Short-Term Load Forecasting for AI-Data Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research shows large-scale AI-centric data centers could experience rapid fluctuations in power demand due to varying computation loads such as sudden spikes from inference or interruption of training large language models (LLMs). As a consequence, such huge and fluctuating power demand pose significant challenges to both data center and power utility operation. Accurate short-term power forecasting allows data centers and utilities to dynamically allocate resources and power large computing clusters as required. However, due to the complex data center power system structure and the black-box nature of the underlying AI algorithms running in data centers, explicit modeling of AI-data center is quite challenging. Alternatively, to deal with this emerging load forecasting problem, we propose a data-driven workflow to predict the short-term electricity load in an AI-data center, and such workflow is compatible with learning-based algorithms such as LSTM, GRU, 1D-CNN. We validate our framework, which achieves decent accuracy on data center GPU short-term power consumption. This provides opportunity for improved power management and sustainable data center operation.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".