MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2376965755 · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2016.04.160

Temperature Forecasts with Stable Accuracy in a Smart Home

2016· article· en· W2376965755 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce Spencer, Feras Al‐Obeidat

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Computer Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDegree (music)Set (abstract data type)Sample (material)Data setFunction (biology)Linear regressionService (business)RegressionEconometricsStatisticsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We forecast internal temperature in a home with sensors, modeled as a linear function of recent sensor values. When delivering forecasts as a service, two desirable properties are that forecasts have stable accuracy over a variety of forecast horizons – so service levels can be predicted – and that the forecasts rely on a modest amount of sensor history – so forecasting can be restarted soon after any data outage due to, for example, sensor failure. From a publicly available data set, we show that sensor values over the past one or two hours are sufficient to meet these demands. A standard machine learning method based on forward stepwise linear regression with cross validation gives forecasts whose out-of-sample errors increase slowly as the forecast horizon increases, and that are accurate to within one fifth of a degree C over three hours, and to within about one half degree C over six hours, based on one or two hours of history. Previous results from this data achieved errors within one degree C over three hours based on five days of history.

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)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia Computer ScienceSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207