Comparison of Random Forest and SARIMA Methods Optimized with Genetic Algorithm for Wind Forecasting

In this work, the Random Forest and SARIMA methods were used, both optimized through genetic algorithms, with the purpose of forecasting wind speed and, consequently, energy production. The data used were collected in $\mathbf{1 0}$ minute intervals over 55 hours and 40 minutes of measurements carried out by LIDAR campaigns in the São Marcos Bay, specifically in the Mearim region. The database was divided into $\mathbf{9 0 \%}$ for training and $\mathbf{1 0 \%}$ for testing, corresponding to 5 hours and 30 minutes of forecasting, allowing the evaluation of model performance. In the experiments, Random Forest presented a mean squared error (MSE) of 0.08, while SARIMA obtained an MSE of 1.16. Random Forest demonstrated the lowest error and highest precision, thus being recommended for forecasting data in the analyzed region.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-11-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/urucon63440.2024.10850434
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Energy Load and Power Forecasting
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.42
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Random Forest and SARIMA Methods Optimized with Genetic Algorithm for Wind Forecasting

Heraldo Possolo de Souza, Ana Cristina Gonçalves, Shigeaki Leite de Lima, Fernanda L. Santos et al.
2 citations
Energy Load and Power Forecasting
0.42
article

Comparison of Random Forest and SARIMA Methods Optimized with Genetic Algorithm for Wind Forecasting

Heraldo Possolo de Souza, Ana Cristina Gonçalves, Shigeaki Leite de Lima, Fernanda L. Santos, Nerval de J. S.
article en
2 citations

Abstract

In this work, the Random Forest and SARIMA methods were used, both optimized through genetic algorithms, with the purpose of forecasting wind speed and, consequently, energy production. The data used were collected in $\mathbf{1 0}$ minute intervals over 55 hours and 40 minutes of measurements carried out by LIDAR campaigns in the São Marcos Bay, specifically in the Mearim region. The database was divided into $\mathbf{9 0 \%}$ for training and $\mathbf{1 0 \%}$ for testing, corresponding to 5 hours and 30 minutes of forecasting, allowing the evaluation of model performance. In the experiments, Random Forest presented a mean squared error (MSE) of 0.08, while SARIMA obtained an MSE of 1.16. Random Forest demonstrated the lowest error and highest precision, thus being recommended for forecasting data in the analyzed region.

Universidade Federal do Maranhão (BR)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 35%
Energy Load and Power Forecasting
0.42
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Comparison of Random Forest and SARIMA Methods Optimized with Genetic Algorithm for Wind Forecasting — Heraldo Possolo de Souza, Ana Cristina Gonçalves, et al. · (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS