MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206910610 · doi:10.3390/en15030810

CBLSTM-AE: A Hybrid Deep Learning Framework for Predicting Energy Consumption

2022· article· en· W4206910610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Olamide Jogunola, Bamidele Adebisi, Khoa Van Hoang, Yakubu Tsado, Segun I. Popoola, Mohammad Hammoudeh, Raheel Nawaz

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsOverfittingComputer scienceAutoencoderRobustness (evolution)Artificial intelligenceDeep learningMean squared errorConvolutional neural networkMachine learningEnergy consumptionArtificial neural networkStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multisource energy data, including from distributed energy resources and its multivariate nature, necessitate the integration of robust data predictive frameworks to minimise prediction error. This work presents a hybrid deep learning framework to accurately predict the energy consumption of different building types, both commercial and domestic, spanning different countries, including Canada and the UK. Specifically, we propose architectures comprising convolutional neural network (CNN), an autoencoder (AE) with bidirectional long short-term memory (LSTM), and bidirectional LSTM BLSTM). The CNN layer extracts important features from the dataset and the AE-BLSTM and LSTM layers are used for prediction. We use the individual household electric power consumption dataset from the University of California, Irvine to compare the skillfulness of the proposed framework to the state-of-the-art frameworks. Results show performance improvement in computation time of 56% and 75.2%, and mean squared error (MSE) of 80% and 98.7% in comparison with a CNN BLSTM-based framework (EECP-CBL) and vanilla LSTM, respectively. In addition, we use various datasets from Canada and the UK to further validate the generalisation ability of the proposed framework to underfitting and overfitting, which was tested on real consumers’ smart boxes. The results show that the framework generalises well to varying data and constraints, giving an average MSE of ∼0.09 across all datasets, demonstrating its robustness to different building types, locations, weather, and load distributions.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations58
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207