MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229335382 · doi:10.3390/en15093425

Bayesian Optimization Algorithm-Based Statistical and Machine Learning Approaches for Forecasting Short-Term Electricity Demand

2022· article· en· W4229335382 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nahid Sultana, S. M. Zakir Hossain, Salma Hamad Almuhaini, Dilek Düştegör

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersImam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal UniversityUniversity of Bahrain
KeywordsNonlinear autoregressive exogenous modelAutoregressive modelComputer scienceBayesian probabilityHyperparameterTerm (time)AlgorithmStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on developing both statistical and machine learning approaches for forecasting hourly electricity demand in Ontario. The novelties of this study include (i) identifying essential factors that have a significant effect on electricity consumption, (ii) the execution of a Bayesian optimization algorithm (BOA) to optimize the model hyperparameters, (iii) hybridizing the BOA with the seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average with exogenous inputs (SARIMAX) and nonlinear autoregressive networks with exogenous input (NARX) for modeling separately short-term electricity demand for the first time, (iv) comparing the model’s performance using several performance indicators and computing efficiency, and (v) validation of the model performance using unseen data. Six features (viz., snow depth, cloud cover, precipitation, temperature, irradiance toa, and irradiance surface) were found to be significant. The Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) of five consecutive weekdays for all seasons in the hybrid BOA-NARX is obtained at about 3%, while a remarkable variation is observed in the hybrid BOA-SARIMAX. BOA-NARX provides an overall steady Relative Error (RE) in all seasons (1~6.56%), while BOA-SARIMAX provides unstable results (Fall: 0.73~2.98%; Summer: 8.41~14.44%). The coefficient of determination (R2) values for both models are >0.96. Overall results indicate that both models perform well; however, the hybrid BOA-NARX reveals a stable ability to handle the day-ahead electricity load forecasts.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations48
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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