Smart home energy management systems: Research challenges and survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electricity is establishing ground as a means of energy, and its proportion will continue to rise in the next generations. Home energy usage is expected to increase by more than 40% in the next 20 years. Therefore, to compensate for demand requirements, proper planning and strategies are needed to improve home energy management systems (HEMs). One of the crucial aspects of HEMS are proper load forecasting and scheduling of energy utilization. Energy management systems depend heavily on precise forecasting and scheduling. Considering this scenario, this article was divided into two parts. Firstly, this article gives a thorough analysis of forecasting models in HEMs with the primary goal of determining whichever model is most appropriate in a given situation. Moreover, for optimal utilization of scheduling strategies in HEMs, the current literature has discussed a number of scheduling optimization approaches. Therefore, secondly in this article, these approaches will be examined thoroughly to develop effective operating scheduling and to make wise judgments regarding usage of these techniques in HEMs. Finally, this paper also presents the future technical advancements and research gaps in load forecasting and scheduling and how they affect HEMs activities in the near future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".