Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchMachine learning

analiza aiqbench

This study validates a critical preprocessing pipeline that repairs defective utility meter data before it corrupts machine-learning demand forecasts, demonstrating that even minor data corruption can degrade model performance by over 80%. By retaining 93% of training targets while restoring forecast accuracy to clean-data levels across multiple algorithms and time horizons, the work provides a robust solution for grid operators relying on noisy sensor inputs. The authors also transparently document an initial failure where over-cleaning worsened results, offering a calibrated amendment that ensures reproducibility and practical reliability for real-world deployment.
Sursă care acoperăarXiv
Ce este aceastaLectura unui model asupra articolului și a acoperirii conexe, scrisă pentru aiqbench. Nu sunt cuvintele publicației.

Validated Data Onboarding for AI Demand Forecasting on U.S. Building Meter Data: Design, Controlled Evaluation, and a Corrected Negative Result

arXiv3 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2610.02397v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Electric utilities and grid operators increasingly rely on machine-learning models to forecast next-day demand, and those models learn from meter data that is routinely defective: readings go missing, sensors freeze, buildings read zero for hours, and units change by a factor of 100. This report presents a data-onboarding pipeline that detects and repairs such defects before a model is trained, using only information available at forecast time, and a controlled experiment that measures whether the pipeline protects a 24-hour-ahead forecast. On hourly electricity data for twelve U.S. buildings from the public Building Data Genome 2 dataset (210,528 rows, 2016-2017), seeded, hash-logged defects touching 0.10% of the training period raised the error of a gradient-boosting forecaster by 86%; after detection and past-only repair the error returned to the clean-data level (mean absolute scaled error 0.760 clean, 1.415 corrupted, 0.729 repaired) while 93% of training targets were retained. At a defect prevalence calibrated to published field studies (1.6% of training rows) the unprotected forecaster's error reached 4.4 times that of a seasonal-naive rule, and the repaired forecaster again matched the clean baseline. The same pattern held for ridge regression and a random forest and across horizons of 1 to 24 hours. A first version of the pipeline over-cleaned natural data and made forecasts 25% worse; that result is retained, its cause is traced in the published artifacts, and the per-building calibration that corrects it is documented as a dated amendment. Every number is reproducible from pinned public inputs with SHA-256 verification, 84 automated tests and continuous integration.

Title:Validated Data Onboarding for AI Demand Forecasting on U.S. Building Meter Data: Design, Controlled Evaluation, and a Corrected Negative Result

Abstract:Electric utilities and grid operators increasingly rely on machine-learning models to forecast next-day demand, and those models learn from meter data that is routinely defective: readings go missing, sensors freeze, buildings read zero for hours, and units change by a factor of 100. This report presents a data-onboarding pipeline that detects and repairs such defects before a model is trained, using only information available at forecast time, and a controlled experiment that measures whether the pipeline protects a 24-hour-ahead forecast. On hourly electricity data for twelve U.S. buildings from the public Building Data Genome 2 dataset (210,528 rows, 2016-2017), seeded, hash-logged defects touching 0.10% of the training period raised the error of a gradient-boosting forecaster by 86%; after detection and past-only repair the error returned to the clean-data level (mean absolute scaled error 0.760 clean, 1.415 corrupted, 0.729 repaired) while 93% of training targets were retained. At a defect prevalence calibrated to published field studies (1.6% of training rows) the unprotected forecaster's error reached 4.4 times that of a seasonal-naive rule, and the repaired forecaster again matched the clean baseline. The same pattern held for ridge regression and a random forest and across horizons of 1 to 24 hours. A first version of the pipeline over-cleaned natural data and made forecasts 25% worse; that result is retained, its cause is traced in the published artifacts, and the per-building calibration that corrects it is documented as a dated amendment. Every number is reproducible from pinned public inputs with SHA-256 verification, 84 automated tests and continuous integration.

Technical report; 8 pages, 5 figures, 2 tables. Code, data manifests, and reproducibility artifacts: this https URL . Preprint; not peer reviewed

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2610.02397 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.02397v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.02397 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 391 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe