MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Advanced and Optimized Forecasting Techniques for Wind Power Generation: A Comparative Analysis

2025· article· W4415368043 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julián Cárdenas, Tohid Rahimi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoosting (machine learning)Wind powerStability (learning theory)Renewable energyTime horizonGradient boostingPoint (geometry)Event (particle physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wind power forecasting and subsequently ramp event detection are vital for maintaining the stability and efficiency of modern power grids that increasingly rely on renewable energy sources. This study presents a new hybrid forecasting framework that combines Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks with Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) to address the limitations of each model individually. While LSTMs are effective at capturing temporal dependencies, they tend to perform poorly in detecting rapid changes such as ramp events. Conversely, XGBoost provides accurate point predictions but lacks inherent temporal awareness. By merging these models, our framework leverages LSTM’s ability to model time sequences and XGBoost’s strength in predicting sharp transitions. This integration markedly improves short-term forecasting accuracy, especially during dynamic ramp conditions. The framework focuses on short-term forecasting with a 12 -hour horizon using 24 hours of historical and forecasted exogenous data. Tested on a four-year meteorological dataset from Atlantic Canada, our results show that this integrated approach, leveraging the complementary strengths of hybrid deep learning (Dual Transformer-LSTM) and tree-based models (XGBoost), achieve a $30 \%$ relative improvement in deterministic and a $40 \%$ improvement in deterministic accuracy when capturing both general and ramp-specific features of wind power signals compared to the other two methods.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207