Energy and Buildings· 2017Q1
Trees vs Neurons: Comparison between random forest and ANN for high-resolution prediction of building energy consumption
- 997citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2017year
Short summary
Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) achieved a marginally better root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 4.97 compared to Random Forest (RF) at 6.10 for predicting hourly hotel HVAC energy consumption, though RF offers advantages in tuning and handling categorical data.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- ANN achieved a lower RMSE of 4.97 compared to RF's 6.10 in predicting hourly HVAC energy consumption.
- Incorporating social parameters like guest numbers slightly improved prediction accuracy for both models.
- RF offers advantages in ease of tuning and modeling with categorical variables.
- Both ANN and RF are considered comparably applicable for building energy prediction tasks.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Energy prediction models are used in buildings as a performance evaluation engine in advanced control and optimisation, and in making informed decisions by facility managers and utilities for enhanced energy efficiency. Simplified and data-driven models are often the preferred option where pertinent information for detailed simulation are not available and where fast responses are required. We compared the performance of the widely-used feed-forward back-propagation artificial neural network (ANN) with random forest (RF), an ensemble-based method gaining popularity in prediction – \nfor predicting the hourly HVAC energy consumption of a hotel in Madrid, Spain. Incorporating social parameters such as the numbers of guests marginally increased prediction accuracy in both cases. Overall, ANN performed marginally better than RF with root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 4.97 and 6.10 respectively. However, the ease of tuning and modelling with categorical variables offers ensemble-based algorithms an advantage for dealing with multi-dimensional complex data, typical in buildings. RF performs internal cross-validation (i.e. using out-of-bag samples) and only has a few tuning parameters. Both models have comparable predictive power and nearly equally applicable in building energy applications.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Energy and Buildings, 2017 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Building and Construction
Building and ConstructionEngineering