MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074911163 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2014.2377178

Fuzzy Prediction Interval Models for Forecasting Renewable Resources and Loads in Microgrids

2014· article· en· W2074911163 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrogridRenewable energyInterval (graph theory)Prediction intervalWind powerComputer scienceFuzzy logicProbabilistic forecastingRepresentation (politics)Mathematical optimizationEnergy management systemElectric power systemElectricity generationReliability engineeringData miningEnergy managementPower (physics)EngineeringEnergy (signal processing)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An energy management system (EMS) determines the dispatching of generation units based on an optimizer that requires the forecasting of both renewable resources and loads. The forecasting system discussed in this paper includes a representation of the uncertainties associated with renewable resources and loads. The proposed modeling generates fuzzy prediction interval models that incorporate an uncertainty representation of future predictions. The model is demonstrated using solar and wind generation and local load data from a real microgrid in Huatacondo, Chile, for one-day ahead forecasts to obtain the expected values together with fuzzy prediction intervals to represent future measurement bounds with a certain coverage probability. The proposed prediction interval models would help to enable the development of robust microgrid EMS.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.183 · 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