MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906329242 · doi:10.1109/pesgm.2018.8586486

A Hybrid Probabilistic Wind Power Prediction Based on An Improved Decomposition Technique and Kernel Density Estimation

2018· article· en· W2906329242 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benyamin Khorramdel, Mahsa Azizi, Nima Safari, C. Y. Chung, Seyed Mahdi Mazhari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKernel density estimationWind powerProbabilistic logicComputer scienceAlgorithmEntropy (arrow of time)Extreme learning machineNumerical weather predictionHilbert–Huang transformMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsEngineeringWhite noiseArtificial neural networkMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high uncertainty of non-stationary wind power time series is a challenging issue in optimal operation and planning of power systems. An efficient way to show wind power uncertainty is to use high-quality prediction intervals (PIs). This paper proposes a hybrid probabilistic wind power prediction model based on improved complete ensemble empirical mode decomposition with adaptive noise (ICEEMDAN) technique, extreme learning machine (ELM) and kernel density estimation (KDE). First, using ICEEMDAN, the original wind power time series is decomposed to components with different frequency ranges. Then, sample entropy (SampEn) technique is employed to group components to three main time series trend, cycle, and noise with diverse complexity levels. The first two components are deterministically predicted while the noise component is probabilistically predicted using the combination of KDE technique and direct plug-in as a well-known bandwidth selection technique. The lower and upper bounds of final PI are found using the summation of lower and upper bounds of noise component with trend and cycle predicted points. The efficacy of the proposed prediction model is depicted by generating reliable and sharp PIs for real wind power datasets in Canada and comparing with other conventional PI construction approaches.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207