MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403262968 · doi:10.1049/gtd2.13276

Improving electric vehicle charging forecasting: A hybrid deep learning approach for probabilistic predictions

2024· article· en· W4403262968 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Jamali Jahromi, Mohammad Reza Masoudi, Mohammad Mohammadi, Shahabodin Afrasiabi

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Generation Transmission & Distribution · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicComputer scienceProbabilistic forecastingElectric vehicleArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Electric vehicles (EVs) have gained significant attention recently. Despite their advantages, challenges in the power grid, such as providing necessary information for optimal operation, persist. High‐precision forecasting techniques are essential to address the nonlinear and complex behavior of EV charging. A hybrid structure based on deep learning, called LSTLNet, has been proposed. LSTLNet combines convolutional neural networks (CNN), gated recurrent neural networks (GRU), attention mechanisms (AM), and automatic regression (AR) models. This combination improves the deterministic forecasting model and addresses the weaknesses of CNN and GRU. Deterministic prediction, which determines only one point of consumption charge, is prone to error. Therefore, probabilistic forecasting, represented as a probability distribution function (PDF) containing comprehensive statistical information, is preferred. A smooth band limit maximum likelihood (SBLM) estimator is used to indirectly predict the PDF from the data. Comparative results with conventional shallow and deep methods for similar time series forecasting demonstrate the superiority of the proposed method for both deterministic and probabilistic forecasting.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Generation Transmission & DistributionSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207