MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401015931 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e35167

Deep learning-based electricity theft prediction in non-smart grid environments

2024· article· en· W4401015931 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

VenueHeliyon · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectricity Theft Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersUniversity of JohannesburgKing Saud University
KeywordsRandom forestComputer sciencePrincipal component analysisResamplingSmart gridElectricityArtificial intelligenceMachine learningDeep learningOversamplingData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In developing countries, smart grids are nonexistent, and electricity theft significantly hampers power supply. This research introduces a lightweight deep-learning model using monthly customer readings as input data. By employing careful direct and indirect feature engineering techniques, including Principal Component Analysis (PCA), t-distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE), UMAP (Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection), and resampling methods such as Random-Under-Sampler (RUS), Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE), and Random-Over-Sampler (ROS), an effective solution is proposed. Previous studies indicate that models achieve high precision, recall, and F1 score for the non-theft (0) class, but perform poorly, even achieving 0 %, for the theft (1) class. Through parameter tuning and employing Random-Over-Sampler (ROS), significant improvements in accuracy, precision (89 %), recall (94 %), and F1 score (91 %) for the theft (1) class are achieved. The results demonstrate that the proposed model outperforms existing methods, showcasing its efficacy in detecting electricity theft in non-smart grid environments.

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 score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.189 · 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