MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207379842 · doi:10.1049/gtd2.12265

A decomposition‐based multi‐time dimension long short‐term memory model for short‐term electric load forecasting

2021· article· en· W3207379842 on OpenAlexaff
Jiehui Huang, Zhi‐Wang Zhou, Chunquan Li, Zhiyuan Liao, Peter Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Generation Transmission & Distribution · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTerm (time)Dimension (graph theory)DecompositionLong short term memoryComputer scienceEconometricsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Short‐term load forecasting is essential to power systems management. However, most existing forecasting methods fail to fully consider how to rationally integrate the intrinsic time‐related dimensions of electric load data and the decomposition methods into machine learning models so that their prediction accuracy and robustness still have much room for improvement. To solve this problem, this paper proposes a decomposition‐based multi‐time dimension long short‐term memory (DB‐MTD‐LSTM) model for short‐term electric load forecasting (STELF). In DB‐MTD‐LSTM, empirical mode decomposition with adaptive noise (CEEMDAN) is first introduced to smooth non‐linear non‐stationary electric load data and constrain the modal aliasing or noise of decomposed electric load data in the traditional decomposed method. A joint relevant time dimensions method (JRTDM) is then developed using autocorrelation analysis to rationally extract the temporal characteristics of decomposed data in multiple time dimensions. An improved LSTM called MTD‐LSTM is developed by combining JRTDM with LSTM, which can effectively apply multi‐dimensional time characteristics of the decomposed load to improve the predictive accuracy and robustness. Several datasets from Australia and China are performed to check the predictive performance of DB‐MTD‐LSTM. Experimental results verify that DB‐MTD‐LSTM has better predictive accuracy and satisfactory robustness compared with state‐of‐the‐art and conventional predictive 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Generation Transmission & DistributionSame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207