skip to main content
10.1145/3308558.3313405acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A Tree-Structured Neural Network Model for Household Energy Breakdown

Published:13 May 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Residential buildings constitute roughly one-fourth of the total energy use across the globe. Numerous studies have shown that providing an energy breakdown increases residents' awareness of energy use and can help save up to 15% energy. A significant amount of prior work has looked into source-separation techniques collectively called non-intrusive load monitoring (NILM), and most prior NILM research has leveraged high-frequency household aggregate data for energy breakdown. However, in practice most smart meters only sample hourly or once every 15 minutes, and existing NILM techniques show poor performance at such a low sampling rate.

In this paper, we propose a TreeCNN model for energy breakdown on low frequency data. There are three key insights behind the design of our model: i) households consume energy with regular temporal patterns, which can be well captured by filters learned in CNNs; ii) tree structure isolates the pattern learning of each appliance that helps avoid magnitude variance problem, while preserves relationship among appliances; iii) tree structure enables the separation of known appliance from unknown ones, which de-noises the input time series for better appliance-level reconstruction. Our TreeCNN model outperformed seven existing baselines on a public benchmark dataset with lower estimation error and higher accuracy on detecting the active states of appliances.

References

  1. Jose´ Alcalá, Oliver Parson, and Alex Rogers. 2015. Detecting anomalies in activities of daily living of elderly residents via energy disaggregation and cox processes. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Conference on Embedded Systems for Energy-Efficient Built Environments. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. K Carrie Armel, Abhay Gupta, Gireesh Shrimali, and Adrian Albert. 2013. Is disaggregation the holy grail of energy efficiency? The case of electricity. Energy Policy 52(2013), 213-234.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Sean Barker, Sandeep Kalra, David Irwin, and Prashant Shenoy. 2013. Empirical characterization and modeling of electrical loads in smart homes. In IEEE IGCC. Arlington, VA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Nipun Batra, Yiling Jia, Hongning Wang, Kamin Whitehouse, 2018. Transferring Decomposed Tensors for Scalable Energy Breakdown across Regions. AAAI (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Nipun Batra, Jack Kelly, Oliver Parson, Haimonti Dutta, William Knottenbelt, Alex Rogers, Amarjeet Singh, and Mani Srivastava. 2014. NILMTK: An Open Source Toolkit for Non-intrusive Load Monitoring. In Fifth International Conference on Future Energy Systems. Cambridge, UK. arXiv:1404.3878 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Nipun Batra, Amarjeet Singh, and Kamin Whitehouse. 2016. Gemello: Creating a Detailed Energy Breakdown from Just the Monthly Electricity Bill. In SIGKDD 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Nipun Batra, Hongning Wang, Amarjeet Singh, and Kamin Whitehouse. 2017. Matrix Factorisation for Scalable Energy Breakdown.. In AAAI. 4467-4473. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Mario E Berges, Ethan Goldman, H Scott Matthews, and Lucio Soibelman. 2010. Enhancing electricity audits in residential buildings with nonintrusive load monitoring. Journal of industrial ecology 14, 5 (2010), 844-858.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. George William Hart. 1992. Nonintrusive appliance load monitoring. Proc. IEEE 80, 12 (1992), 1870-1891.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy. 2015. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. In International conference on machine learning. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Jack Kelly and William Knottenbelt. 2015. Neural NILM: Deep neural networks applied to energy disaggregation. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Conference on Embedded Systems for Energy-Efficient Built Environments. ACM, 55-64. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Jihyun Kim, Thi-Thu-Huong Le, and Howon Kim. 2017. Nonintrusive load monitoring based on advanced deep learning and novel signature. Computational intelligence and neuroscience 2017 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. J. Z. Kolter, S. Batra, and A. Y. Ng. 2010. Energy Disaggregation via Discriminative Sparse Coding. In NIPS 2010. Vancouver, BC, Canada. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. J. Z. Kolter and T. Jaakkola. 2012. Approximate Inference in Additive Factorial HMMs with Application to Energy Disaggregation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. La Palma, Canary Islands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E Hinton. 2012. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 1097-1105. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Roderick JA Little. 1988. Missing-data adjustments in large surveys. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 6, 3 (1988), 287-296.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Oliver Parson, Grant Fisher, April Hersey, Nipun Batra, Jack Kelly, Amarjeet Singh, William Knottenbelt, and Alex Rogers. 2015. Dataport and NILMTK: A building data set designed for non-intrusive load monitoring. In GlobalSIP 2015. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Oliver Parson, Siddhartha Ghosh, Mark J Weal, and Alex Rogers. 2012. Non-Intrusive Load Monitoring Using Prior Models of General Appliance Types.. In AAAi. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Soumith Chintala, and Gregory Chanan. 2017. Pytorch.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Luis Pe´rez-Lombard, Jose´ Ortiz, and Christine Pout. 2008. A review on buildings energy consumption information. Energy and buildings 40, 3 (2008), 394-398.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Staff Report. 2017. 2017 Assessment of Demand Response and Advanced Metering.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Jeffrey M Wooldridge. 2007. Inverse probability weighted estimation for general missing data problems. Journal of Econometrics 141, 2 (2007), 1281-1301.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Mingjun Zhong, Nigel Goddard, and Charles Sutton. 2015. Latent Bayesian melding for integrating individual and population models. In NIPS 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    WWW '19: The World Wide Web Conference
    May 2019
    3620 pages
    ISBN:9781450366748
    DOI:10.1145/3308558

    Copyright © 2019 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 13 May 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate1,899of8,196submissions,23%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format