MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Regression Model-Based Short-Term PV Power Generation Forecasting

2022· article· en· W4313562621 on OpenAlexaff
Shahab Karamdel, Xiaodong Liang, S.O. Faried, Md Nasmus Sakib Khan Shabbir

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePhotovoltaic systemSupport vector machineMultivariate adaptive regression splinesKrigingElectric power systemRegression analysisMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningPolynomial regressionPower (physics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solar photovoltaic (PV) modules have been increasingly integrated into power systems. However, their intermittency and variability have considerable impacts on power grids and could jeopardize the grid's stability when the penetration is high. Developing accurate PV power generation forecasting methods is key to enhancing reliable and secure grid operation. In this paper, a data-driven regression model-based short-term PV power generation forecasting is proposed, where nineteen regression models (including both deterministic and probabilistic predictors) from five regression families are evaluated, and performance assessment indices, such as RMSE and R-squared, are adopted to find the best models. To further improve the performance of forecasting models, hyperparameter optimization and tuning are conducted using MATLAB Regression Learner App. A real-world historical dataset of PV power generation is used to train and further test the models. It is found that the interactions linear, medium Gaussian support vector machine (SVM), and the ensemble of bagged trees outperform other regression models in this study. The proposed method can be utilized by the system operator for effective scheduling future power systems.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSolar Radiation and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207