MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915629347 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2018.2872822

Very Short-Term Wind Power Prediction Interval Framework via Bi-Level Optimization and Novel Convex Cost Function

2019· article· en· W2915629347 on OpenAlexafffund
Nima Safari, Seyed Mahdi Mazhari, C. Y. Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematical optimizationBenchmark (surveying)Prediction intervalTerm (time)Electric power systemInterval (graph theory)Computer scienceMinificationWind powerConvex optimizationDifferentiable functionHyperparameterFunction (biology)Operator (biology)Power (physics)EngineeringMathematicsRegular polygonArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Substantial challenges in power systems operation and control as a result of the intermittent and stochastic nature of wind power generation can be significantly alleviated by proficient very short-term wind power prediction interval (WPPI) models. In WPPI models, minimization of cost functions is conducted to train prediction engines and consequently tune their parameters. The prevalent cost functions of prediction engines in WPPI models are mainly non-differentiable and non-convex, and therefore the training process becomes problematic. To transcend such a crucial barrier, this paper addresses a new very short-term WPPI framework based on a bi-level formulation and benefiting from a differentiable and convex cost function. The prediction engine is trained by classical global optimization of the cost function in the lower-level problem, while hyperparameters that control the quality of the WPPIs are injected thereto from the upper-level problem. The hyperparameters can be tuned such that the most useful WPPIs are constructed from the lower-level problem depending on the power system operator's preferences. Lessening the need to heuristically tune a large number of prediction engine parameters is the foremost contribution of this work to the WPPI literature. The superior performance of the proposed WPPI is verified in the multistep ahead prediction of real wind power generation data in comparison to well-tailored benchmark models.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207