Multicriteria decision-making framework for robust energy management AI solutions

IF 4.9 2区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Salem Garfan , A.H. Alamoodi , Suliana Sulaiman , O.S. Albahri , A.S. Albahri , Iman Mohamad Sharaf
{"title":"Multicriteria decision-making framework for robust energy management AI solutions","authors":"Salem Garfan ,&nbsp;A.H. Alamoodi ,&nbsp;Suliana Sulaiman ,&nbsp;O.S. Albahri ,&nbsp;A.S. Albahri ,&nbsp;Iman Mohamad Sharaf","doi":"10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In recent years, global attention has been shifted toward energy issues, prompting significant support from major countries toward nearly zero-energy structures. However, this transition faces challenges, particularly regarding the financial implications of implementation despite diverse methodologies. The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) has catalyzed advancements in energy conservation and management, leading to the development of numerous smart energy management systems leveraging the internet of things and AI methodologies. Various machine learning (ML) models have been utilized for energy-saving and consumption prediction solutions, posing challenges in selecting the most effective model. Multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) models offer a solution to this challenge and have been applied across domains, including energy management. This study aims to utilize MCDM approaches, specifically the fuzzy-weighted zero-inconsistency (FWZIC) and combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS) methods, to select the best energy management ML model. The study used data for eight ML alternatives based on the assessments by three field experts with respect to five criteria. The results of the criteria evaluation weights indicate that robustness (<em>C<sub>1</sub></em>) received the highest criterion weight with a value of <em>0.298</em>. The results of the alternative evaluation indicated the hybrid artificial neural network (<em>A<sub>1</sub></em>) as the best model for performance. Additionally, a comparison analysis was performed between FWZIC and various criteria weighting methods, as well as between CODAS and different alternative ranking methods. This framework enables decisionmakers to consider an AI solution that optimizes for accuracy, costs, and resilience in a move towards zero-energy infrastructure.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34478,"journal":{"name":"Sustainable Futures","volume":"10 ","pages":"Article 100822"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainable Futures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666188825003879","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, global attention has been shifted toward energy issues, prompting significant support from major countries toward nearly zero-energy structures. However, this transition faces challenges, particularly regarding the financial implications of implementation despite diverse methodologies. The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) has catalyzed advancements in energy conservation and management, leading to the development of numerous smart energy management systems leveraging the internet of things and AI methodologies. Various machine learning (ML) models have been utilized for energy-saving and consumption prediction solutions, posing challenges in selecting the most effective model. Multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) models offer a solution to this challenge and have been applied across domains, including energy management. This study aims to utilize MCDM approaches, specifically the fuzzy-weighted zero-inconsistency (FWZIC) and combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS) methods, to select the best energy management ML model. The study used data for eight ML alternatives based on the assessments by three field experts with respect to five criteria. The results of the criteria evaluation weights indicate that robustness (C1) received the highest criterion weight with a value of 0.298. The results of the alternative evaluation indicated the hybrid artificial neural network (A1) as the best model for performance. Additionally, a comparison analysis was performed between FWZIC and various criteria weighting methods, as well as between CODAS and different alternative ranking methods. This framework enables decisionmakers to consider an AI solution that optimizes for accuracy, costs, and resilience in a move towards zero-energy infrastructure.
强大的能源管理AI解决方案的多标准决策框架
近年来,全球关注焦点转向能源问题,主要国家大力支持实现近零能耗结构。然而,这一过渡面临着挑战,特别是在方法不同的情况下执行所涉经费问题上。人工智能(AI)的出现促进了能源节约和管理的进步,导致了许多利用物联网和人工智能方法的智能能源管理系统的发展。各种机器学习(ML)模型已被用于节能和消费预测解决方案,在选择最有效的模型方面提出了挑战。多标准决策(MCDM)模型为这一挑战提供了解决方案,并已应用于包括能源管理在内的多个领域。本研究旨在利用MCDM方法,特别是模糊加权零不一致性(FWZIC)和基于距离的组合评估(CODAS)方法,选择最佳的能量管理机器学习模型。该研究使用了基于三位现场专家就五个标准进行评估的八种ML替代方案的数据。各指标评价权值的结果表明,稳健性(C1)获得的指标权值最高,为0.298。替代评价结果表明,混合人工神经网络(A1)是性能最好的模型。此外,还对FWZIC与各种标准加权方法、CODAS与不同备选排序方法进行了比较分析。该框架使决策者能够考虑在向零能源基础设施迈进的过程中优化准确性、成本和弹性的人工智能解决方案。
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
Sustainable Futures
Sustainable Futures Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
1.80%
发文量
34
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: Sustainable Futures: is a journal focused on the intersection of sustainability, environment and technology from various disciplines in social sciences, and their larger implications for corporation, government, education institutions, regions and society both at present and in the future. It provides an advanced platform for studies related to sustainability and sustainable development in society, economics, environment, and culture. The scope of the journal is broad and encourages interdisciplinary research, as well as welcoming theoretical and practical research from all methodological approaches.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信