Cost-Sensitive Weighting and Imbalance-Reversed Bagging for Streaming Imbalanced and Concept Drifting in Electricity Pricing Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In data streaming environments such as a smart grid, it is impossible to restrict each data chunk to have the same number of samples in each class. Hence, in addition to the concept drift, classification problems in streaming data environments are inherently imbalanced. However, streaming imbalanced and concept drifting problems in the power system and smart grid have rarely been studied. Incremental learning aims to learn the correct classification for the future unseen samples from the given streaming data. In this paper, we propose a new incremental ensemble learning method to handle both concept drift and class imbalance issues. The class imbalance issue is tackled by an imbalance-reversed bagging method that improves the true positive rate while maintains a low false positive rate. The adaptation to concept drift is achieved by a dynamic cost-sensitive weighting scheme for component classifiers according to their classification performances and stochastic sensitivities. The proposed method is applied to a case study for the electricity pricing in Australia to predict whether the price of New South Wales will be higher or lower than that of Victorias in a 24-h period. Experimental results show the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm with statistical significance in comparison to the state-of-the-art incremental learning methods.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".