Daily Natural Gas Load Forecasting Based on a Hybrid Deep Learning Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forecasting daily natural gas load accurately is difficult because it is affected by various factors. A large number of redundant factors existing in the original dataset will increase computational complexity and decrease the accuracy of forecasting models. This study aims to provide accurate forecasting of natural gas load using a deep learning (DL)-based hybrid model, which combines principal component correlation analysis (PCCA) and (LSTM) network. PCCA is an improved principal component analysis (PCA) and is first proposed here in this paper. Considering the correlation between components in the eigenspace, PCCA can not only extract the components that affect natural gas load but also remove the redundant components. LSTM is a famous DL network, and it was used to predict daily natural gas load in our work. The proposed model was validated by using recent natural gas load data from Xi’an (China) and Athens (Greece). Additionally, 14 weather factors were introduced into the input dataset of the forecasting model. The results showed that PCCA–LSTM demonstrated better performance compared with LSTM, PCA–LSTM, back propagation neural network (BPNN), and support vector regression (SVR). The lowest mean absolute percentage errors of PCCA–LSTM were 3.22% and 7.29% for Xi’an and Athens, respectively. On these bases, the proposed model can be regarded as an accurate and robust model for daily natural gas load forecasting.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".