MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408805405 · doi:10.1109/tste.2025.3550555

An Iterative Cleaning Method for Abnormal Wind Power Data in Wind Farms Based on Wasserstein Distance

2025· article· en· W4408805405 on OpenAlexaff
Yijun Shen, Bo Chen, Jianzheng Wang, Li Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid and Power Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersKey Research and Development Program of Zhejiang ProvinceScience and Technology Innovation 2025 Major Project of NingboZhejiang University
KeywordsWind powerIterative methodWind power forecastingComputer sciencePower (physics)MeteorologyEnvironmental scienceMarine engineeringMathematical optimizationElectric power systemElectrical engineeringEngineeringMathematicsAlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A wind turbine's power curve is an important indicator for evaluating the power generation performance of wind turbines, which is of great significance for the operation of wind farms and the scheduling of power systems. However, the shutdown of wind turbines, sensor failures, and power curtailment can cause a large number of outliers, which poses great challenges to wind turbine status monitoring and power prediction. Aiming at the characteristics of abnormal wind turbine data, this paper proposes an iterative cleaning method for wind farms based on wasserstein distance. Via this proposed method, the speed and power are modeled while gradually removing outliers. A neural network combined with wasserstein distance and monotonic constraints is leveraged to create a curve model and to synchronously clean up abnormal data. The curve fitted by the neural network converges to the true wind turbine power curve, which ultimately enables curve modeling while removing outliers. Finally, various experiments are conducted on numerical simulation datasets and twelve real wind turbine datasets. Qualitative and quantitative results demonstrate that the algorithm proposed can establish an accurate power curve model in the presence of a large amount of abnormal data, and significantly outperforms other baselines based on some discussed criteria.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Sustainable EnergySame topicSmart Grid and Power SystemsFrench-language works237,207