MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321502838 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13903

A proposed novel adaptive DC technique for non-stationary data removal

2023· article· en· W4321502838 on OpenAlexaff
Hmeda Musbah, Hamed H. Aly, Timothy Little

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeries (stratigraphy)Computer scienceStationary processTime seriesTransformation (genetics)LogarithmAlgorithmMathematicsMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stationarity of a time series is an important assumption in the Box-Jenkins methodology. Removing the non-stationary feature from the time series can be done using a differencing technique or a logarithmic transformation approach, but it is not guaranteed from the first step. This paper proposes a new adaptive DC technique, a novel technique for removing a non-stationary time series from the first step. The technique involves transferring non-stationary data into another domain that deals with it as a stationary time series, as it is much easier to be forecasted in that domain. The adaptive DC technique has been applied to different time series, including gasoline and diesel fuel prices, temperature, demand side, inflation rate and number of internet users time series. The performance of the proposed technique is evaluated using different statistical tests, including Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF), Kwiatkowski-Phillips-Schmidt-Shin (KPSS), and Phillips Perron (PP). Additionally, the technique is validated by comparing it with a differencing technique, and the results show that the proposed technique slightly outperforms the differencing method. The importance of the proposed technique is its capability to get the stationarity data from the first step, whereas the differencing technique sometimes needs more than one step.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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