Wind power forecasting using artificial neural networks with numerical prediction : a case study for mountainous Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wind is a free and easily available source of energy. Several countries, including Canada, have already incorporated wind power into their electricity supply system. Forecasting wind power production is quite challenging because the wind is variable and depends on weather conditions, terrain factors and turbine height. In addition to traditional physical and statistical methods, some advanced methods based on artificial intelligence have been investigated in recent years to achieve more reliable wind-power forecasts. The aim of this work is to exploit the ability of artificial neural network (ANN) models to find the most effective parameters to estimate generated power from predicted wind speed at a wind farm in mountainous Canada. The historical data of both observations and forecasts of weather characteristics along with turbine availabilities and the reported power production are used for this purpose. Experiments are done first with the observations (perfect-prog technique) to find the optimum architecture for the artificial neural network. Next to obtain a day-ahead forecast of the wind power, weather forecasts from a numerical weather prediction model was input to the optimum ANN as the predictors (model output statistics method). The results from ANN models are compared to linear-model fits in order to show the ability of ANN models to capture the nonlinearity effects. Also, another comparison is made between the results from artificial neural network models and the current approach used operationally by a utility company. The selected architecture is a three-layered feed-forward back-propagation ANN model with 8 hidden neurons. Verification results using an independent dataset show that the ANN method improves the day-ahead wind-power forecasts by up to 56% compared to the current operational 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".