MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381465310 · doi:10.3390/pr11051382

Investigating the Power of LSTM-Based Models in Solar Energy Forecasting

2023· article· en· W4381465310 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProcesses · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersUniversiti Tenaga NasionalTenaga Nasional Berhad
KeywordsComputer scienceRenewable energyPhotovoltaic systemMean squared errorWind powerSolar energyProbabilistic forecastingMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningReliability engineeringProbabilistic logicEngineeringStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solar is a significant renewable energy source. Solar energy can provide for the world’s energy needs while minimizing global warming from traditional sources. Forecasting the output of renewable energy has a considerable impact on decisions about the operation and management of power systems. It is crucial to accurately forecast the output of renewable energy sources in order to assure grid dependability and sustainability and to reduce the risk and expense of energy markets and systems. Recent advancements in long short-term memory (LSTM) have attracted researchers to the model, and its promising potential is reflected in the method’s richness and the growing number of papers about it. To facilitate further research and development in this area, this paper investigates LSTM models for forecasting solar energy by using time-series data. The paper is divided into two parts: (1) independent LSTM models and (2) hybrid models that incorporate LSTM as another type of technique. The Root mean square error (RMSE) and other error metrics are used as the representative evaluation metrics for comparing the accuracy of the selected methods. According to empirical studies, the two types of models (independent LSTM and hybrid) have distinct advantages and disadvantages depending on the scenario. For instance, LSTM outperforms the other standalone models, but hybrid models generally outperform standalone models despite their longer data training time requirement. The most notable discovery is the better suitability of LSTM as a predictive model to forecast the amount of solar radiation and photovoltaic power compared with other conventional machine learning methods.

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 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 score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.195 · 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