Long-term electricity demand forecasting for power system planning using economic, demographic and climatic variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stochastic planning of power production overcomes the drawback of deterministic models by accounting for uncertainties in the parameters. Such planning accounts for demand uncertainties by using scenario sets and probability distributions. However, in previous literature, different scenarios were developed by either assigning arbitrary values or assuming certain percentages above or below a deterministic demand. Using forecasting techniques, reliable demand data can be obtained and inputted to the scenario set. This article focuses on the long-term forecasting of electricity demand using autoregressive, simple linear and multiple linear regression models. The resulting models using different forecasting techniques are compared through a number of statistical measures and the most accurate model was selected. Using Ontario's electricity demand as a case study, the annual energy, peak load and base load demand were forecasted up to the year 2025. In order to generate different scenarios, different ranges in the economic, demographic and climatic variables were used. [Received 16 October 2007; Revised 31 May 2008; Revised 25 October 2008; Accepted 1 November 2008]
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".