A Novel Machine Learning-Based Price Forecasting for Energy Management Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Price forecasting (PF) is the primary concern in distributed power generation. This paper presents a novel and improved technique to forecast electricity prices. The data of various power producers, Capacity Purchase Price (CPP), Power Purchase Price (PPP), Tariff rates, and load demand from National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA) are considered for MAPE reduction in PF. Eight time-series and auto-regression algorithms are developed for data fetching and setting the objective function. The feed-forward ANFIS based on the ML approach and space vector regression (SVR) is introduced to PF by taking the input from time series and auto-regression (AR) algorithms. Best-feature selection is conducted by adopting the Binary Genetic Algorithm (BGA)-Principal Component Analysis (PCA) approach that ultimately minimizes the complexity and computational time of the model. The proposed integration strategy computes the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), and the overall improvement percentage is 9.24%, which is valuable in price forecasting of the energy management system (EMS). In the end, EMS based on the Firefly algorithm (FA) has been presented, and by implementing FA, the cost of electricity has been reduced by 21%, 19%, and 20% for building 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".