MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2502311290 · doi:10.3390/en9080593

Energy Optimization in Smart Homes Using Customer Preference and Dynamic Pricing

2016· article· en· W2502311290 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Babar Rasheed, Nadeem Javaid, Ashfaq Ahmad, Mohsin Jamil, Zahoor Ali Khan, Umar Qasim, Nabil Alrajeh

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaDalhousie University
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsKnapsack problemScheduleComputer scienceElectricityMathematical optimizationEnergy consumptionDynamic pricingOptimization problemEnergy (signal processing)Control (management)PreferenceOperations researchSimulationReal-time computingEngineeringEconomicsArtificial intelligenceMicroeconomicsMathematicsAlgorithmElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present an energy optimization technique to schedule three types of household appliances (user dependent, interactive schedulable and unschedulable) in response to the dynamic behaviours of customers, electricity prices and weather conditions. Our optimization technique schedules household appliances in real time to optimally control their energy consumption, such that the electricity bills of end users are reduced while not compromising on user comfort. More specifically, we use the binary multiple knapsack problem formulation technique to design an objective function, which is solved via the constraint optimization technique. Simulation results show that average aggregated energy savings with and without considering the human presence control system are 11.77% and 5.91%, respectively.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations56
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207