MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414184187 · doi:10.38088/jise.1635104

Short-Term Electricity Load Forecasting and Seasonality Analysis Using Temperature and Artificial Intelligence Methods in the Southeastern Anatolia Region

2025· article· en· W4414184187 on OpenAlexaff
Sena Çadırcı, İbrahim Gürsu Tekdemir

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Innovative Science and Engineering (JISE) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsSafran Electronics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averageArtificial neural networkElectricityEnergy consumptionDemand forecastingLinear regressionTime seriesSeasonality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The planning of electrical energy systems can be realized in a more efficient and sustainable way by forecasting energy demand accurately. In this context, short-term load forecasting plays a critical role in optimizing energy production and distribution processes. In this study, short-term load forecasting was conducted using hourly electricity consumption data from a facility located in the Southeastern Anatolia Region between 2019–2022. The data were integrated with meteorological parameters to evaluate the impact of temperature. The performance of Multiple Linear Regression (MLR), Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), and AutoRegressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) methods were compared. According to the results, the ARIMA method was the most successful with an accuracy rate of 92%, followed by the ANN model with 90% accuracy. The MLR method demonstrated relatively lower performance, achieving an accuracy rate of 89%. Moreover, ANN showed a strong capability to model complex relationships, while ARIMA excelled in datasets with seasonality. In conclusion, this study highlights the strengths and weaknesses of different methods, providing valuable contributions to energy planning and emphasizing the importance of analyses conducted using regional datasets.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Innovative Science and Engineering (JISE)Same topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207