MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395675237 · doi:10.3390/en17092055

A Comprehensive Resource Assessment for Wind Power Generation on the Rural Island of Sibuyan, Philippines

2024· article· en· W4395675237 on OpenAlexaff
Jerome G. Gacu, Junrey D. Garcia, Eddie G. Fetalvero, Merian P. Catajay-Mani, Cris Edward F. Monjardin, Christopher Power

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerResource (disambiguation)Natural resource economicsRural electrificationElectricity generationEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningPower (physics)GeographyEnvironmental economicsEngineeringComputer scienceEconomicsElectricityElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amid rising energy demands in rural areas, thorough resource assessments for initiatives such as wind power are crucial. This study involves a land resource assessment for wind power generation on the rustic Sibuyan Island in the Philippines, which is currently experiencing an electricity shortage. A comprehensive overview of the island’s suitability for wind energy projects is performed via evaluation and analysis using geospatial data and multi-criteria decision making (MCDM). The research results indicate that 50.44% (220.68 km2) of the island’s land area is categorized as ‘poorly suitable’ since it considers protected areas where developments are not allowed. Only 0.08% (0.35 km2) of the island can be classified as ‘marginally suitable’, while 9.15% (40.73 km2), 36.64% (176.39 km2), and 0.69% (3.05 km2) are labeled as ‘moderately suitable’, ‘suitable’, and ‘highly suitable’, respectively. This confirms the potential for wind energy exploration on the island. Delineating the suitability levels provides a foundational framework for stakeholders that enables them to identify optimal sites for wind power, sustain the island’s resources, and contribute to the renewable energy landscape of this rural location. Overall, this study, underpinned by data analysis, offers invaluable insights for decision making in wind power development, with the presented framework adaptable to other areas of interest.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207