2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.11.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance assessment of five MCP models proposed for the estimation of long-term wind turbine power outputs at a target site using three machine learning techniques

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the wind speeds tested [4 m/s to 16 m/s], the Reynolds number goes from 1.015 × 10 5 to 4.063 × 10 5 . Although turbulence and density variations influence in-field measurements [3,22], since this work presents a calibration procedure, we only considered wind tunnel measures at low turbulence levels.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the wind speeds tested [4 m/s to 16 m/s], the Reynolds number goes from 1.015 × 10 5 to 4.063 × 10 5 . Although turbulence and density variations influence in-field measurements [3,22], since this work presents a calibration procedure, we only considered wind tunnel measures at low turbulence levels.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hence, comparing distinct methods is necessary before electing a single one to proceed with the WRA. Several studies worked on this matter of comparing different MCP methods according to metrics such as mean absolute error, mean absolute relative error or mean squared error [51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61]. Nonetheless, there is no consensus about one single best MCP model, reinforcing the necessity of testing several of them for every set of wind data.…”
Section: Mcp Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where: MARE is the mean absolute relative error for the forecast horizon; T is the number of data in the test stage (see Figure 1); r = T-m-n; MARE j is the mean absolute relative error for the forecasting period j; P j and  j P are the actual and estimated wind farm power output in the forecasting period j, respectively; R is the mean value of Pearson's coefficient of correlation between the estimated and actual wind farm power output for the forecast horizon; and R j is the mean Pearson correlation coefficient between the estimated and actual wind farm power output values for the forecasting period j. The combined use of the two previous metrics is considered sufficient for the evaluation of the performance of the models and they have been widely used [38][39][40][41]. Alternatively, for the evaluation of future models, combinations of other metrics could be used [42].…”
Section: Metrics Used To Compare the Different Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%