MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Campus Electric Load Forecasting Using Recurrent Neural Networks

2024· article· en· W4400276706 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zain Ahmed, Mohsin Jamil

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceRecurrent neural networkElectrical loadArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringEngineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short-Term Load Forecasting is a challenging research problem and has a tremendous impact on the generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity. In this paper, different Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) based time-series forecasting algorithms are applied to the electric load data obtained from the Memorial University of Newfoundland. These algorithms include Long Short Term Memory (LSTM), Gated Recurrent Network (GRU), Bi-GRU and Bi-LSTM. The data is trained on the previous week and its accuracy for the next day is measured using hourly forecasts. The accuracy of these algorithms is compared for day-ahead forecasting potential. Bi-GRU based RNN shows best performance among the tested algorithms with the highest R2 score and lowest Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Mean Squared Error (MSE).

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207