4.7 Article

Evaluation of the causes and impact of outliers on residential building energy use prediction using inverse modeling

期刊

BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT
卷 138, 期 -, 页码 194-206

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.04.039

关键词

Inverse modeling; Energy use; Residential buildings; Outliers; Building performance

资金

  1. Ministry of Education and Training of Vietnam and Earth Networks

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inverse modeling techniques are often used to predict the performance and energy use of buildings. Residential energy use is generally highly dependent on occupant behavior; this can limit a model's accuracy due to the presence of outliers. There has been limited data available to determine the cause of and evaluate the impact of such outliers on model performance, and thus limited guidance on how best to address this in model development. Thus the main objective of this work is to link the use of outlier detection methods to the causes of anomalies in energy use data, and to the determination of whether or not to remove an identified outlier to improve an inverse model's performance. A dataset of 128 U.S. residential buildings with highly-granular, disaggregated energy data is investigated. Using monthly data, change-point modeling was determined to be the best method to predict consumption. Three methods then are used to identify outliers in the data, and the cause and impact of these outliers is evaluated. Approximately 19% of the homes had an outlier. Using the disaggregate data, the causes were found to mostly be due to variations in occupant-dependent use of large appliances, lighting, and electronics. In 20% of homes with outliers, the removal of the outlier improved model performance, in particular all outliers identified with both the standard deviation and quartile methods, or all three methods. These two combinations of outlier detection methods are thus recommended for use in improving the prediction capabilities of inverse change point models.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据