MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ensemble Learning for Charging Load Forecasting of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations

2020· article· en· W3126866643 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2020 IEEE Electric Power and Energy Conference (EPEC) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkDependency (UML)Ensemble learningElectric power systemElectric vehicleTerm (time)Recurrent neural networkArtificial intelligenceMachine learningPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric vehicles (EVs) can help reduce the dependency on fossil oil and increasing concerns on environmental pollution problems. However, due to the complex charging behaviors and the large charging demand, EV charging has imposed a large burden on the power system. The forecasting of electric vehicle charging loads can help address the above issues by providing power systems with the future load as a reference for energy dispatching. Machine learning methods have demonstrated their effectiveness for short-term load forecasting. Different from previous works, this paper proposes a novel ensemble learning-based forecasting model by combining three base learners including the artificial neural network (ANN), recurrent neural network (RNN), and long short-term memory (LSTM) algorithms. Specifically, a linear regression (LR) algorithm is used to learn the weight of each base learner. The feasibility and advantage of our proposed model are demonstrated by experiments conducted on a real-world dataset and comparisons with the other four baselines.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.187 · 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