ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Motion-Induced Errors in Buoy-Based Wind Measurements: Mechanisms, Compensation Methods, and Future Perspectives for Offshore Applications.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Data Quality Assessment, Representativeness, and External Consistency of a Coastal Oceanographic Buoy Using Copernicus Marine and ERA5 Products.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate measurement of sea-surface winds is critical for climate science, physical oceanography, and the rapidly expanding offshore wind energy sector. Buoy-based platforms-moored meteorological buoys, drifters, and floating LiDAR systems (FLS)-provide practical alternatives to fixed offshore structures, especially in deep water where bottom-founded installations are economically prohibitive. Yet these floating platforms are subject to continuous pitch, roll, heave, and yaw motions forced by wind, waves, and currents. Such six-degree-of-freedom dynamics introduce multiple error pathways into the measured wind signal. This paper synthesizes the current understanding of motion-induced measurement errors and the techniques developed to compensate for them. We identify four principal error mechanisms: (1) geometric biases caused by sensor tilt, which can underestimate horizontal wind speed by 0.4-3.4% depending on inclination angle; (2) contamination of the measured signal by platform translational and rotational velocities; (3) artificial inflation of turbulence intensity by 15-50% due to spectral overlap between wave-frequency buoy motions and atmospheric turbulence; and (4) beam misalignment and range-gate distortion specific to scanning LiDAR systems. Compensation strategies have progressed through four recognizable stages: fundamental coordinate-transformation and velocity-subtraction algorithms developed in the 1990s; Kalman-filter-based multi-sensor fusion emerging in the 2000s; Response Amplitude Operator modeling tailored to FLS platforms in the 2010s; and data-driven machine-learning approaches under active development today. Despite this progress, key challenges persist. Sensor reliability degrades under extreme sea states precisely when accurate data are most needed. The coupling between high-frequency platform vibrations and turbulence remains poorly characterized. No unified validation framework or benchmark dataset yet exists to compare methods across platforms and environments. We conclude by outlining research priorities: end-to-end deep-learning architectures for nonlinear error correction, adaptive algorithms capable of all-sea-state operation, standardized evaluation protocols with open datasets, and tighter integration of intelligent software with next-generation low-power sensors and actively stabilized platforms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.