Quarter-Hourly Power Load Forecasting Based on a Hybrid CNN-BiLSTM-Attention Model with CEEMDAN, K-Means, and VMD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate long-term power load forecasting in the grid is crucial for supply–demand balance analysis in new power systems. It helps to identify potential power market risks and uncertainties in advance, thereby enhancing the stability and efficiency of power systems. Given the temporal and nonlinear features of power load, this paper proposes a hybrid load-forecasting model using attention mechanisms, CNN, and BiLSTM. Historical load data are processed via CEEMDAN, K-means clustering, and VMD for significant regularity and uncertainty feature extraction. The CNN layer extracts features from climate and date inputs, while BiLSTM captures short- and long-term dependencies from both forward and backward directions. Attention mechanisms enhance key information. This approach is applied for seasonal load forecasting. Several comparative experiments show the proposed model’s high accuracy, with MAPE values of 1.41%, 1.25%, 1.08% and 1.67% for the four seasons. It outperforms other methods, with improvements of 0.25–2.53 GWh2 in MSE, 0.15–0.1 GWh in RMSE, 0.1–0.74 GWh in MAE and 0.22–1.40% in MAPE. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the data processing method and the impact of training data volume on forecasting accuracy are analyzed. The results indicate that decomposing and clustering historical load data, along with large-scale data training, can both boost forecasting accuracy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".