MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377971359 · doi:10.1109/tits.2023.3276947

MetaProbformer for Charging Load Probabilistic Forecasting of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations

2023· article· en· W4377971359 on OpenAlexafffund
Xingshuai Huang, Di Wu, Benoît Boulet

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProbabilistic logicProbabilistic forecastingLeverage (statistics)Computer scienceElectric vehicleTransformerCharging stationElectric power systemAutomotive engineeringReliability engineeringEngineeringVoltageArtificial intelligencePower (physics)Electrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The penetration of electric vehicles (EV) has been increasing rapidly in recent years. Electric vehicle charging load poses a huge demand on the power grids. The forecasting for electric vehicle charging load, especially for the charging load of EV charging stations, is of significant importance for the safe operation of power grids. However, most of the existing forecasting methods fail to capture the long-term dependencies efficiently and assume the availability of a large amount of training data. Hence, they cannot address newly built charging stations with scarce historical charging load data. Meanwhile, most of the methods focus on point forecasting, which lacks risk consideration. In this work, we aim to leverage the benefits of Transformer-based models for EV charging forecasting. Specifically, we propos Probformer, a Transformer-based forecasting model for charging load forecasting. To enable Probformer to adapt fast to unseen environments, we further extend it to MetaProbformer, a meta-learning-based forecasting framework. Extensive experiments have been done on real-world datasets for both point forecasting and probabilistic forecasting. Experimental results show that our methods can consistently outperform baseline methods by a large margin.

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)0.005
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations71
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207