Deep learning versus traditional machine learning methods for aggregated energy demand prediction
Abstract
In this paper the more advanced, in comparison with traditional machine learning approaches, deep learning methods are explored with the purpose of accurately predicting the aggregated energy consumption. Despite the fact that a wide range of machine learning methods have been applied to probabilistic energy prediction, the deep learning ones certainly represent the state-of-the-art artificial intelligence methods with remarkable success in a spectrum of practical applications. In particular, the use of Multi Layer Perceptrons, recently enhanced with deep learning capabilities, is proposed. Furthermore, its performance is compared with the most commonly used machine learning methods, such as Support Vector Machines, Gaussian Processes, Regression Trees, Ensemble Boosting and Linear Regression. The analysis of the day-ahead energy prediction demonstrates that different prediction methods present significantly different levels of accuracy in the case of a challenging dataset that comprises an interesting mix of consumers, wind and solar generation. The results show that Multi Layer Perceptrons outperform all the eight methods used as a benchmark in this study.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
ML has the potential to greatly speed up building energy demand computations by ignoring physical knowledge, incorporating it, or learning surrogate models.
“ML has the potential to speed up these computations greatly, either by ignoring physical knowledge of the building entirely [452,617], by incorporating it into the computation [195], or by learning to approximate the physical model to reduce the need for expensive simulation (surrogate models) [274].”
From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [617]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 118
- Authors
- Paterakis, N. G., Mocanu, E., Gibescu, M., Stappers, B., & van Alst, W.
- Affiliations
- Eindhoven University of Technology (NL)
- Venue
- 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference Europe (ISGT-Europe)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2017-09
- Pages
- 1-6
- OpenAlex
- W2783038087
- Cited by
- 118
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5
- FWCI
- 10.06
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe (publishedVersion)
- TU/e Research Portal (publishedVersion)
- TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Energy Load and Power Forecasting
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Smart Grid Energy Management
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Solar Radiation and Photovoltaics
- Keywords
- deep learning, multilayer perceptron, support vector machine, Gaussian processes, regression trees, ensemble boosting, wind and solar generation, benchmark comparison
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review