Agglomerative Hierarchical Clustering with Dynamic Time Warping for Household Load Curve Clustering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Energy companies often implement various demand response (DR) programs to better match electricity demand and supply by offering the consumers incentives to reduce their demand during critical periods. Classifying clients according to their consumption patterns enables targeting specific groups of consumers for DR. Traditional clustering algorithms use standard distance measurement to find the distance between two points. The results produced by clustering algorithms such as K-means, K-medoids, and Gaussian Mixture Models depend on the clustering parameters or initial clusters. In contrast, our methodology uses a shape-based approach that combines Agglomerative Hierarchical Clustering (AHC) with Dynamic Time Warping (DTW) to classify residential households’ daily load curves based on their consumption patterns. While DTW seeks the optimal alignment between two load curves, AHC provides a realistic initial clusters center. In this paper, we compare the results with other clustering algorithms such as K-means, K-medoids, and GMM using different distance measures, and we show that AHC using DTW outperformed other clustering algorithms and needed fewer clusters.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".