Comparison of Short-Term Load Forecasting Techniques

R. Sethi, J. Kleissl
{"title":"Comparison of Short-Term Load Forecasting Techniques","authors":"R. Sethi, J. Kleissl","doi":"10.1109/SusTech47890.2020.9150490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents a comparative analysis of the different forecasting techniques (Statistical method (ARIMA)), Machine Learning method (Multivariate Linear Regression) and Deep Learning method (LSTM)) for short term load forecasting. The forecasting model for each of these techniques takes into account the historical load (annual), site temperature data and US calendar data as input features. The model is trained on the first nine months of data and then tested for accuracy on the remaining three months. A case study using the load profile of a commercial building (amusement park) in San Diego, California is presented, where the performance of the above forecasting techniques is compared. The error metric used for comparison is the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) value. The results indicate that LSTM model offers the best performance in terms of forecasting accuracy. The designed LSTM model can be deployed as part of Energy Management System (EMS) for smart grids. The robustness of the LSTM model is further explored by comparing the above LSTM encoder-decoder architecture with a standard LSTM architecture. In addition to the above dataset, both architectures were tested on two more datasets- one for an office building and another for an operations center building located in San Diego. Both architectures were trained on first 9 months of load data and tested on the remaining 3 months. The encoder-decoder architecture performed better than the standard architecture across all the datasets.","PeriodicalId":184112,"journal":{"name":"2020 IEEE Conference on Technologies for Sustainability (SusTech)","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 IEEE Conference on Technologies for Sustainability (SusTech)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SusTech47890.2020.9150490","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This paper presents a comparative analysis of the different forecasting techniques (Statistical method (ARIMA)), Machine Learning method (Multivariate Linear Regression) and Deep Learning method (LSTM)) for short term load forecasting. The forecasting model for each of these techniques takes into account the historical load (annual), site temperature data and US calendar data as input features. The model is trained on the first nine months of data and then tested for accuracy on the remaining three months. A case study using the load profile of a commercial building (amusement park) in San Diego, California is presented, where the performance of the above forecasting techniques is compared. The error metric used for comparison is the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) value. The results indicate that LSTM model offers the best performance in terms of forecasting accuracy. The designed LSTM model can be deployed as part of Energy Management System (EMS) for smart grids. The robustness of the LSTM model is further explored by comparing the above LSTM encoder-decoder architecture with a standard LSTM architecture. In addition to the above dataset, both architectures were tested on two more datasets- one for an office building and another for an operations center building located in San Diego. Both architectures were trained on first 9 months of load data and tested on the remaining 3 months. The encoder-decoder architecture performed better than the standard architecture across all the datasets.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
短期负荷预测技术的比较
本文对短期负荷预测的不同预测技术(统计方法(ARIMA))、机器学习方法(多元线性回归)和深度学习方法(LSTM)进行了比较分析。每种技术的预测模型都考虑了历史负荷(年度)、现场温度数据和美国日历数据作为输入特征。该模型在前9个月的数据上进行训练,然后在其余3个月的数据上进行准确性测试。本文以加利福尼亚州圣迭戈的一座商业建筑(游乐园)为例,对上述预测技术的性能进行了比较。用于比较的误差度量是均方根误差(RMSE)值。结果表明,LSTM模型在预测精度方面表现最好。所设计的LSTM模型可以作为智能电网能源管理系统(EMS)的一部分部署。通过将上述LSTM编解码器架构与标准LSTM架构进行比较,进一步探讨了LSTM模型的鲁棒性。除了上述数据集之外,这两种架构还在另外两个数据集上进行了测试——一个用于办公楼,另一个用于位于圣地亚哥的运营中心大楼。这两种架构都在前9个月的负载数据上进行了训练,并在剩下的3个月上进行了测试。在所有数据集上,编码器-解码器架构比标准架构表现得更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
UAV Power Management, Generation, and Storage System Principles and Design Toward Sustainable Water System: Modeling Pipe Failure in Water Distribution Networks Implementation of Critical Care Customer Within a Small-Scale Model of a Smart Grid Comparison of Short-Term Load Forecasting Techniques Optimal Energy Storage Schedules for Load Leveling and Ramp Rate Control in Distribution Systems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1