Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Robust framework based on hybrid deep learning approach for short term
load forecasting of building electricity demand
Charan Sekhar *, Ratna Dahiya
Department of Electrical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra, Kurukshetra, Haryana, 136119, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling Editor: Henrik Lund Buildings consume about half of the global electrical energy, and an accurate prediction of their electricity
consumption is crucial for building microgrids’ efficient and reliable functioning, leading to profitability for users
Keywords: and utilities. This paper proposes a novel optimal hybrid strategy for building load prediction that combines
Short-term load forecast bilateral long short-term memory (BiLSTM), convolution neural networks (CNN), and grey wolf optimization
Bilateral long short-term memory
(GWO). The GWO obtains the optimal set of parameters of the CNN and BiLSTM algorithms. One-dimensional
Convolution neural networks
CNN is applied to extract the time series data feature effectively. The proposed strategy performance is inves­
Time series prediction
Grey wolf optimization tigated using four buildings having distinct characteristics with hourly resolution data. Results justify that the
same technique can be applied effectively to different structures. The work compares and examines their per­
formance with other cutting-edge technologies for the forecast for one day, two days, and a week. The findings
demonstrate that the suggested GWO–CNN–BiLSTM technique performs more accurately than standard CNN-
LSTM, CNN-BiLSTM, optimized BiLSTM, and traditional LSTM and BiLSTM techniques.

1. Introduction unpredictable and highly fluctuating with nonlinear characteristics due

The power system resilience necessitates a balance between supply
and demand, which becomes challenging as electrical energy con­
sumption rises continuously due to economic and population growth.
Further imbalance is brought on by the requirement for a sustainable
grid incorporating renewable energy sources and electric vehicle tech­
nologies to reduce pollution emissions. Accurate demand estimation is
unavoidable to lessen imbalance and enhance system reliability and
security. Integrating renewable energy sources into the distribution
system or single entity has created a new paradigm, such as microgrids.
Many microgrids are designed for diverse purposes, including campus
microgrids, industrial microgrids, military microgrids, residential
microgrids, and complex commercial microgrids [1]. In all types of
microgrids, buildings are major electricity users.
Building energy consumption in India is around 33% and increasing
at a rate of 8% [2], and around the world is one-third of total energy
consumption and 55% of total electricity consumption [3]. Demand
forecasts of buildings ranging from a few hours to a few days assist
building managers and operators in more intelligent resource utiliza­
tion, cutting emissions, operating the grid safely, and increasing cost
savings [4]. However, the electrical energy consumption in buildings is
to the nature of consumption depending on the scheduling, occupancy,
and working culture of a particular building. Over decades, researchers,
engineers, and mathematicians have developed several prediction
methods broadly categorized as physical, statistical, and artificial in­
telligence. Physical models require professionals and more equipment
rating details and also suffer from inefficient learning, time-consuming,
and cumbersome. Statistical approaches are quick, easy, and straight­
forward, depending on current and past data. They are the most applied
methods for forecast applications in the last century. Despite that, these
approaches are poor at interpreting massive amounts of data and have
shortfalls in accuracy for irregular load swings. Due to deregulation, the
complexity of power usage patterns has also grown. The above limita­
tions are overcame by Artificial intelligence (AI) methods due to their
nonlinear learning capability, good computation facilities, and
data-handling techniques for forecast applications and hence gained
popularity [5,6]. Accordingly, the present work developed a hybrid
framework based on deep learning (DL) techniques: a 1-dimensional
convolution neural network (CNN) and a bilateral long short-term
memory (BiLSTM) network.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: charansekhar@gmail.com, charan_61900135@nitkkr.ac.in (C. Sekhar), ratna_dahiya@nitkkr.ac.in (R. Dahiya).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.126660
Received 9 September 2022; Received in revised form 29 November 2022; Accepted 8 January 2023
Available online 16 January 2023
0360-5442/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya
1.1. Literature survey
The work [7–14] shows an upsurge in using AI techniques to esti­
mate electricity at the grid or region level and indicates ample literature
is available on grid demand forecasts. However, lesser work explored the
consumption pattern of the buildings compared to the power grid level.
Research [15–22] has proposed various structures of artificial neural
networks (ANN), machine learning (ML) techniques, or a combination of
multiple ML methods for short-term load forecast (STLF) for one
building or numerous with very close characteristics to that single
building. The comparative analysis of methodologies based solely on
those types of building loads—residential, commercial, or admin­
istrative—was offered. The single DL techniques are developed in Refs.
[23,24] to estimate the electricity demand. The work in Ref. [23]
considered residential demand prediction using conditional restricted
Boltzmann machines and factored dependent restricted Boltzmann ma­
chines (CRBM). While the research of Cai et al. deals with the data of
three buildings for the next-day forecast using long short-term memory
(LSTM) and gated CNN approaches [24].
To overcome the overfitting limitations of a single technique, few
researchers have created hybrid methods to boost the forecast accuracy
of buildings. Forecasting with three ensemble approaches using multi­
layer perceptron (MLP), LSTM, XGBOOST, support vector regression
(SVR), and linear regression (LR) methods are proposed in Ref. [25] for
net zero building. Kong et al. developed an LSTM neural network-based
framework for forecasting a group of individual consumers where the
output of the LSTM technique is fed to the feed-forward neural network
(FFNN) [26]. A hybrid algorithm of regression trees and CNN is created
to predict three industrial demands [27]. Imani Maryam combined CNN
with SVR for residential load forecasting, where CNN extracts the fea­
tures from the data cubes and SVR for forecasting [28]. Nine different DL
techniques-based framework is developed for an hour and day ahead
forecast of five buildings from diversified geographical locations. The
demand variance from lowest to highest is relatively low even though
the work took buildings from various applications into consideration
and manually selected the parameters from the multiple sets [29]. The
residential consumption forecast problem is addressed in Refs. [30,31]
by combining CNN with LSTM and gated recurrent unit (GRU),
respectively. Somu et al. constructed a CNN-LSTM-based hybrid tech­
nique by including a K-nearest neighbor to estimate the energy of an
academic building [32].
The main limitation of the above-described techniques is the manual
network selection of the number of hidden layers, hidden units, learn
rate, and drop factor. Selecting a set of parameters for modeling the
forecast technique is crucial because it increases the model’s stability.
Techniques for hyper-parameter optimization that are frequently
employed include manual and automatic searches. Manual search
mainly relies on the knowledge and experience of individuals, which is
difficult in all cases. To overcome the optimal parameter selection
problem, researchers combined the STLF techniques with optimization
methods. The studies in Refs. [33–38] employed the particle swarm
optimization (PSO) technique and its variations to determine the
optimal values for parameters of the various ML techniques used in the
STLF of different types of buildings. These include weights of the neural
networks, hybrid model coefficient weights, and parameters of extreme
learning machines with kernels, ANFIS. Although the techniques ach­
ieved considerable accuracy, still the PSO method has a delayed
convergence, inertia weights, and learning rate selection problem, and
the local optima problem is a primary constraint. Massana J et al.
employed the grid search algorithm to ascertain the parameters of
multilinear regression, multilayer perceptron, and support vector
regression. They analyzed its performance on the university office
building consumption [39]. The grid search method’s drawback is not
remembering the best value in its process.
Tuning of the ANN parameters, such as hidden layer nodes and train-
test ratio, are addressed with the grasshopper optimization algorithm
2
Energy 268 (2023) 126660
(GHOA) for forecasting smart grids in New South whales and Victoria
urban areas [40]. Talaat et al. also applied for GHOA to determine the
optimal number of neurons for hidden layers of ANN for the demand
forecast of the youth power station from the city of Salhiya, where the
demand range is around ten of MWs [41]. In contrast, work [42] had
chosen Harris hawks optimization (HHO) for tuning weights of ANN for
the forecast of the Queensland electricity market. Gao et al. in Ref. [43]
developed an improved whale optimization algorithm (WOA) to find
hidden nodes and weights for cooling load forecasts in buildings. Even
the WOA had presented considerable improvement, yet suffers with
slow convergence. Tran T. N. chose the grid search algorithm to opti­
mize the number of filters, kernel size, epochs, and inputs of the 1D CNN
structure for the STLF of Queensland state of Australia and Ho Chi Minh
city of Vietnam [44]. The error is still high even after optimization of the
CNN network. The efforts from Refs. [45,46] tried to optimize LSTM
network parameters, the number of hidden units, hidden layers, dropout
rate, and learning rate using a genetic algorithm and hidden layers,
hidden units, and dropout rate using improved sine cosine optimization
(SCO), respectively. In the former case, case studies are two campus
buildings, and the latter study is considered an academic building. Three
regional loads in Madhya Pradesh, India, are considered for forecasting
using grid search optimized multiple BiLSTM networks to learn the
transitional period between seasons [47]. A Bayesian
optimization-based parallel CNN-LSTM network was built for buildings’
heat load prediction [48]. In the Assam region of India, the electricity
demand projection on special days, such as regional festivals, is done
utilizing a hybrid framework of GWO - SVR. For significant days, such as
regional festivals, they optimized the SVR parameters intensive loss
function, trade-off, and kernel function [49]. The literature shows that
the optimal set of parameters of single forecast technique to improve the
forecast accuracy and stability. Spite of the fact that a single forecast
method’s ideal network achieved better outcomes, it still has its
limitations.
1.2. Research gaps and contributions
• According to the literature review, CRBM and CNN-SVR techniques
are used for residential demand forecasting. The methods CNN-
LSTM, MLR-MLP-SVR, GA-LSTM, and SCOA-LSTM, are confined to
forecasting work on academic buildings, while CNN networks pre­
dict industrial demands. It indicates that most forecast work is done
on particular types of buildings. Hence there is the scope of a
generalized model which applies to diversified buildings, whereas
the electrical consumption pattern is entirely different.
• Among the DL techniques, LSTM approaches are common in the
forecast work. In contrast, an improved version of the LSTM is
BiLSTM which is not used much. The LSTM technique learns the
temporal dependencies of sequence data in one direction, which may
be subject to an overfitting problem. BiLSTM includes an additional
layer for the reverse flow of a sequence of information and allows the
sequence data to flow in both forward and backward directions.
Bidirectional learning helps to overcome the overfitting problem
[50].
• Another important strategy that is used in association with BiLSTM is
1D-CNN. The superior abilities of 1D-CNN that extract features
through internal linkages increase the proposed framework’s overall
performance and provide improved predictability.
• Some researchers worked on forecasting the electrical energy con­
sumption of different buildings with the manual selection of a set of
parameters. This will increase the burden on humans to simulate
with different combinations to get better accuracy. This is avoided in
the present work by the GWO technique implementation to achieve
an optimal set of parameters to enhance the 1D-CNN and BiLSTM
network accuracy. The GWO technique is easy to implement, suc­
cessfully exploits and explores the search space, and is more reliable,
quick, and efficient than other evolutionary algorithms.
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya
• The work considered ten parameters of two techniques for optimi­
zation, which overcome the limitations of the single technique
parameter optimization. Another strength of the proposed work is
fewer iterations in comparison with the literature.
The current work offers a better solution to reduce the errors in the
building forecast using a hybrid approach while keeping in mind the
above research gaps.
1.3. Paper organization
The paper is organized into six sections, including the first section
comprises the introduction of the work and the motivation behind it.
Section II describes the details of the techniques BiLSTM, CNN, and
GWO developed for simulation work. Section III explains the method­
ology developed from the methods mentioned earlier. Various case
studies of the forecast work are given in section IV. The tabular and
graphical results with discussion are produced in section V, and overall
conclusions of the work and future scope are concluded in section VI.
2. Methods
Basic concepts of the techniques are given as follows.
2.1. Bilateral long short term memory
The LSTM technique consists of an input gate, forget gate, and output
gate, along with a memory cell. Fig. 1 shows the LSTM network func­
tioning [51].
The forget gate and the input gate value depend on the previous
hidden state and current input.
( )
Ft = σ Wfh ht− 1 + Wfx xt + bf (1)
It = σ(Wih ht− 1 + Wix xt + bi ) (2)
( )
The cell state activation Gt = tanh Wgh ht− 1 + Wgx xt + bg (3)
The cell state function Ct = Ct− 1 ⊙ Ft + It ⊙ Gt (4)
The output gate value Ot = σ(Woh ht− 1 + Wox xt + bo ) (5)
Final hidden state Ht = tanh(Ct ) ⊙ Ot (6)
Notations σ (sigmoid) and tanh (hyperbolic tangent) are the
nonlinear activation functions and keep the values in the [0,1] and
[− 1,1] range, respectively. The weights in the gates are represented
asWpq where p in the suffix represents the corresponding gate, and the
suffix q denotes whether it is for hidden state or input value. The gate
biases are indicated with a symbolbp .
BiLSTM is an upgraded LSTM technique to learn from past and future
sequence data terms. For time series data-based forecasting, under­
standing the model from past and future frames is required, facilitated
by the BiLSTM network composed of two LSTM-based layers. One is in
Fig. 1. BiLSTM architecture.
3
Energy 268 (2023) 126660
the forward and the second is in the backward direction. The architec­
ture of the BiLSTM is shown in Fig. 1.
The information of the forward LSTM and backward LSTM units is
→ ←
stored as hidden states ht and ht , respectively, at a time, ‘t.’ The final
hidden state will be computed by concatenating two hidden states [52].
(→ ← )
ht = ∂ ht , ht (7)
2.2. Convolution neural networks
Convolution neural networks are a unique class of deep learning
techniques that uses convolutional operations. The features in the time
series consumption data of the buildings were extracted using 1-D CNN
in the current work [27], which applies sliding convolution operation
along the 1-dimensional time series data sequence. The proposed
1D-CNN comprises three fundamental layers: the convolution layer, the
detection layer, and the pooling layer. The performance of the CNN
network depends on the parameters of these layers. They include filter
size, number of filters in the layers, stride, padding, and batch size. The
CNN layers’ orientation and the BiLSTM network for forecast work are
shown in Fig. 2.
2.3. Grey wolf optimization
The GWO reflects the hunting pattern of wolves. Grey wolves use
leadership skills at alpha, beta, delta, and omega levels. The pack leader
is alpha and leads the group and is considered the best position in
optimization. The beta, the second level of the pack’s leader, coordinates
with the alpha and the other wolves. The delta and omega are consec­
utively decreasing in the steps in commanding authority of the pack [53,
54].
The grey wolves identify and encircle the prey, the first step of
hunting and the mathematical model of it as at the current time step is
⃒ ⃒
D = ⃒C × Yp (t) − Y(t)⃒ (8)
The positions are updated using the
Y(t + 1) = Yp (t) − A × D (9)
The determination of A and C vectors using
( )
t
A = (2 × a) • r1 − a; C = 2 • r2 ; a = 2 × 1 − (10)
max iteration
Where A & C are coefficient vectors, the components of vector ‘a’ are
decreased linearly from 2 to 0 to attain optima over the iterations. The
random vectors r1 and r2 are in between 0 and 1. The YP and Y indicates
the position vector of the prey and grey wolves.
Alpha, the pack’s leader, directs the hunt. The alpha, beta, and delta
locations are in better positions for the correct mathematical model, and
the other elements update their placements by these positions.
⃒ ⃒
Dα = |C1 •Yα − Y|; Dβ = ⃒C2 •Yβ − Y⃒; Dδ = |C3 •Yδ − Y| (11)
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya
Fig. 2. CNN - BiLSTM structure.
Y1 = Yα − A1 •Dα ; Y2 = Yβ − A2 •Dβ ; Y3 = Yδ − A3 •Dδ (12)
Y1 +Y2 +Y3
Y(t + 1) = (13)
3
Updating the locations of the search agents depicted with the help of
Fig. 3. The updated positions of search agents are within the circle. The
final stage in the hunting of grey wolves is attacking the prey. We have
mathematically modeled this stage using the variable ’a’ by decreasing
the value to zero.
3. Methodology
The research proposed a novel hybrid forecast framework for STLF
consisting of four phases, depicted in Fig. 4.
The proposed work starts with the data processing phase. This phase
deals with importing and processing raw data. Missing data and outliers
in the raw data from the electric meter may affect the forecast’s accu­
racy. The missing data is due to a power supply issue. An algorithm is
created in the current work to eliminate empty cells from the data.
Outliers are another kind of information that must be avoided,
brought on by faulty or broken instruments. Their influence is reduced
in the current work by Z-score normalization, which also accelerates the
training process. The Z-score normalization of data using Eq. (14) keeps
the data with a mean of zero, and a standard deviation is one and keeps
the data in [0,1].
x− x
X= (14)
σx
Standardized data is split into training and testing data. After pro­
cessing the data, the time series data is sent to the second phase.
The optimization phase handles the execution of GWO to determine
the optimal parameters. The GWO algorithm initializes the positions
using the upper and lower boundaries of the parameters. Then, evaluate
Fig. 3. Grey Wolves hunting pattern.
4
Energy 268 (2023) 126660
CNN-BiLSTM forecast framework fitness of the locations suggested in
the training phase as shown in the diagram. The CNN-BiLSTM network’s
training mean square error (MSE) is considered for the GWO objective
function, which must be reduced. Based on the fitness value, the best
population for the position update got picked. The GWO runs iteratively
to optimize the parameters of CNN-BiLSTM, which stops when the
maximum iterations are reached.
The training and forecasting phases combine the 1DCNN and BiLSTM
techniques to train and forecast. In the training stage, it is initialized by
GWO to obtain optimal parameters for forecasting. The total of ten pa­
rameters of both CNN and BiLSTM techniques are optimally determined
and shown with boundaries in Appendix C. The framework consists of a
sequence input layer to feed the input to CNN layers. The layers of a one-
dimensional CNN network extract the sequence data’s characteristics by
utilizing the convolution layers with the relu activation function, pool­
ing layers to get better values. The output of the CNN layers is fed to
BiLSTM layers and a fully connected layer. Finally, the trained result is
taken from the regression layer.
After GWO executes the criteria for optimality, the best parameters
regarding the least MSE are considered for a potential solution. The final
best parameters are given to the 1DCNN-BiLSTM network to estimate
accurate electricity consumption. The performance evaluation phase,
where the performance measures are computed, receives the predicted
data.
3.1. Case study example
A small example is presented to understand the working of the
proposed GWO – CNN – BiLSTM. Consider a sample of 500 consumption
points of hourly resolution of the college building in this example. 90%
of the data was used for training, and the remaining 10% for testing. Let
Np = 3 and Iterations = 1. Initial alpha, beta, and omega positions are
taken as infinite. Initialize the random population for the optimization,
and their values are in Table 1.
The fitness values of the three positions are evaluated to determine
the alpha value. It is 3.7354E+03, and the best position is 3. The
remaining beta and delta positions are the same.
In the second iteration, the new positions are evaluated and shown in
Table 2 . If their fitness is less than the previous value, it is taken as
alpha. Otherwise, the value is the count for the beta. Here beta value is
4.15E+04 for position-1.
For the new positions of the iteration-1 from the Table 3, fitness
values are calculated. For position − 3, the fitness value is less than the
previous alpha value. So, the alpha value is updated with a new value.
Here it is 136.37. For position-2, the fitness value is higher than beta, so
it is considered for the delta value, which is 9.053E+05. In this manner,
the GWO algorithm determines the optimal parameters of the CNN
-BiLSTM network.
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Fig. 4. Proposed Forecast framework.

Table 1
GWO Iteration 0: parameters values.
Position Layer-1 hidden Layer-2 hidden Layer-3 hidden Number of Epochs Learning minibatch Drop Filter No. of
units units units layers rate factor size filters

1 213 97 67 2 183 10^(-4.49) 2^8 0.2248 3 5

2 203 122 71 1 124 10^(-3.24) 2^8 0.1102 6 2
3 179 76 74 2 133 10^(-3.63) 2^7 0.3135 8 5

Table 2
GWO Iteration 1: parameters values.
Position Layer-1 hidden Layer-2 hidden Layer-3 hidden Number of Epochs Learning minibatch Drop Filter No. of
units units units layers rate factor size filters

1 175 75 46 1 124 10^(-5) 2^4 0.1190 2 6

2 175 75 75 5 100 10^(-3) 2^8 0.1563 8 3
3 130 112 27 1 100 10^(-3) 2^2 0.119 3 1

Table 3
GWO Iteration 1: parameters after position update.
Position Layer-1 hidden Layer-2 hidden Layer-3 hidden Number of Epochs Learning minibatch Drop Filter No. of
units units units layers rate factor size filters

1 175 75 46 1 123 10^(-5) 2^4 0.1190 2 6

2 175 75 75 2 100 10^(-3) 2^8 0.1563 8 1
3 175 75 75 1 100 10^(-3.2) 2^4 0.100 3 1

5
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

4. Data description network with a single layer and 100 hidden units (HU) per layer, Case 2
is again a single-layer network, yet 200 HU per layer instead of 100, and
The following four buildings from Mendeley data and Kaggle have Case 3 is a network with two layers with 200 HU in the first layer and
been considered case studies in the present work. The characteristics of 100 HU in the second layer. Stacking LSTM with two layers performs
the buildings vary from one another. better than single-layer LSTM technologies for both data sets. While the
BiLSTM has different performances for each data set. The remaining
• The first one is a campus, the second from a hospital, the third is forecasting method parameters are 300 epochs, 64 minibatch size, 0.005
residential, and the fourth is an industrial building. According to the learn rate, and 0.1 drop factor. All tests are performed using the MAT­
college’s power data, annual consumption averages 12958.66 kW for LAB environment on a laptop with an Intel core-i5 processor and 16 GB
an hourly load resolution. The standard deviation of the demand is of RAM.
2453.61 kW. From March to April, there is a fall in electricity con­ The significant performance variables determining the model’s pre­
sumption due to the vacation period and resulting in a heating load dictive abilities include prediction accuracy and generalization. Four
drop. end users of electricity are employed to assess the performance of the
• The second data set depicts the hospital building’s hourly electricity proposed model, and their consumption patterns are very different,
use. Two hundred seventy-five people could be accommodated at the allowing us to study the generalization ability. This section reports the
hospital when it was built. The hospital demand profile has an outcomes of the suggested approach, along with comparisons to other
average and standard deviation of 1058.368 kW and 150.72 kW, cutting-edge techniques like single, hybrid DL techniques and optimized
respectively. The lowest consumption is between February and April BiLSTM methods. Being good at acquiring knowledge from the time
and mid of September, and there is an increase in energy use series data compared to ML techniques and a recent upsurge in the
throughout the summer due to switching on air conditioning [55]. forecast field includes only the DL-based methods in the present work.
• A third case study relies on the domestic electricity usage of a two- For effective scheduling of generating plants, unit commitment, demand
floor home in Houston, Texas, in the United States. The data in­ response, and fuel planning, the model has been used to anticipate one
cludes three years of consumption data at hourly resolution from day, two days, and one week in the future .
Jun. 01, 2016, to August 2020. The significant consumption is due to
two refrigerators, two water heaters of 50 gallons, an air condi­ 5.2.1. Model performance for one week forecast
tioning system, washing machines, a TV, a security DVR, and a dryer. This section presents the one-week forecast performance of the
The average building consumption over a year is 0.89163 kW, and proposed model against the single, hybrid, and Optimized models. The
the standard deviation is 0.90813 [56]. performance analysis is carried out on the four building data sets, and
• The final data set comprises one-year Pharmaceutical industrial results in terms of performance indices are presented in Table 4.
building consumption of hourly resolution with a mean consumption Figs. 5–12 shows the comparison of weekly forecast results of the
of 1587.18 kW and a deviation of 241.07 kW. The peak demand is proposed technique against single, hybrid and optimized models. Fig. 5,
2387.7 kW during May, and the minimum is 1150 kW during the Fig. 7, Fig. 9, and Fig. 11 indicate the proposed GWO–CNN–BiLSTM
night of November and December [55]. closely follows the actual demand and fits better than the other models
for a weekly forecast for all four types of buildings with considerable
The proposed work considered 90% of data from each dataset for improvement in accuracy.
training and the remaining 10% for validation.
• The minimum errors by the GWO–CNN–BiLSTM prediction are
5. Performance evaluation 0.00293 kW, 0.000559 kW, − 0.000655 kW, and 0.000146 kW for
college, hospital, residential and industrial building loads. The
5.1. Evaluation metrics maximum error magnitudes are 1.23 kW, 0.3785 kW, − 0.002005
kW, and 1.45 kW in college, hospital, residential, and Industrial
Five measures are used to assess the proposed model’s performance. demand estimation.
They are mean absolute error (MAE), mean square error (MSE), mean • The error at any instant is near zero and not more than 0.5 kW by
absolute percentage error (MAPE), root mean square error (RMSE), and hospital demand, which can be accepted in emergency environ­
normalized root mean square error (NRMSE). ments. Compared to college demand prediction, all considered
methods are good in predicting for remaining three buildings.
∑n ( )2
Ya,i − Yp,i • For a one-week projection, the GWO-BiLSTM outperforms the APSO-
1 ∑n
( )
MAE = Ya,i − Yp,i ; MSE = i=1
(15) BiLSTM in RMSE by 49.56%, 20.53%, 74.7%, and 34.64% for col­
n i=1 n lege, hospital, residential and industrial buildings. In the same way,
it outperforms EJAYA-BiLSTM in RMSE for the forecast of one week
n ⃒ ⃒
1∑ ⃒Ya,i − Yp,i ⃒ by 46.26%, 25.46%, and 21.64% for college, hospital, and industrial
MAPE = ⃒ ⃒ × 100 (16)
n i=1 ⃒ Ya,i ⃒ buildings. Yet it shows slightly lower performance for residential
data set than EJAYA-BiLSTM by 38.1%.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√∑ ∑ n
2 • The APSO-BiLSTM shows a considerable improvement in the whole
√n ( )2 (Ya,i − Yp,i )
√
√
Ya,i − Yp,i i=1 week’s prediction compared to one day and two days ahead forecast.
(17) For the one-week forecast condition, the BiLSTM is superior to LSTM
n
RMSE = i=1 ; NRMSE = ∑n
n
in projection.
1
n
Ya,i
i=1

Where actual and forecasted loads are represented with Ya,i , and Yp,i
correspondingly, and ‘n’ denotes the test sample number.
5.2. Results and analysis
The LSTM and BiLSTM are examined under three circumstances and
chosen a better one to compare with the proposed technique. Case 1 is a
5.2.2. Model performance for one day and two days forecast
5.2.2.1. College building dataset. The BiLSTM approach, however, be­
haves entirely different for each dataset. For the college demand, a
single-layer BiLSTM network with 200 hidden units is good in accuracy.
All forecast models closely follow the variations in the load curve,
especially the forecast by the proposed GWO–CNN–BiLSTM technique

6
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Table 4
One-Week Forecast comparison of College, Hospital, Residential, and Industrial Building Consumption.
Data Set Technique MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE

College Building LSTM 5.6039 33.7704 0.0570 5.8112 5.80E-04

BiLSTM 4.2954 23.4651 0.0422 4.8440 4.84E-04
CNN-LSTM 3.9268 19.2608 0.0405 4.3887 4.38E-04
CNN-BiLSTM 2.4398 7.7501 0.0251 2.7839 2.78E-04
APSO-BiLSTM 5.7042 38.8380 0.0558 6.2320 6.23E-04
EJAYA-BiLSTM 5.1837 34.2073 0.0503 5.8487 5.84E-04
GWO-BiLSTM 2.8671 9.8798 0.0283 3.1432 3.14E-04
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM 0.6171 0.4648 0.0062 0.6818 6.81E-05
Hospital Building LSTM 0.3322 0.1342 0.0329 0.3664 3.63E-04
BiLSTM 0.3186 0.1500 0.0316 0.3873 3.83E-04
CNN-LSTM 0.1970 0.0539 0.0190 0.2322 2.29E-04
CNN-BiLSTM 0.1472 0.0355 0.0141 0.1884 1.86E-04
APSO-BiLSTM 0.2532 0.0950 0.0243 0.3083 3.05E-04
EJAYA-BiLSTM 0.2646 0.1080 0.0264 0.3287 3.25E-04
GWO-BiLSTM 0.2100 0.0600 0.0204 0.2450 2.43E-04
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM 0.1056 0.0195 0.0104 0.1397 1.38E-04
Residential Building LSTM 0.0021 5.52E-06 0.4810 0.0023 0.0052
BiLSTM 0.0016 4.20E-06 0.3385 0.0020 0.0045
CNN-LSTM 0.0014 3.88E-06 0.4215 0.0019 0.0043
CNN-BiLSTM 9.72E-04 1.30E-06 0.2361 0.0011 0.0025
APSO-BiLSTM 0.0058 6.90E-05 0.3509 0.0083 0.0057
EJAYA-BiLSTM 0.0011 1.80E-06 0.3149 0.0013 0.0029
GWO-BiLSTM 0.0018 4.64E-06 0.4990 0.0021 0.0048
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM 9.36E-04 9.37E-07 0.2453 9.68E-04 0.0021
Industrial Building LSTM 0.7344 0.6832 0.0484 0.8265 0.00054
BiLSTM 0.6914 0.5564 0.0471 0.7459 0.00049
CNN-LSTM 0.4344 0.3212 0.0299 0.5668 0.00037
CNN-BiLSTM 0.3944 0.2223 0.0271 0.4715 0.0003
APSO-BiLSTM 1.0688 1.3960 0.0727 1.1815 7.83E-04
EJAYA-BiLSTM 0.9057 0.9712 0.0607 0.9855 6.53E-04
GWO-BiLSTM 0.6336 0.5963 0.0405 0.7722 5.12E-04
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM 0.1636 0.0506 0.0112 0.2249 1.49E-04

Fig. 5. One-week forecast comparison in terms of MAE, MAPE, and RMSE for the college building data set.

completely overlaps on actual demand than other models.
For the college data set, a graphical representation of the perfor­
mance indices, each instant error, and one-day ahead prediction is
illustrated in Fig. 13, Fig. 14, and Fig. 15 and summarized the perfor­
mance indices in Table 5.
5.2.2.2. Hospital building data set. The hospital data set projection re­
sults for the next day and two days are presented in this subsection.
BiLSTM of 1 layer with 200 hidden units for hospital demand is less
accurate, which is better in college demand projection. Instead, the 2-
layer BiLSTM network performs better for this case study.
The same trend of the forecasting performance of all models is
repeated for hospital building consumption, like college building fore­
casting. The recommended method outperforms optimized BiLSTMs
approaches and state-of-the-art DL approaches in estimating the hospital
data set. The one-day forecast performance indices, each instant error,
and the results of hospital demand are illustrated in Fig. 16, Fig. 17, and
Fig. 18. Table 6 compares the models’ performance. Compared to col­
lege demand prediction, all considered methods are good in predicting
hospital building load, and their MAE is less than 0.5 kW for one day,
two days forecast. The proposed technique GWO–CNN–BiLSTM im­
proves the accuracy in MAPE 59.64% and 31.21% over 1DCNN-BiLSTM
for one day and two days forecast, respectively.
5.2.2.3. Residential building data set. Fig. 19, Fig. 20, and Fig. 21 indi­
cate the comparison of the proposed technique against other state-of-
the-art methods in terms of performance indices, error magnitude at
each instant in terms of kW, and one-day forecast.
5.2.2.4. Industrial building data set. For the Industrial consumption
forecast, the single layer with 200 hidden units performs better and is
considered for comparison. Like the case of other datasets, the proposed

7
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Fig. 6. Comparison of one-week forecast error at each instant for college building data set.

Fig. 7. One-week forecast comparison in terms of MAE, MAPE, and RMSE for hospital building data set.

Fig. 8. Comparison of one-week forecast error at each instant for hospital building data set.

Fig. 9. One-week forecast comparison in terms of MAE, MAPE, and RMSE for Residential building data set.

8
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Fig. 10. Comparison of one-week forecast error at each instant for residential building data set.

Fig. 11. One-week forecast comparison in terms of MAE, MAPE, and RMSE for Industrial Building data set.

Fig. 12. Comparison of one-week forecast error at each instant for industrial building data set.

Fig. 13. Comparison of one-day performance in terms of MAE, MAPE, and RMSE for college building.

9
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Fig. 14. One-day forecast each instant error comparison for the college building data set.

Fig. 15. One-day forecast of the College Building.

Table 5
One day and Two days ahead forecast performance comparison of the college building.
Technique One day forecast Two days forecast

MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE

LSTM 5.7781 35.3763 0.0586 5.9478 5.96E-04 5.7334 34.2056 0.0587 5.8486 5.94E-04
BiLSTM 4.3981 24.2246 0.0435 4.9218 4.94E-04 4.6717 26.3633 0.0472 5.1345 5.22E-04
CNN-LSTM 3.9645 18.6148 0.0407 4.3145 4.32e-04 4.5597 25.8831 0.0478 5.0875 5.17E-04
CNN-BiLSTM 2.4042 7.5327 0.0248 2.7445 2.75E-04 2.7372 9.9583 0.0287 3.1556 3.21E-04
APSO-BiLSTM 5.9482 41.7688 0.0583 6.4628 6.48E-04 5.4227 37.6024 0.0534 6.1320 6.23E-04
EJAYA-BiLSTM 5.4324 36.2988 0.0530 6.0248 6.04E-04 4.9104 32.7622 0.0481 5.7238 5.82E-04
GWO-BiLSTM 3.0398 10.8169 0.0301 3.2889 3.30E-04 2.8083 9.99327 0.0279 3.1612 3.21E-04
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM 0.5416 0.3824 0.0055 0.6184 6.20E-05 0.5223 0.3643 0.0054 0.6036 6.13e-05

Fig. 16. Comparison of one-day performance in terms of MAE, MAPE, and RMSE for hospital building.

technique outperforms considered state-of-the-art techniques and is
represented in the table.
The comparison of the proposed technique against hybrid and single
techniques in terms of the performance indices, each hour error instant,
and one-day forecast are shown in Fig. 22, Fig. 23, and Fig. 24.
5.3. Comparison of BiLSTM with LSTM
The BiLSTM technique outperforms LSTM for one day and two days
forecast for case studies of college, residential and industrial buildings.
For the college building data set, the BiLSTM performance is superior to
LSTM for a day ahead by 25.77% in MAPE and two days estimate by

10
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Fig. 17. One-day forecast each instant error comparison models for Hospital building data set.

Fig. 18. One-day forecast of the hospital building dataset.

Table 6
One day and Two days forecast performance comparison for the hospital data set.
Technique One day ahead forecast Two days ahead forecast

MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE

LSTM 0.4284 0.1936 0.0370 0.4400 3.84E-04 0.3325 0.1359 0.0298 0.3686 3.40E-04
BiLSTM 0.4490 0.2892 0.0380 0.5378 4.6958e-04 0.3678 0.1934 0.0332 0.4398 4.0546e-04
CNN-LSTM 0.3205 0.1086 0.0277 0.3295 2.8768e-04 0.2626 0.0817 0.0238 0.2859 2.6355e-04
CNN-BiLSTM 0.2562 0.0737 0.0223 0.2714 2.3694e-04 0.1931 0.0524 0.0173 0.2289 2.1103e-04
APSO-BiLSTM 0.4874 0.3324 0.0408 0.5765 5.03E-04 0.3289 0.1851 0.0288 0.4302 3.97E-04
EJAYA-BiLSTM 0.3968 0.2185 0.0333 0.4674 4.08E-04 0.2660 0.1217 0.0231 0.3489 3.22E-04
GWO-BiLSTM 0.3529 0.1721 0.0296 0.4149 3.62E-04 0.2575 0.1024 0.0228 0.3200 2.95E-04
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM 0.1036 0.0160 0.0090 0.1268 1.11E-04 0.1281 0.0265 0.0119 0.1628 1.50E-04

Fig. 19. Comparison of one-day performance in terms of MAE, MAPE, and RMSE for residential building.

19.59%. Even though for the hospital demand prediction at one day and
48 h ahead time horizon, the BiLSTM shows less performance than the
LSTM, the maximum error at any instant does not exceed 1 kW. Simi­
larly, for residential and industrial loads, BiLSTM prediction is better
than LSTM by 42.29% and 49.4% in MAPE in the day-ahead forecast.
The improvement has also been observed for two days forecast.
For one week forecast, BiLSTM performance is better than LSTM,
indicating that BiLSTM shows potential learning during the weekend
due to its bidirectional learning capability and produces less error than
LSTM. For the case one-week prediction, the BiLSTM has superior per­
formance over LSTM for all case studies. Unlike the one-day forecast
case, the BiLSTM technique performs better for all four case studies. It
outperforms LSTM by 25.96%, 3.95%, and 2.76% in MAPE for one week
of the forecast for college, hospital, and industrial buildings. Adding
CNN layers to LSTM or BiLSTM improves accuracy for all cases. Here
also, table results indicate that CNN-BiLSTM performs better than LSTM
and BiLSTM and superior to CNN-LSTM for all case studies, either one or
two days or a week prediction. Another observation of BiLSTM is that
the overfitting problem is also avoided.

11
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Fig. 20. One-day forecast each instant error comparison for the residential building data set.

Fig. 21. One-day forecast of the Residential demand.

Fig. 22. Comparison of one-day performance in terms of MAE, MAPE, and RMSE for industrial building.

Fig. 23. One-day forecast of each instant error comparison for Industrial Building.

5.4. Effect of the optimal CNN-BiLSTM technique on the performance
The performance of the BiLSTM technique is improved in two ways.
The first strategy is parameter tuning, while the second is a hybrid
approach that combines the two methods.
• Automatic parameter tuning of the BiLSTM network shows accuracy
improvement instead of the manual setting. Three well-known meta-
heuristic-tuned BiLSTM networks are put up for comparison. They
are GWO, improved JAYA, and adaptive PSO. The BiLSTM, CNN, and
training option parameters from Appendix C are considered for
optimization.

12
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya
Fig. 24. One-day forecast of the Industrial building.
• In contrast to APSO-BiLSTM and EJAYA-BiLSTM, the GWO-based
BiLSTM network performs better. The results unequivocally
demonstrate the GWO’s expertise in exploring and exploiting the
solution space.
• All the considered optimization techniques produced better results
for single-layer BiLSTM.
• For the hospital demand, the drop factor of EJAYA-BiLSTM and
GWO-BILSTM techniques are given 0.21 and 0.118, improving the
accuracy over BiLSTM. The GWO-BiLSTM also takes advantage of
hidden units in first layer (225), resulting in better performance over
EJAYA-BiLSTM. The drop factor of APSO-BiLSTM is only 0.1
resulting in poor performance. The GWO–CNN–BiLSTM drop factor,
first layer hidden units are 0.18 and 225, respectively. Along with
these parameters, CNN layers also assist in improving accuracy.
• Similarly, for the case of residential demand, the drop factor for
APSO-BiLSTM, EJAYA-BILSTM, GWO-BiLSTM, GWO–CNN–BiLSTM
are 0.1, 0.4, 0.26, and 0.16, and the learning rates are 1.00^-03,
1.43^-04 and 4.78^-04, 6.11^-04. These values represent that the
more drop factor and lower learning rate improve the accuracy of
EJAYA-BiLSTM, GWO-BiLSTM, and GWO–CNN–BiLSTM. The hidden
units are almost equal by all optimization algorithms.
• A similar pattern is observed for industrial demand also except GWO-
BiLSTM, whose learn is high, result to decrease in performance for
one day forecast but still consistent for all day and two days and
weekly forecast.
• For the day, two days forecast, the GWO-BiLSTM outperforms the
APSO-BiLSTM, EJAYA-BiLSTM in MAPE by 48.37%, and 47.75%,
43.27%, and 42% for college and hospital buildings. For the resi­
dential building, the GWO – BiLSTM produced better prediction over
APSO-BiLSTM for one day and two days forecast. In contrast, for
industrial demand, its performance is superior over PSO-BiLSTM for
two days forecast.
• The traditional LSTM, BiLSTM, or GWO BiLSTM performance metrics
are reduced in value with the inclusion of CNN. Two hybrid tech­
niques, CNN-LSTM and CNN-BiLSTM, are used for comparison,
which are created by inserting 1D-CNN layers before the actual LSTM
and BiLSTM layers, respectively. Including the CNN layer in BiLSTM
enhances its capacity to forecast events and outshines CNN-LSTM
because CNN improved data capture capabilities enable BiLSTM to
increase the accuracy of its forecasts. Including the CNN layer in
BiLSTM enhances its capacity to forecast events and outshines CNN-
LSTM because CNN improved data capture capabilities enable
BiLSTM to increase the accuracy of its forecasts.
• The guided practice indicates that the GWO successfully obtains the
best quality values. Moreover, a hybrid strategy gave more accurate
results than a single method because it incorporated the two
methods’ best qualities. The current study made use of both ap­
proaches, which significantly increased accuracy. The research pro­
posal suggests that framework CNN-BiLSTM parameters be tuned
using GWO since it is accurate in estimation compared to optimized
BiLSTM networks and un-optimized hybrid techniques.
13
Energy 268 (2023) 126660
• Optimizing parameters of the hybrid technique composed of the
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM strategy outperforms the single and hybrid
methods. The relative error of the proposed technique
5.5. Comparison of optimization capability and performance
Compared to BiLSTM parameters optimization, the optimal param­
eter selection of the CNN-BiLSTM network shows considerable
improvement in the forecast accuracy from the start of the optimization
technique. Even though the PSO BiLSTM technique exhibits a good
prediction for the residential demand, it is far away compared to GWO
and EJAYA-based forecasting approaches. The addition of the CNN layer
reflected in the reduction of epochs for all case studies without losing
accuracy.
The results of all case studies illustrate that GWO-BiLSTM has
consistent and more accurate performance than APSO-BILSTM and
EJAYA-BiLSTM. Fig. 25 shows the convergence of optimization tech­
niques and indicates the convergence of GWO is faster than the other
two optimization methods, reflecting on lesser epochs. The proposed
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM has a flatter convergence curve and represents
more excellent stability. One common observation found that all opti­
mization methods produced better results for a single layer of the fore­
cast network. The generalization capability of the proposed technique is
assessed on four buildings of different characteristics, with varied
training and testing samples size and for different forecast horizons.
Table 4, Table 5 Table 6, Table 7, and Table 8 illustrate its superior
performance.
6. Conclusions
The study proposed a novel hybrid GWO–CNN–BiLSTM approach to
resolve the STLF issue of buildings. The GWO algorithm is integrated to
obtain the optimal parameters from the training of CNN and BiLSTM
networks, thereby utilizing them to improve the forecast accuracy. The
1DCNN extracts the features from the sequence data, and the BiLSTM
learns the data in both forward and backward directions. The model
performance is analyzed for One-day, two days, and one-week pro­
jections of four different characteristics case studies. They are college,
hospital, residential and industrial. Different training sample sizes are
also considered to analyze the generalization capability of the proposed
model.
The conclusions are 1) compared to individual techniques LSTM and
BiLSTM, hybrid approaches CNN-LSTM and CNN-BiLSTM produced
better prediction to a certain extent. 2) The GWO converged faster and
flattered for the CNN-BiLSTM network, indicating its stability. Even the
starting iteration error is also much lower. 3) The proposed hybrid
optimal strategy GWO–CNN–BiLSTM outperforms all considered tech­
niques LSTM and BiLSTM, hybrid approaches like CNN-LSTM and CNN-
BiLSTM, and optimized BiLSTM approaches like APSO-BiLSTM, EJAYA-
BiLSTM, and GWO-BiLSTM. 4) The suggested approach increased pre­
cision and maintained the MAE and MAPE below 1 kW and 0.25%,
respectively, and the relative error is less than 0.001 for all four data
sets.
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Fig. 25. Optimization Convergence comparison for hospital, residential and industrial buildings.

Table 7
One day and Two days forecast performance comparison for the Residential data set.
Technique One day ahead forecast Two days ahead forecast

MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE

LSTM 0.0021 5.47E-06 0.5081 0.0023 0.0054 0.00213 5.31E-06 0.4984 0.0023 0.0053
BiLSTM 0.0013 3.20E-06 0.2932 0.0017 0.0041 0.00142 3.37E-06 0.2981 0.0018 0.0042
CNN-LSTM 0.0013 3.03E-06 0.3967 0.0017 0.0040 0.00142 3.37E-06 0.4145 0.0018 0.0042
CNN-BiLSTM 0.0010 1.32E-06 0.2497 0.0011 0.0026 9.44E-04 1.21E-06 0.2365 0.0011 0.0025
APSO-BiLSTM 0.0081 1.16E-04 0.3651 0.0107 0.0056 0.0064 8.02E-05 0.3529 0.0089 0.0057
EJAYA-BiLSTM 0.0011 1.65E-06 0.3124 0.0012 0.003 0.0011 1.73E-06 0.3220 0.0013 0.0031
GWO-BiLSTM 0.0018 4.16E-06 0.5018 0.0020 0.0048 0.0018 4.41E-06 0.5153 0.0021 0.0049
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM 9.20E-04 8.86E-07 0.2464 9.41E-04 0.0022 9.33E-04 9.15E-07 0.2500 9.57E-04 0.0022

Table 8
One day and Two days forecast performance comparison for the Industrial data set.
Technique One day ahead forecast Two days ahead forecast

MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE MAE (kW) MSE MAPE (%) RMSE (kW) NRMSE

LSTM 0.7071 0.6837 0.0419 0.8269 0.00048 0.7139 0.6441 0.0451 0.8025 0.00050
BiLSTM 0.3651 0.1663 0.0212 0.4078 0.000238 0.5517 0.3879 0.0357 0.6228 0.00038
CNN-LSTM 0.3482 0.2056 0.0194 0.4534 0.000264 0.3406 0.1744 0.0210 0.4177 0.00026
CNN-BiLSTM 0.2764 0.0871 0.0166 0.2952 0.00017 0.3526 0.1395 0.0229 0.3735 0.00023
APSO-BiLSTM 0.5699 0.4562 0.0333 0.6754 3.94E-04 0.8114 0.8499 0.0524 0.9219 5.75E-04
EJAYA-BiLSTM 0.5214 0.3992 0.0299 0.6318 3.69E-04 0.7253 0.6707 0.0465 0.8190 5.10E-04
GWO-BiLSTM 0.6971 0.7062 0.0392 0.8403 4.56E-04 0.6202 0.5361 0.0376 0.7322 4.56E-04
GWO–CNN–BiLSTM 0.2564 0.1511 0.0155 0.3887 2.27E-04 0.1959 0.0861 0.0123 0.2935 1.83E-04

In conclusion, the proposed GWO–CNN–BiLSTM prediction model
can effectively assist in smarter utilization of building resources and cost
savings by providing high prediction accuracy with consistency and
greater generalization ability. This approach can also assist in creating
the proper generation units to manage the necessary electrical energy to
create net-zero buildings. The proposed strategy has the potential to
predict the distributed generation of power in the future. Future work
can also be developed on the improved version of the metaheuristic
technique.
Supervision, Visualization, Writing- Reviewing and Editing. Software,
Validation.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.

Credit author statement Data availability

Charan Sekhar: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data Considered data in article is public available and mentioned in
curation, Investigation, Writing – original draft. Ratna Dahiya: reference

14
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Appendix A

Fig. 26. Zoom plot for college demand forecast.

Fig. 27. Zoom plot for Hospital demand forecast.

Fig. 28. Zoom plot for Residential demand forecast.

Fig. 29. Zoom plot for Industrial demand forecast.

Appendix B. Relative Error of the Proposed Method for all case studies

Fig. 30. Relative error of proposed model for college building.

15
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya Energy 268 (2023) 126660

Fig. 31. Relative error of proposed model for hospital building.

Fig. 32. Relative error of the proposed model for residential building.

Fig. 33. Relative error of the proposed model for industrial building.

Appendix C: List of Hyperparameters for optimization

Technique Hyperparameter Lower Limit Upper Limit

CNN 1D CNN filter size 2 8

1D CNN number of filters 2 256
BiLSTM Hidden units (HU) in the first layer 175 225
HU in the second layer 75 125
HU in the third layer 25 75
Common Parameters No. of layers 1 3
Epochs 100 200
Learn rate 10^(-5) 10^(-3)
Drop factor 0.1 0.4
Minibatch size 16 256

References [6] Bourdeau M, qiang Zhai X, Nefzaoui E, Guo X, Chatellier P. Modeling and
forecasting building energy consumption: a review of data-driven techniques.
Sustain Cities Soc 2019;48:101533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101533.
[1] Hossain E, Kabalci E, Bayindir R, Perez R. Microgrid testbeds around the world:
[7] Jha N, Prashar D, Rashid M, Gupta SK, Saket RK. Electricity load forecasting and
state of art. Energy Convers Manag Oct. 2014;86:132–53. https://doi.org/
feature extraction in smart grid using neural networks. Comput Electr Eng 2021;96:
10.1016/j.enconman.2014.05.012.
107479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2021.107479.
[2] Reilly MB William K. ClimateWorks-Annual-Report-2010. ClimateWorks; 2010.
[8] Yazici I, Faruk O, Delen D. Deep-learning-based short-term electricity load
[3] Hamilton I, Rapf O. Executive summary of the 2020 global status report for
forecasting : a real case application. Eng Appl Artif Intell 2022;109:104645.
buildings and construction. 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2021.104645. January.
[4] Ahmad A, Khan JY. Optimal sizing and management of distributed energy
[9] Eskandari H, Imani M, Moghaddam MP. Convolutional and recurrent neural
resources in smart buildings. Energy 2022;244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
network based model for short-term load forecasting. Elec Power Syst Res 2021;
energy.2022.123110.
195:107173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2021.107173. October 2020.
[5] Raza MQ, Khosravi A. A review on artificial intelligence based load demand
[10] Rafi SH, Nahid-Al-Masood, Deeba SR, Hossain E. A short-term load forecasting
forecasting techniques for smart grid and buildings. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
method using integrated CNN and LSTM network. IEEE Access 2021;9:32436–48.
2015;50:1352–1372, Oct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.065.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3060654.

16
C. Sekhar and R. Dahiya
[11] Farsi B, Amayri M, Bouguila N, Eicker U. On short-term load forecasting using
machine learning techniques and a novel parallel deep LSTM-CNN approach. IEEE
Access 2021;9:31191–212. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3060290.
[12] Wang S, Wang X, Wang S, Wang D. Bi-directional long short-term memory method
based on attention mechanism and rolling update for short-term load forecasting.
Int J Electr Power Energy Syst Jul. 2019;109:470–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijepes.2019.02.022. February.
[13] Mughees N, Mohsin SA, Mughees A, Mughees A. Deep sequence to sequence Bi-
LSTM neural networks for day-ahead peak load forecasting. Expert Syst Appl 2021;
175:114844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114844. December 2020.
[14] Zhang N, Li Z, Zou X, Quiring SM. Comparison of three short-term load forecast
models in Southern California. Energy Dec. 2019;189:116358. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2019.116358.
[15] Bagnasco A, Fresi F, Saviozzi M, Silvestro F, Vinci A. Electrical consumption
forecasting in hospital facilities: an application case. Energy Build 2015;103:
261–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.05.056.
[16] Lusis P, Khalilpour KR, Andrew L, Liebman A. Short-term residential load
forecasting: impact of calendar effects and forecast granularity. Appl Energy 2017;
205:654–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.07.114. July.
[17] Deb C, Eang LS, Yang J, Santamouris M. Forecasting diurnal cooling energy load
for institutional buildings using Artificial Neural Networks. Energy Build 2016;
121:284–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.12.050.
[18] Dagdougui H, Bagheri F, Le H, Dessaint L. Neural network model for short-term
and very-short-term load forecasting in district buildings. Energy Build Nov. 2019;
203:109408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109408.
[19] Jetcheva JG, Majidpour M, Chen W. Neural network model ensembles for building-
level electricity load forecasts. Energy Build Dec. 2014;84:214–23. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.08.004.
[20] Biswas MAR, Robinson MD, Fumo N. Prediction of residential building energy
consumption: a neural network approach. Energy 2016;117:84–92. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.10.066.
[21] Amber KP, Aslam MW, Hussain SK. Electricity consumption forecasting models for
administration buildings of the UK higher education sector. Energy Build 2015;90:
127–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.01.008.
[22] Ghenai C, et al. Short-term building electrical load forecasting using adaptive
neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). J Build Eng 2022;52:104323. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104323. February.
[23] Mocanu E, Nguyen PH, Gibescu M, Kling WL. Deep learning for estimating building
energy consumption. Sustain. Energy, Grids Networks 2016;6:91–9. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.segan.2016.02.005.
[24] Cai M, Pipattanasomporn M, Rahman S. Day-ahead building-level load forecasts
using deep learning vs. traditional time-series techniques. Appl Energy 2019;236:
1078–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.12.042. December 2018.
[25] Koukaras P, Bezas N, Gkaidatzis P, Ioannidis D, Tzovaras D, Tjortjis C. Introducing
a novel approach in one-step ahead energy load forecasting. Sustain. Comput.
Informatics Syst. 2021;32:100616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
suscom.2021.100616. July 2020.
[26] Kong W, Dong ZY, Jia Y, Hill DJ, Xu Y, Zhang Y. Short-term residential load
forecasting based on LSTM recurrent neural network. IEEE Trans Smart Grid Jan.
2019;10(1):841–51. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2017.2753802.
[27] Walser T, Sauer A. Typical load profile-supported convolutional neural network for
short-term load forecasting in the industrial sector. Energy AI 2021;5. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.egyai.2021.100104. July, p. 100104, Sep.
[28] Imani M. Electrical load-temperature CNN for residential load forecasting. Energy
Jul. 2021;227:120480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120480.
[29] Chitalia G, Pipattanasomporn M, Garg V, Rahman S. Robust short-term electrical
load forecasting framework for commercial buildings using deep recurrent neural
networks. Appl Energy Nov. 2020;278:115410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2020.115410. January.
[30] Kim TY, Cho SB. Predicting residential energy consumption using CNN-LSTM
neural networks. Energy 2019;182:72–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2019.05.230.
[31] Sajjad M, et al. A novel CNN-GRU-Based hybrid approach for short-term residential
load forecasting. IEEE Access 2020;8:143759–68. https://doi.org/10.1109/
ACCESS.2020.3009537.
[32] Somu N, Raman M R G, Ramamritham K. A deep learning framework for building
energy consumption forecast. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2021;137:110591.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110591. April 2020.
[33] Liu N, Tang Q, Zhang J, Fan W, Liu J. A hybrid forecasting model with parameter
optimization for short-term load forecasting of micro-grids. Appl Energy 2014;129:
336–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.05.023.
17
Energy 268 (2023) 126660
[34] Li K, Hu C, Liu G, Xue W. Building’s electricity consumption prediction using
optimized artificial neural networks and principal component analysis. Energy
Build 2015;108:106–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.09.002.
[35] Wang J, Zhu S, Zhang W, Lu H. Combined modeling for electric load forecasting
with adaptive particle swarm optimization. Energy 2010;35(4):1671–1678, Apr.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2009.12.015.
[36] Semero YK, Zhang J, Zheng D. EMD–PSO–ANFIS-based hybrid approach for short-
term load forecasting in microgrids. IET Gener, Transm Distrib Feb. 2020;14(3):
470–5. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.0869.
[37] Raza MQ, Nadarajah M, Hung DQ, Baharudin Z. An intelligent hybrid short-term
load forecasting model for smart power grids. Sustain Cities Soc 2017;31:264–75.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.12.006.
[38] Ofori-Ntow Jnr E, Ziggah YY, Relvas S. Hybrid ensemble intelligent model based on
wavelet transform, swarm intelligence and artificial neural network for electricity
demand forecasting. Sustain Cities Soc 2021;66:102679. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scs.2020.102679.
[39] Massana J, Pous C, Burgas L, Melendez J, Colomer J. Short-term load forecasting in
a non-residential building contrasting models and attributes. Energy Build Apr.
2015;92:322–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.02.007.
[40] Li C. Designing a short-term load forecasting model in the urban smart grid system.
Appl Energy May 2020;266:114850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2020.114850. January.
[41] Talaat M, Farahat MA, Mansour N, Hatata AY. Load forecasting based on
grasshopper optimization and a multilayer feed-forward neural network using
regressive approach. Energy 2020;196:117087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2020.117087.
[42] Tayab UB, Zia A, Yang F, Lu J, Kashif M. Short-term load forecasting for microgrid
energy management system using hybrid HHO-FNN model with best-basis
stationary wavelet packet transform. Energy Jul. 2020;203:117857. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117857.
[43] Gao Z, Yu J, Zhao A, Hu Q, Yang S. A hybrid method of cooling load forecasting for
large commercial building based on extreme learning machine. Energy Jan. 2022;
238:122073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.122073.
[44] Thanh NGOC Tran. Grid search of convolutional neural network model in the case
of load forecasting. Arch Electr Eng 2021;70(1):25–36. https://doi.org/10.24425/
aee.2021.136050.
[45] Luo XJ, Oyedele LO. Forecasting building energy consumption: adaptive long-short
term memory neural networks driven by genetic algorithm. Adv Eng Inf Oct. 2021;
50:101357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2021.101357. July.
[46] Somu N, M R GR, Ramamritham K. A hybrid model for building energy
consumption forecasting using long short term memory networks. Appl Energy
Mar. 2020;261:114131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114131. July
2019.
[47] Sharma A, Jain SK. A novel seasonal segmentation approach for day-ahead load
forecasting. Energy Oct. 2022;257:124752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2022.124752.
[48] Chung WH, Gu YH, Yoo SJ. District heater load forecasting based on machine
learning and parallel CNN-LSTM attention. Energy May 2022;246:123350. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.123350.
[49] Barman M, Dev Choudhury NB. A similarity based hybrid GWO-SVM method of
power system load forecasting for regional special event days in anomalous load
situations in Assam, India. Sustain Cities Soc Oct. 2020;61:102311. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102311. January.
[50] Siami-Namini S, Tavakoli N, Namin AS. The performance of LSTM and BiLSTM in
forecasting time series. In: IEEE international conference on big data (big data);
2019. p. 3285–92. https://doi.org/10.1109/BigData47090.2019.9005997. Dec.
2019.
[51] Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput Nov. 1997;
9(8):1735–80. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735.
[52] Schuster M, Paliwal KK. Bidirectional Recurrent Neural Networks 1997;45(11):
2673–81.
[53] Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A. Grey wolf optimizer. Adv Eng Software 2014;69:
46–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007.
[54] Jayabarathi T, Raghunathan T, Adarsh BR, Suganthan PN. Economic dispatch
using hybrid grey wolf optimizer. Energy 2016;111:630–41. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2016.05.105.
[55] Jafari F, Mohsen A, Ghofrani ALI, Angizeh. EnergyPlus data. 2020.
[56] Polu Sri. Residential power usage 3 years data - Timeseries. Kaggle; 2020. https://
www.kaggle.com/datasets/srinuti/residential-power-usage-3years-data-timeserie
s. accessed Nov. 01, 2022).