MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239949396 · doi:10.1002/9781119283362.ch5

Short‐Term Load Forecasting and Post‐Strategy Design for <scp>CCHP</scp> Systems

2017· other· en· W4239949396 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Shi, Mingxi Liu, Fang Fang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive modelOrdinary least squaresTerm (time)Autoregressive–moving-average modelIdentification (biology)Moving averageQuadratic equationComputer scienceMathematical optimizationControl theory (sociology)MathematicsEconometricsStatisticsControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses the autoregressive moving average with exogenous inputs (ARMAX) model which is selected as the forecasting model and the parameter identification algorithm for combined cooling, heating, and power (CCHP) Systems, including instrument variable (IV), two-stage recursive least squares (TSRLS), and ordinary least squares (OLS)-TSRLS. It briefly introduces load forecasting. The chapter explains two steps of the operation strategy design, including the optimal operation strategy for forecasted loads and the post-strategy. It presents a case study to verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed forecasting method and post-strategy. IV is introduced into the identification procedure to solve the problem of inconsistent OLS identification results caused by omitted variables or the correlation between explanatory variables and error terms. The chapter provides derivations of the closed-form solutions of quadratic autoregressive moving average (ARMA) and ARMAX model identifications.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207