Ensemble of Artificial Neural Networks for Seasonal Forecasting of Wind Speed in Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Efficient utilization of wind energy resources, including advances in weather and seasonal forecasting and climate projections, is imperative for the sustainable progress of wind power generation. Although temperature and precipitation data receive considerable attention in interannual variability and seasonal forecasting studies, there is a notable gap in exploring correlations between climate indices and wind speeds. This paper proposes the use of an ensemble of artificial neural networks to forecast wind speeds based on climate oscillation indices and assesses its performance. An initial examination indicates a correlation signal between the climate indices and wind speeds of ERA5 for the selected case study in eastern Canada. Forecasts are made for the season April–May–June (AMJ) and are based on most correlated climate indices of preceding seasons. A pointwise forecast is conducted with a 20-member ensemble, which is verified by leave-on-out cross-validation. The results obtained are analyzed in terms of root mean squared error, bias, and skill score, and they show competitive performance with state-of-the-art numerical wind predictions from SEAS5, outperforming them in several regions. A relatively simple model with a single unit in the hidden layer and a regularization rate of 10−2 provides promising results, especially in areas with a higher number of indices considered. This study adds to global efforts to enable more accurate forecasting by introducing a novel approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".