MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243107379 · doi:10.1109/fskd.2015.7382083

A statistical model for predicting power demand peaks in power systems

2015· article· en· W2243107379 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Xiangdong An, Nick Cercone

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersIndependent Electricity System Operator
KeywordsElectricityComputer sciencePeak demandSoftware deploymentEnvironmental economicsFiscal yearWork (physics)CommodityElectricity generationPower (physics)Operations researchBusinessFinanceEconomicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The total commodity cost for electricity also includes the cost of building new electricity infrastructure and the expenses of providing conservation and demand response programs. This is called the Global Adjustment (GA) by the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), a corporate entity in Ontario, Canada working at the heart of Ontario's power system to ensure there is enough power to meet the province's energy needs in real-time and to plan and secure energy for the future. In Ontario, approximately 300 Class A customers representing Ontario's largest electricity consumers pay GA based on how much they contribute to the 5 highest peak hour demands in a fiscal year. Accurately predicting the top 5 peak hours in a fiscal year may help such a customer minimize its energy consumption in such periods and save it tens of millions of dollars in adjustment cost. In the meantime, this will reduce the size of demand peaks and the need of new electricity infrastructure for exceptionally high peak demands. This paper proposes to learn a statistical model for predicting in real-time the top 5 peak demand hours in a fiscal year, where feature selection is discussed. Preliminary experimental studies indicate the proposed model can effectively help locate the potential peak hours. This work is conducted for an application project, so we also discuss the implementation and deployment details of this model, where a client-server architecture with Ajax is adopted to ensure the updated peak hour information is delivered to all customers in real-time.

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 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 score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207