MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188605683

Computing Electricity Consumption Profiles from Household Smart Meter Data

2014· article· en· W2188605683 on OpenAlexaff
Omid Ardakanian, Negar Koochakzadeh, Rayman Preet Singh, Lukasz Golab, Srinivasan Keshav

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmart meterAutoregressive modelComputer scienceElectricityScalabilityConsumption (sociology)OutlierMetric (unit)Smart gridData miningElectricity meterData setPower consumptionAutomatic meter readingPower (physics)EconometricsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringDatabaseMathematicsTelecommunications
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate a critical problem in smart meter data mining: computing electricity consumption profiles. We present a simple, interpretable and practical profiling framework for residential consumers, which accounts for variations in electricity consumption at di↵erent times of day and at di↵erent external temperatures. Our approach is to isolate the e↵ect of external temperature on electricity consumption and apply a time-series autoregressive model to the remaining signal. The proposed profiles may be used for making personalized energy-saving recommendations, detecting outliers, and generating very large realistic data sets for testing the scalability of smart meter data management systems. Using predictive power as a metric for the accuracy of consumption profiles, we show, using a real data set of 1000 homes, that our approach results in improved root-mean-squared prediction error compared to existing approaches. 1.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207