MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226449636 · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3160484

Solar Power Forecasting Using Deep Learning Techniques

2022· article· en· W4226449636 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 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMean absolute percentage errorPhotovoltaic systemComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMean squared errorPerceptronDeep learningArtificial neural networkMachine learningMultilayer perceptronElectricityStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent rapid and sudden growth of solar photovoltaic (PV) technology presents a future challenge for the electricity sector agents responsible for the coordination and distribution of electricity given the direct dependence of this type of technology on climatic and meteorological conditions. Therefore, the development of models that allow reliable future prediction, in the short term, of solar PV generation will be of paramount importance, in order to maintain a balanced and comprehensive operation. This article discusses a method for predicting the generated power, in the short term, of photovoltaic power plants, by means of deep learning techniques. To fulfill the above, a deep learning technique based on the Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) algorithm is evaluated with respect to its ability to forecast solar power data. An evaluation of the performance of the LSTM network has been conducted and compared it with the Multi-layer Perceptron (MLP) network using: Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) and Coefficient of Determination (R <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup> ). The prediction result shows that the LSTM network gives the best results for each category of days. Thus, it provides reliable information that enables more efficient operation of photovoltaic power plants in the future. The binomial formed by the concepts of deep learning and energy efficiency seems to have a promising future, especially regarding promoting energy sustainability, decarburization, and the digitization of the electricity sector.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.227 · 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