Reducing error propagation for long term energy forecasting using multivariate prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many statistical and machine learning models for prediction make use of historical data as an input and produce single or small numbers of output values. To forecast over many timesteps, it is necessary to run the program recursively. This leads to a compounding of errors, which has adverse effects on accuracy for long forecast periods. In this paper, we show this can be mitigated through the addition of generating features which can have an “anchoring” effect on recurrent forecasts, limiting the amount of compounded error in the long term. This is studied experimentally on a benchmark energy dataset using two machine learning models LSTM and XGBoost. Prediction accuracy over differing forecast lengths is compared using the forecasting MAPE. It is found that for LSTM model the accuracy of short term energy forecasting by using a past energy consumption value as a feature is higher than the accuracy when not using past values as a feature. The opposite behavior takes place for the long term energy forecasting. For the XGBoost model, the accuracy for both short and long term energy forecasting is higher when not using past values as a feature.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".