An evaluation of variable selection methods using Southern Africa solar irradiation data

IF 0.6 4区 工程技术 Q4 ENERGY & FUELS
D. Maposa, Amon Masache, P. Mdlongwa, C. Sigauke
{"title":"An evaluation of variable selection methods using Southern Africa solar irradiation data","authors":"D. Maposa, Amon Masache, P. Mdlongwa, C. Sigauke","doi":"10.17159/2413-3051/2024/v35i1a16336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dimensionality poses a challenge in developing quality predictive models. Often when modelling solar irradiance (SI), many covariates are considered. Training such data has several disadvantages. This study sought to identify the best variable embedded selection method for different location and time horizon combinations from Southern Africa solar irradiance data. It introduced new variable selection methods into solar irradiation studies, namely penalised quantile regression (PQR), regularised random forests (RRF), and quantile regression forest (QRF). Stability analysis, performance and accuracy metric evaluations were used to compare them with the common lasso, elastic and ridge regression methods. The QRF model performed best in all locations followed by the shrinkage methods on hourly data. However, it was found that QRF is not sensitive to associations through correlations, thereby ignoring the relevance of variables while focusing on importance. Among the shrinkage methods, the lasso performed best in only one location. On the 24-hour horizon, elastic net dominated the performances among the shrinkage methods, but QRF was best in three locations of the six considered. Results confirmed that variable selection methods performed differently on different situational data sets. Depending on the strengths of the methods, results were combined to identify the most paramount variables. Day, total rainfall, and wind direction were superfluous features in all situations. The study concluded that shrinkage methods are best in cases of extreme multicollinearity, while QRF is best on data sets with outliers or/and heavy tails.","PeriodicalId":15666,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Energy in Southern Africa","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Energy in Southern Africa","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-3051/2024/v35i1a16336","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dimensionality poses a challenge in developing quality predictive models. Often when modelling solar irradiance (SI), many covariates are considered. Training such data has several disadvantages. This study sought to identify the best variable embedded selection method for different location and time horizon combinations from Southern Africa solar irradiance data. It introduced new variable selection methods into solar irradiation studies, namely penalised quantile regression (PQR), regularised random forests (RRF), and quantile regression forest (QRF). Stability analysis, performance and accuracy metric evaluations were used to compare them with the common lasso, elastic and ridge regression methods. The QRF model performed best in all locations followed by the shrinkage methods on hourly data. However, it was found that QRF is not sensitive to associations through correlations, thereby ignoring the relevance of variables while focusing on importance. Among the shrinkage methods, the lasso performed best in only one location. On the 24-hour horizon, elastic net dominated the performances among the shrinkage methods, but QRF was best in three locations of the six considered. Results confirmed that variable selection methods performed differently on different situational data sets. Depending on the strengths of the methods, results were combined to identify the most paramount variables. Day, total rainfall, and wind direction were superfluous features in all situations. The study concluded that shrinkage methods are best in cases of extreme multicollinearity, while QRF is best on data sets with outliers or/and heavy tails.
利用南部非洲太阳辐照数据评估变量选择方法
维度是开发高质量预测模型的一项挑战。在建立太阳辐照度(SI)模型时,通常会考虑许多协变量。训练此类数据有几个缺点。本研究试图从南部非洲的太阳辐照度数据中找出针对不同地点和时间范围组合的最佳变量嵌入选择方法。它在太阳辐照研究中引入了新的变量选择方法,即惩罚性量化回归(PQR)、正则化随机森林(RRF)和量化回归森林(QRF)。通过稳定性分析、性能和准确度评估,将它们与常见的拉索、弹性和脊回归方法进行了比较。在所有地点,QRF 模型都表现最佳,其次是小时数据的收缩方法。然而,研究发现,QRF 对通过相关性产生的关联并不敏感,因此忽略了变量的相关性,而只关注重要性。在缩减方法中,套索法仅在一个地点表现最佳。在 24 小时范围内,弹性网在各种缩减方法中表现最佳,但 QRF 在所考虑的六个地点中的三个地点表现最佳。结果证实,变量选择方法在不同情况的数据集上表现不同。根据各种方法的优势,我们对结果进行了综合,以确定最重要的变量。在所有情况下,日、总降雨量和风向都是多余的特征。研究得出结论,收缩法最适用于多重共线性极强的情况,而 QRF 最适用于有离群值或/和重尾的数据集。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The journal has a regional focus on southern Africa. Manuscripts that are accepted for consideration to publish in the journal must address energy issues in southern Africa or have a clear component relevant to southern Africa, including research that was set-up or designed in the region. The southern African region is considered to be constituted by the following fifteen (15) countries: Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of Congo, Lesotho, Malawi, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Within this broad field of energy research, topics of particular interest include energy efficiency, modelling, renewable energy, poverty, sustainable development, climate change mitigation, energy security, energy policy, energy governance, markets, technology and innovation.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信