MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131110071 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3060290

On Short-Term Load Forecasting Using Machine Learning Techniques and a Novel Parallel Deep LSTM-CNN Approach

2021· article· en· W3131110071 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

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMean absolute percentage errorComputer scienceMean squared errorArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkTerm (time)Electrical loadDeep learningScheduling (production processes)Convolutional neural networkEnergy consumptionMachine learningPower (physics)StatisticsMathematical optimizationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since electricity plays a crucial role in countries' industrial infrastructures, power companies are trying to monitor and control infrastructures to improve energy management and scheduling. Accurate forecasting is a critical task for a stable and efficient energy supply, where load and supply are matched. This article discusses various algorithms and a new hybrid deep learning model which combines long short-term memory networks (LSTM) and convolutional neural network (CNN) model to analyze their performance for short-term load forecasting. The proposed model is called parallel LSTM-CNN Network or PLCNet. Two real-world data sets, namely “hourly load consumption of Malaysia ” as well as “daily power electric consumption of Germany”, are used to test and compare the presented models. To evaluate the tested models' performance, root mean squared error (RMSE), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), and R-squared were used. In total, this article is divided into two parts. In the first part, different machine learning models, including the PLCNet, predict the next time step load. In the second part, the model's performance, which has shown the most accurate results in the first part, is discussed in different time horizons. The results show that deep neural networks models, especially PLCNet, are good candidates for being used as short-term prediction tools. PLCNet improved the accuracy from 83.17% to 91.18% for the German data and achieved 98.23% accuracy in Malaysian data, which is an excellent result in 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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.218 · 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