MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407843107 · doi:10.63111/qes-2025.1.0001

A different approach to the "Airborne Wind Energy" technology

2025· article· en· W4407843107 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marco Ghivarello

Bibliographic record

VenueQualEnergia Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceAerospace engineeringRemote sensingEngineeringGeologyGeographyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KGM1 is a new brand for power generation that uses the most powerful green technology called Airborne Wind Energy (AWE) for off-grid populations, a growing market with 800 million users. Inuit, Sami, remote communities, islands, disaster lands; lots having low sun, high winds and clipping logistic problems, 60% of communities use diesel generators with power around 20kW. It offers a mobile wind energy system (10-25 kW rated) using kites, that is up to 50% cheaper and 90% weight-saving compared to current wind turbines. We target simple concepts, an easiness to transport and installation; last but not least, is the first prototype worldwide, tested under operating conditions, with an always positive energy production duty cycle. To make a simple comparison, this generation of technology works like a kite surfer who is kiting! It is now managed by GHIVA firm and structured on a less demanding Off-Grid market but will then reach the On-Grid market with larger, fully automated generators. Born from a “bottom-up” approach in my own cellar KGM1 has evolved as far as passion and free time could take it—with very low funding. Today, it drifts through the online world like a message in a bottle, awaiting its next chapter. Two web links to summarize 8 years of research: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XwjtqPLi5PsAxo49bGlJG24GRubCFhxz/view?usp=drive_link https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1EiyWFwV4oBhGxbAo7xr0kjq2aTWQbEvg/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=108653029879271250506&rtpof=true&sd=true

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 score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualEnergia ScienceSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207