Short-term load prediction based on Pearson-optimized CNN-LSTM hybrid neural network
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Under the demand of new power system construction, it is important to establish a solid and reliable power grid structure with stable operation by accelerating the construction of a "double high" strategy with the goal of "double carbon". Bus load can reflect the operation of the power grid, so bus load forecasting is important to maintain the safety and stability of the power system. To solve the problems of low accuracy and inefficiency of existing load forecasting methods for power systems, this paper adopts a combined CNN-LSTM load forecasting model with Pearson optimization, which is machine learning combined with deep learning. Firstly, Pearson correlation analysis is used for data processing to extract the main features of load data. Then three neural networks, CNN, LSTM, and CNN-LSTM, are used for training and load prediction, respectively. The experimental results show that the load prediction accuracy of the hybrid CNN-LSTM neural network prediction model based on Pearson optimization is higher than that of CNN and LSTM alone and matches with the actual value, which is a load prediction method with higher accuracy.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it