MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085016202 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2011.2177870

Data Mining for Electricity Price Classification and the Application to Demand-Side Management

2012· article· en· W2085016202 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricity marketElectricityDemand sideElectricity price forecastingElectricity priceComputer scienceEconomicsDemand forecastingMicroeconomicsOperations researchEconometricsIndustrial organizationOperations managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forecasting electricity prices plays a significant role in making optimal scheduling decisions in competitive electricity markets. Predominantly, price forecasting is performed from a “point forecasting” perspective, i.e., forecasting the exact values of future prices. However, in some applications, such as demand-side management, operation decisions are made based on certain price thresholds. It is, hence, desirable to obtain the “classes” of future prices, which can be cast as an electricity price classification problem. In this paper, we investigate the application and effectiveness of several data mining approaches for electricity market price classification. In addition, we propose a new data model for forming the initial data set for price classification. Simulation results for New York, Ontario, and Alberta electricity market prices are provided. Finally, the application of the generated numerical results to a demand-side management case study is demonstrated.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.221 · 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