Application of Time Series Analysis Model in Monitoring Electricity Consumption Behaviour and Anti-Theft of Electricity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
stimation method based on semi-supervised learning and time series analysis prediction. The electricity consumption data of power theft users are extracted as time series data, and in order to achieve multi-step prediction, MMD is utilized to improve the LSSVR semi-supervised learning algorithm. In addition, a perturbation term is introduced to optimize the convergence effect of the artificial bee colony algorithm, and a time series prediction algorithm based on improved artificial bee colony is established. Bringing in the power theft monitoring process to identify whether the user has power theft behavior, using the real power consumption dataset as the experimental validation data, comparing the identification accuracy of the prediction model. Predict the potential power theft of each user, solve the optimization model with the goal of optimal economic efficiency, and determine the actual ranking order of power theft users. The improved time series prediction algorithm proposed in this paper has a global error of 0.0003 and 0.0027 in dataset 1 and dataset 2, respectively, with the lowest global error and the highest overall accuracy of PSE prediction. And the algorithm predicts the list of users to be scheduled is basically the same as the list of users determined by the real PSE, which can achieve the maximum economic benefits.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it