MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008533347 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2975738

Deep Learning for Load Forecasting: Sequence to Sequence Recurrent Neural Networks With Attention

2020· article· en· W3008533347 on OpenAlexafffund
Ljubisa Sehovac, Katarina Grolinger

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceRecurrent neural networkArtificial intelligenceDeep learningArtificial neural networkFeed forwardEncoderMachine learningSequence learningScheduling (production processes)Sequence (biology)Feedforward neural networkTime horizonControl engineeringEngineeringMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biggest contributor to global warming is energy production and use. Moreover, a push for electrical vehicle and other economic developments are expected to further increase energy use. To combat these challenges, electrical load forecasting is essential as it supports energy production planning and scheduling, assists with budgeting, and helps identify saving opportunities. Machine learning approaches commonly used for energy forecasting such as feedforward neural networks and support vector regression encounter challenges with capturing time dependencies. Consequently, this paper proposes Sequence to Sequence Recurrent Neural Network (S2S RNN) with Attention for electrical load forecasting. The S2S architecture from language translation is adapted for load forecasting and a corresponding sample generation approach is designed. RNN enables capturing time dependencies present in the load data and S2S model further improves time modeling by combining two RNNs: encoder and decoder. The attention mechanism alleviates the burden of connecting encoder and decoder. The experiments evaluated attention mechanisms with different RNN cells (vanilla, LSTM, and GRU) and with varied time horizons. Results show that S2S with Bahdanau attention outperforms other models. Accuracy decreases as forecasting horizon increases; however, longer input sequences do not always increase accuracy.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations201
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207