Analysis of aggregated functional data from mixed populations with application to energy consumption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding energy consumption patterns of different types of consumers is essential in any planning of energy distribution. However, obtaining individual‐level consumption information is often either not possible or too expensive. Therefore, we consider data from aggregations of energy use, that is, from sums of individuals' energy use, where each individual falls into one ofCconsumer classes. Unfortunately, the exact number of individuals of each class may be unknown due to inaccuracies in consumer registration or irregularities in consumption patterns. We develop a methodology to estimate both the expected energy use of each class as a function of time and the true number of consumers in each class. To accomplish this, we use B‐splines to model both the expected consumption and the individual‐level random effects. We treat the reported numbers of consumers in each category as random variables with distribution depending on the true number of consumers in each class and on the probabilities of a consumer in one class reporting as another class. We obtain maximum likelihood estimates of all parameters via a maximization algorithm. We introduce a special numerical trick for calculating the maximum likelihood estimates of the true number of consumers in each class. We apply our method to a data set and study our method via simulation.
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 | 0.013 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".