MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405008951 · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2024.103607

A designed predictive modelling strategy based on data decomposition and machine learning to forecast solar radiation

2024· article· en· W4405008951 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

VenueResults in Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsDecompositionComputer scienceRadiationMachine learningArtificial intelligencePhysicsOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• A hybrid solar radiation forecasting model has been designed. • Robust Local Mean Decomposition (RLMD) splits the solar radiation data into the subset of PFs, AMPs and FMs signals. • The low frequency based PFs play a vital role as pertinent features. • Random Forest algorithm (RF) used the PFs to design RLMD-RF to forecast solar radiation. • The proposed RLMD-RF model provides significant energy management implications. Consistent with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 7, the design and optimization of clean energy resources ( e.g ., solar energy) is a highly motivating task for all researchers globally who continue to build research synergies that can tackle the future likelihood of energy crises due to socioeconomic and strategic environmental policy. In this paper, a weekly solar radiation ( S R ) forecasting model is designed using a robust local mean decomposition (RLMD) technique unified with a random forest (RF) algorithm to generate a fully optimised hybridized RLD-RF model that has a promising capability to forecast the S R values. In the first stage of model design, the RLMD, a frequency resolution method, is applied to decompose the original S R time series into amplitude modulation subseries (AMs), frequency modulation subseries (FMs), and the low-frequency product functions (PFs) to reveal the internal structure of the model construction data to incrementally optimize the RLD-RF model where only PFs were used. Subsequently, the statistically significant lagged subseries at a week ahead forecasting horizon ( t – 1) of the low-frequency PFs with residual components are extracted individually, via partial autocorrelation function ( PACF ), to capture the historical behaviour of frequency-resolved S R component in order to build a robust modelling framework. Consequently, the random forest (RF) algorithm is employed to forecast each of the subseries using PACF-based lagged inputs to construct a fully optimised hybrid RLMD-RF predictive model. RLMD-RF is benchmarked against a baseline RF, M5tree, and multiple linear regression (MLR), Artificial neural network (ANN) and Gaussian process regression (GPR) algorithms, including their hybridized counterparts ( i.e. , RLMD-M5tree, RLMD-MLR, RLMD-ANN, and RLMD-GPR) using statistical score metrics in the independent testing phase. The results generated at test sites in Queensland State, Australia that have high solar energy potential confirm that the RLMD-RF method can produce quality predictions of weekly solar radiation against the benchmarking comparison models. For instance, RLMD-RF for Barcaldine are higher in terms ( E WI = 0.938 , E NS = 0.878) against RLMD-MLR ( E WI = 0.845 , E NS = 0.705), the RLMD-M5tree ( E WI = 0.836 , E NS = 0.684), RLMD-ANN ( E WI = 0.836 , E NS = 0.715), RLMD-GPR ( E WI = 0.839 , E NS = 0.716), the RF ( E WI = 0.720 , E NS = 0.564), the M5tree ( E WI = 0.692 , E NS = 0.522), the MLR ( E WI = 0.683 , E NS = 0.508), the ANN ( E WI = 0.708 , E NS = 0.519) and the GPR ( E WI = 0.708 , E NS = 0.520). Similarly, the RLMD-RF also outperformed in Rockhampton, Clermont, and Lockyer Valley stations as compared to other models. This research establishes the practical usefulness of hybridised RLMD-RF modelling framework for accurate S R forecasting and advocates its possible consideration in renewable and sustainable energy production and monitoring systems that can aid in decision-making by energy utilities and stakeholders ( e.g ., climate and energy policy experts).

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.228 · 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