A Step-By-Step Identification Method For Non-Intrusive Loads Based On Fused Features

Electric Power Systems Research
A Step-by-Step Identification Method for Non-intrusive Loads based on Fused Features

and Inception-TOPSIS
--Manuscript Draft--
Manuscript Number: EPSR-D-23-00960R1
Article Type: Research Paper
Keywords: Non-intrusive load recognition; Fused features; Inception network; TOPSIS
Abstract: It fails to correctly identify loads with similar voltage-current trajectories within the non-
intrusive load recognition method, besides the training parameters of the recognition
model are too many by using a conventional deep learning algorithm, and it also uses
up more computer resources. Therefore, the use of fused features and a step-by-step
identification algorithm are provided for non-intrusive loads combining the Technique
for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution algorithm and the Inception
network in this paper. Firstly, the Inception network is applied to recognize the loads
with V-I trajectories in the first step; then the loads that are not successfully identified in
the first step can be identified using fused numerical features in the second step based
on the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution algorithm to
achieve fast and fine recognition. The proposed method reduces the computational
cost and enhances the performance of load recognition, according to the validation and
comparative analysis with other algorithms on the Plug-Load Appliance Identification
Dataset.
Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Manuscript Click here to view linked References
A Step-by-Step Identification Method for Non-intrusive

Loads based on Fused Features and Inception-TOPSIS
Na Luo, Chunning Na, Huan Pan and Feng Li
Abstract: It is likely to fail to correctly identify loads with similar voltage-current (V-I) trajectories
within the non-intrusive load recognition method, besides the training parameters of the recognition
model are too many by using conventional deep learning algorithm, and it also uses up more
computer resources. Therefore, the use of fused features and a step-by-step identification algorithm
are provided for non-intrusive loads combining the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to
the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) algorithm and the Inception network in this paper. Firstly, the Inception
network is applied to recognize the loads with V-I trajectories in the first step; then the loads that
are not successfully identified in the first step can be identified using fused numerical features in
the second step based on the TOPSIS algorithm to achieve fast and fine recognition results. The
proposed method reduces the computational cost and enhances the performance of load recognition,
according to the validation and comparative analysis with other algorithms on the Plug-Load
Appliance Identification Dataset (PLAID).
Keywords: Non-intrusive Load Recognition, Fused Features, Inception Network, TOPSIS

Corresponding author: nana508@163.com; Tel: +86-951-2061004; Fax: +86-951-2061003.
Project information: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
under Grant No. 52167006, the Key Research and Development Program of Ningxia Province under
Grant No. 2020BDE03003 and the National Natural Science Foundation of Ningxia Province under
Grant No. 2022AAC03118.
1. Introduction
According to China's dual carbon target, the refined management of the electricity demand side
plays a significant role in the rational dispatch and effective use of electrical energy, and it has led
to continuous innovation of the power system [1]. Non-intrusive Load Monitoring (NILM) is the
key foundation of power management on the demand side. Customers can regulate their electricity
consumption behavior to save electricity by using NILM technology, which also allows the grid to
optimize the system's structure and increases the efficiency of the power dispatch. Consequently,
the study of NILM with a highly practical significance has attracted scholars’ attention [2][3].
A conventional method of non-intrusive load recognition was based on dividing load features
into steady-state and transient features, and usually combined with typical classification algorithms
such as deep learning for identification. A conventional method based on power features was
presented in [4] compared with a classification method based on V-I trajectories, and the results
showed that the classification method achieved a better recognition rate than the conventional
method. Based on V-I trajectories with the amplitude transformed to pixel values, a method for
distinguishing various kinds of loads was presented in [5] based on a two-dimensional (2D)
convolutional neural network (CNN). [6] further introduced color-coded V-I trajectories and used
pre-trained CNN to distinguish loads in the PLAID dataset. Both color-coded and pixelated V-I
trajectories have a higher recognition rate than conventional V-I trajectories, but there is a
disadvantage of taking up computer resources in these methods. Then, [7] first mapped V-I
trajectories onto cells with binary values and used a Supervised Self-Organizing Map (SSOM) for
recognition. This method greatly decreased the computational work compared to other conventional
methods, and the results showed that the recognition rate was higher than the rate in [6].
However, only using V-I trajectories is unable to distinguish various loads with similar V-I
trajectories and to accurately reflect the other features of loads, such as harmonics.
To address this drawback, boosting features carry by loads can effectively improve the
recognition rate based on V-I trajectories. Fused color V-I images with current, voltage, and phase
were presented in [8], and the method realized the effective identification of different types of loads.
[9] extracted V-I trajectories and temporal features for recognition based on CNN and the Long and
Short Term Memory (LSTM) architecture, and the results showed that the model outperformed the
remaining load identification method on different loads. [10] and [11] combined CNN with a deep
fusion of harmonics, power, and V-I trajectories in a high-dimensional environment, and the results
showed that this method was also effective in identifying different types of loads. [12] and [13] used
back propagation (BP) combined with CNN to form a two-channel model to identify loads, and the
results showed that the identification accuracy was significantly improved for the loads with multi-
states.
Even though the deep learning method of fused features in combination with dual channels
enhanced the extraction of various features, its training process necessitates a significant amount of
computing, and it was a heavy burden on the computer's processing capability. Conventional CNN
usually used deeper convolution to extract high-dimensional information, however, they had an
excessive number of training parameters, which was prone to overfitting phenomena. The Inception
network is a particular kind of CNN, its network structure can be expanded horizontally, and the
input feature vectors can be extracted at various scales, it can increase the number of neurons in the
network, and significantly reduce the number of network parameters [14]. A network model
combining the Visual Geometry Group (VGG) and Inception network in the field of image
processing was proposed in [15], and the results showed that the use of the Inception network can
significantly improve recognition rates compared to conventional CNN.
Additionally, the algorithm with relatively low computational complexity is also a current
research direction for load recognition. [16] identified loads with similar current features using a
similarity matching algorithm based on TOPSIS, but the recognition rate was insufficient since there
was no feature fusion. To improve the recognition rate, the fused features and a step-by-step
recognition method are used to identify loads with similar V-I trajectories based on Inception-
TOPSIS in this paper.
The main contribution of this work lies in:
1. It is the first time to apply the Inception network to research non-intrusive loads
identification. And the calculation cost can be greatly reduced by using the advantages of
the Inception network and the TOPSIS algorithm.
2. The step-by-step recognition method can effectively improve the recognition rate based on
multi-features.
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces the algorithm's flow and the step-by-
step recognition method. Section 3 presents the recognition principle of the first step based on the
Inception network. Section 4 describes the recognized principles of the second step based on the
TOPSIS algorithm. Section 5 identifies 11 classes of loads in the PLAID dataset and demonstrates
the effectiveness and accuracy of the proposed algorithm. And the algorithms in this paper are also
compared and analysed with other algorithms. Finally, Section 6 concludes this study.
2. Principles of Step-by-Step Non-intrusive Load Identification based
on Fused Features and Inception-TOPSIS
Fig. 1 shows the step-by-step recognition algorithm of the non-intrusive loads. The first step is
to recognize the V-I trajectories by using the Inception network, and the second step is to recognize
the fused numerical features of loads that are unidentified in the first step by using the TOPSIS
algorithm, and the identification results are obtained by these two steps.
Fig. 1. Flow Chart of The Algorithm in This Paper
3. First Step Identification based on Inception Network
3.1 Construction of V-I Trajectories
Usually, the V-I trajectory contains rich steady-state features and loads can be distinguished by
the differences in V-I trajectories.
The binary-mapped 2D V-I trajectory is a mapping of the V-I trajectory onto cells, each cell is
labeled with a binary number [17]. The matrix cell will be set as 1, if a trajectory passes through the
element of the im -th row and vm -th column of the matrix, otherwise it is 0. And the V-I values in
the steady-state are linear, they can be converted to integers between 0 and n using Equation (1),
I m min I
im n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max I min I
(1)
Vm min V
vm n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max V min V
Where: im , vm are the converted current and voltage at the m -th sample point, respectively.
I m , Vm are the raw current and voltage of the data point m , respectively.
min I , minV are the minimum values of current and voltage in a steady-state period,
respectively.
max I , maxV are the maximum values of current and voltage in a steady-state period,
respectively.
n is the order of the matrix;   is the downward rounding sign.
The 2D V-I trajectories of loads in the PLAID dataset are shown in Fig. 2. Some loads with
similar V-I trajectories cannot be effectively distinguished, while others with different V-I
trajectories can be effectively distinguished.
Fig. 2. Binary V-I Trajectories with n  32 for the Loads in PLAID
3.2 First Step Identification by the Inception Network based on V-I Trajectories
The Inception module is shown in Fig. 3. It performs different convolution and pooling
operations such as 1×1, 3×3, and 5×5 on the input data. Unlike the conventional sequential
concatenation of convolution and pooling layers, the Inception module cleverly achieves
dimensionality reduction and allows simultaneous convolution and aggregation at multiple
dimensions by using 1×1 convolutional substitution. The output of each part is pooled by using the
same type of padding, which fills the dimensions of the output with the same as the input. Finally,
Concat is used to fuse the output data from each channel.
Fig. 3. Diagram of the Inception Module

The Inception network in this study consists of a 3×3 convolutional layer, two Blocks, and a
Global Average Pooling (GAP) layer, as depicted in Fig. 4. One Inception module is noted as one
Block, and the convolution and pooling steps of Block 1 are set to 2, the convolution and pooling
steps of Block 2 are set to 1, and the activation function is set to "Relu". A 2D V-I trajectory is
passed different convolution and pooling operations, and it is subsequently output to the Softmax
function through a GAP layer, then the final recognition result will be output.
Fig. 4. Flow Chart for Inception Network Recognition

However, conventional CNN frequently takes one or more fully connected layers before using
a Softmax function to classify data. Due to the huge number of fully connected layers, the training
speed of the model is slowed down, it is also likely to cause an overfitting phenomenon. Each feature
map of the convolution output is averaged by replacing the traditional fully connected layer with a
GAP layer, and the need for training parameters is eliminated, thus the network parameters are
drastically reduced and resulting in a more robust model with the reduced overfitting phenomenon
[18]. Fig. 5 shows a comparison of the fully connected layer and the GAP layer. It is easy to see that
the parameter calculation of the Inception network has greatly reduced by using the GAP layer
instead of the fully connected layer from this simple comparative structure diagram alone.
Fig. 5. Comparison between the Fully Connected Layer and the GAP Layer
4. Second Step Identification based on the TOPSIS algorithm
The V-I trajectories alone are not sufficient to effectively differentiate loads with similar
trajectories in the first step, so the second step is required to achieve the recognition of the surplus
loads. The fused numerical features, which combines active and reactive power, harmonics, and
power factor [19], will be used for load recognition based on the TOPSIS algorithm.
4.1 Acquisition of Fused Numerical Features
Different numerical features can effectively distinguishs different loads. In this paper, the
active and reactive power, the first five odd harmonics, and the power factor are fused as numerical
features. Among them, active and reactive power features can distinguish between high and low
power loads, harmonics can compensate for the problem on the lack of sampling accuracy with the
V-I trajectory, and power factors can reflect the energy efficiency of loads and distinguish the nature
of loads. The fused numerical features are extracted by using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) [20].
As Equation (2), X (k ) is the k -th signal of the frequency domain after the FFT during a
specific steady-state:
N 1 2 πkn
j
X (k )   in e N
, k  0,1,, N  1 (2)
n0
Where, in is the i -th current sampling. N is the total number of sampling points in a period.
X (k ) is the amplitude of the k -th signal, it is also the k -th harmonics. However, the odd
harmonics of household loads are significantly larger than the even harmonics, and the harmonic
value will be already small when the order of harmonics is greater than 11 [10]. Therefore, the first
five odd harmonics are chosen as the harmonic features.
Additionally, the time domain voltage and current can be expressed by Equation (3):
N 1
i(t )  I (0)   2I ( k ) cos  kwt  φi( k ) 
k 1
N 1
(3)
v(t )  V (0)
  2V (k )
cos  kwt  φ (k )
v 
k 1
Where: w is the angular velocity.
I (0) , V (0) are the rms fundamental current and voltage, respectively.
I ( k ) , V ( k ) are the rms values of k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively.
i( k ) , v are the phase angles of the k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively.
(k )
Then, the active and reactive power can be calculated by the time domain voltage and current
by Equation (4):
N 1
P  V (0) I (0)  V ( k ) I ( k ) cos  φv( k )  φi( k ) 
k 1
N 1
(4)
Q  V (k ) (k )
I sin  φ (k )
v φ
(k )
i 
k 1
While the power factor is generally expressed as λ and calculated from the active and reactive
power by Equation (5).
P
 (5)
P  Q2
2
4.2 Second Step Identification by TOPSIS based on Fused Numerical Features
TOPSIS algorithm is an efficient multi-objective decision-making method, it enables the
comparison and selection of multiple schemes [21].
In this paper, the evaluation index refers to the numerical features of each load in the database,
and the evaluation object refers to each load that was not successfully identified in the first step. Fig.
6 shows the identification process of the TOPSIS algorithm.

Fig. 6. Recognition Flow Chart of TOPSIS Algorithm
In terms of weight determination, this paper adopts a comprehensive weight calculation method,
which combines the entropy weight method [22], the Criteria Importance Though Intercriteria
Correlation (CRITIC) weight method [23], and the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) weight
method. These three objective weight methods can effectively prevent errors caused by subjective
factors and ensure the integrity of the evaluation process. The entropy weight method
emphasizes the variability of features and reflects the differences between features, the CRITIC
fully considers both the correlation and the conflict between features, whereas PCA focuses on the
correlation between features. These three weight methods are combined to obtain the comprehensive
weight W j for the j -th feature as shown in Equation (6):
W j1W j2W j3
Wj  M
(6)
W W W
j 1
1
j j
2 3
j
Where M indicates the number of load features, W j1 , W j2 and W j3 denotes the entropy weight,
CRITIC weight, and PCA weight of the j -th feature, respectively.
Finally, the identification results of the second step are obtained based on the similarity Di
between the load to be tested and the i -th load in the database. The greater the Di is, the more
similar the load to be tested is to the loads in the database, then the tested load can be identified and
the recognition rate can be obtained.

5. Experimental Verification and Comparative Analysis
The PLAID dataset [24] has a total of 1074 datasets from 235 independent loads and provides
voltage and current for 11 different types of household loads at a sampling frequency of 30 kHz for
experimental testing.
5.1 Evaluation Indicators
The average of the F1-score in the first step and the accuracy ε in the second step for each load
is the accuracy for the final recognition rate of the step-by-step identification model.
5.1.1 Evaluation Indicators in the First Step
There are three evaluation indicators for identification in the first step. Accuracy, F1-score, and
confusion matrix [25] are used to evaluate the recognition rate for the Inception network. Where
Accuracy is used to evaluate the performance of the model, and the F1-score is used to evaluate
whether each load is identified successfully in the first step of identification. Among them, Accuracy
can be obtained from Precision and Recall.
And the Precision is the proportion of all samples with accurate positive predictions out of all
samples with positive predictions, it can be calculated by Equation (7).

TP
Pre  (7)
TP  FP
While the Recall is the proportion of samples with expected positive results to those with actual
positive results, it can be calculated by Equation (8).

TP
Rec  (8)
TP  FN
Then the Accuracy is the proportion of correct predictions in the whole sample, it can be
calculated by Equation (9).

TP  TN
Acc  (9)
TP  FP  TN  FN
Where: TP indicates the number of classes that are positive but are predicted to be positive.
TN indicates the number of classes that are negative but are predicted to be negative.
FP indicates the number of classes that are negative but are predicted to be positive.
FN indicates the number of classes that are positive but are predicted to be negative
[26].
Finally, the F1-score is the summed average of the Precision and Recall, it can be obtained by
Equation (10).
2Pre  Rec
F1-score  (10)
Pre  Rec
5.1.2 Evaluation Indicators in the Second Step
The accuracy indicator ε for the second step represents the ratio of the number of correctly
identified loads nture to the total number of loads ntext , it can be calculated by Equation (11):
nture
ε=  100% (11)
ntest
5.2 Experimental Verification
5.2.1 First Step Identification
Firstly, this paper constructed the 2D V-I trajectories image. And the number n was set to 32.
After adjusting the relevant parameters, the ratio of the training set and the test set is 8:2, and
the training process is shown in Fig. 7. The recognition accuracy and loss value tend to be stable
when the epoch number exceeds 60, and the difference of the accuracy between the test set and the
training set is minimal. It shows that the Inception network has a good anti-overfitting ability.
Fig. 7. Training Process of Inception Network

Through the visual analysis of the data, the confusion matrix after the above identification is
shown in Fig. 8. The accuracy for the Inception network model achieves 96.26%.
Fig. 8. Confusion Matrix for the Recognition with Inception Network
(Where AC: air conditioner, CFL: compact fluorescent lamp, Bulb: incandescent light bulb,
Washing: washing machine)
The F1-score for each type of load, which is derived from the confusion matrix, is used to
assess the model's capability to recognize loads. As shown in Fig. 9, the F1-score of the Fridge, AC,
and Heater are all lower than 90%, because these loads have multiple operating states, and the
features of similar loads in different states are quite different. The CFL and Laptop both achieves
an F1-score of 1, and the recognition accuracy is 100%. Except for these two loads, the remaining
loads are not correctly recognized, and they will be recognized in the second step.
Fig. 9. F1-scores of Inception Network of All Types of Loads
5.2.2 Second Step Identification
In this subsection, the numerical features of the loads except for CFL and Laptop are acquired,
and the feature database is built. A total of 180 loads are randomly selected from 9 types, and the
recognition results for each load will be obtained by calculating the similarity using the TOPSIS
algorithm, and the recognition results are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Results for the Second Step Identification

Loads AC Fan Fridge Hairdryer Heater Bulb Microwave Vacuum Washing
ε (%) 98.12 99.07 98.56 97.23 100 100 100 100 96.57
The numerical features of the Fan and CFL are more similar in terms of power factor and power
distribution. And the identification rate of the Fan will be effectively increased when the CFL does
not interfere with the identification of the Fan.
Then, an average recognition rate of 99.12% can be attained for the step-by-step recognition
of the Inception-TOPSIS model. And it is possible to recognize different loads effectively by
combining numerical features and V-I trajectories.
5.3 Comparative Analysis
5.3.1 Comparative Analysis with Conventional CNN
Performance comparisons between the conventional CNN and the Inception network were
made in this subsection. The CNN consists of three convolutional and pooling layers, which are
followed by a fully connected layer, and then it uses Softmax for classification. The training process
is shown in Fig. 10. The recognition accuracy and loss value also tends to be stable when the epoch
number exceeds 60, and the difference in the accuracy in the training set between the Inception and
conventional CNN is about 0.1. And the loss value of Inception is significantly lower than CNN's.
Therefore, the Inception network has higher recognition accuracy, faster convergence, and smaller
loss, compared with the conventional CNN.
Fig. 10. Training Process Comparison of Inception Network and Conventional CNN
As shown in Fig. 11, the confusion matrix of the conventional CNN can achieve a recognition
accuracy of 85.51%, which is 11 percentage points lower than the Inception network compared with
Fig. 8. However, none of the F1-scores of the loads reached 1 as shown in Fig. 12. Therefore, all 11
types of loads were not successfully identified in the first step and need to be identified in the second
step.
Fig. 11. Confusion Matrix for the Recognition with Conventional CNN
Fig. 12. F1-score of Conventional CNN of All Types of Loads

In the second step, the loads will be classified with TOPSIS, and the identification results are
shown in Table 2. The highest accuracy ε is 98.09 %, and it is significantly lower than the accuracy
after classification with the Inception network.

Loads AC CFL Fan Fridge Hairdryer Heater Bulb Laptop Microwave Vacuum Washing
ε (%) 97.78 94.26 97.35 96.05 96.98 95.68 98.72 98.03 97.58 98.09 96.68
And the average accuracy of the step-by-step recognition based on conventional CNN and
TOPSIS is 97.02%, which is two percentage points lower than the proposed method in this paper.
Obviously, based on the analysis above, the step-by-step recognition by using the Inception-TOPSIS
model improves the recognition accuracy while using fewer training parameters, and has a stronger
anti-overfitting ability.
5.3.2 Comparative Analysis with Other Algorithms
In this subsection, the recognition speed and the accuracy of the proposed algorithm are
compared with other recognition algorithms. All the experiments were based on the PLAID dataset,
with a Win10 system as the experimental environment, Python 3.8 as the language, and PyTorch
1.11.0 as the deep learning framework. 1074 sample data from 11 different types of household loads
are identified, and the ratio of the training set to the test set is still 8:2. Table 3 shows the
identification time and accuracy of different methods.

Table 3. Comparison of Identification Performance of Different Algorithms
Load features Identification models T(min) Accuracy (%)
V-I Inception network 11 96.26
V-I CNN 12 85.51
V-I+ Numerical TOPSIS 13 98.91
V-I+ Numerical CNN-TOPSIS 14 97.02
V-I+ Numerical CNN-K-means 16 92.17
V-I+ Numerical Inception network-K-means 15 96.87
This paper Inception network-TOPSIS 12 99.12
Note: K-means represents the K-means clustering algorithm.
Even though only using V-I trajectories for recognition takes less time, the recognition
accuracy is poorer. Despite the K-means clustering method with a simple algorithm structure, the
identification accuracy isn't high, because no fusion features don't have a strong clustering effect.
Therefore, the recognition rate is still lower than the proposed algorithm. The step-by-step
recognition method in this paper not only effectively improves the recognition efficiency, but also
reduces the recognition time by combining the Inception network and TOPSIS.
5.3.3 Comparative Analysis of Noise Resistance
To verify the noise resistance of the proposed algorithm, White Gaussian Noise is
superimposed on the raw voltage and current. The new voltage and current are obtained by adding
noise with different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), and the SNR is calculated by Equation (12).
L
 (x ) i
2
SNR  10lg i 1
L
(12)
 (ni )2
i 1
Where xi represents the original signal, ni represents the noise signal, and L is the length
of the original signal.
Usually, the SNR indicates the deviation between the noise-combined signal and the original
signal, and the higher the SNR increases, the smaller the noise signal is.
The confusion matrixes of the first step by the Inception network under different noises with
SNRs of 5dB, 10dB, 20dB, and 30dB are shown in the Appendix. And the accuracy in the first step
keeps getting better as the SNR rises, as shown in Fig. 13. The identification rate of the Inception
network is still higher than the conventional CNN under different SNRs.
Fig. 13. Comparison of Recognition Accuracy for Conventional CNN and Inception under
Different SNRs
Under different SNRs, the step-by-step identification results are shown in Table 4. The step-
by-step identification algorithm can still achieve effective recognition of loads after adding noise,
and the recognition rate of the step-by-step model keeps improving as the SNR increases, which
indicates that the step-by-step model of the Inception-TOPSIS algorithm has a certain resistance to
noise.
Table 4. Recognition Accuracy under Different SNRs
SNR (dB) 5 10 20 30 40
Accuracy (%) 81.34 86.97 90.03 91.27 94.46
6. Conclusion
This paper proposes a step-by-step non-invasive loads identification method based on fused
features and Inception-TOPSIS. The step-by-step non-invasive loads identification method greatly
reduces computational difficulty, saves computational resources, and provides the possibility to
realize plug-and-play devices. The proposed method's effectiveness was fully validated through
experimental validation and comparative analysis using the public dataset PLAID dataset.
However, there are still some limitations to the proposed method. For instance, this paper only
has carried out the identification based on the public dataset, but the proposed method is not
validated based on the actual household datasets. In addition, an operational algorithm should be
tested in practical applications. Therefore, the next research focus is to solve the problems to
improve the scalability of the algorithm and try to use the embedded system to achieve real-time
recognition of the loads.
References
[1] K. He, L. Stankovic, J. Liao, V. Stankovic, Non-intrusive load disaggregation using graph signal
processing, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. 9 (3) (2018) 1739-1747, doi:
10.1109/TSG.2016.2598872.
[2] Aladesanmi, E. J., K. A. Folly, Overview of non-intrusive load monitoring and identification
techniques, IFAC-PapersOnLine. 48 (30) (2015) 415-420, doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.12.414.
[3] Ahmed Zoha, Alexander Gluhak, Muhammad Ali Imran, Sutharshan Rajasegarar, Non-intrusive load
monitoring approaches for disaggregated energy sensing: A survey, Sensors. 12 (12) (2012) 16838-
16866, doi: 10.3390/s121216838.
[4] H. Y. Lam, G. S. K. F. , W. K. Lee , A Novel Method to Construct Taxonomy of Electrical Appliances
Based on Load Signatures, IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics. 53 (2007) 653-660,
doi: 10.1109/TCE.2007.381742.
[5] Z. Shi, B. Yin, An improved Non-intrusive load identification method for V-I trajectory based on
amplitude to pixel value, 2021 IEEE 5th Information Technology, Networking, Electronic and
Automation Control Conference (ITNEC). (2021), 1510-1516, doi:
10.1109/ITNEC52019.2021.9587263.
[6] Y. Liu, X. Wang, W. You, Non-Intrusive Load Monitoring by Voltage–Current Trajectory Enabled
Transfer Learning, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. 10 (5) (2019) 5609-5619, doi:
10.1109/TSG.2018.2888581.
[7] Du, L., He, D., Harley, R. G., Habetler, T. G, Electric Load Classification by Binary Voltage–Current
Trajectory Mapping. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. 7 (1) (2016) 358-365, doi:
10.1109/TSG.2015.2442225.
[8] J. Huan，C. Wang, H. Hong, Y. Sui, M. Yu, X. Pan, Non-intrusive load monitoring method based on
color encoding and deep learning, Science Technology and Engineering. 21(21)(2021) 8901-8908.(In
Chinese)
[9] C. Chen, P. Gao, J. Jiang, H. Wang, P. Li, S. Wan, A deep learning based non-intrusive household
load identification for smart grid in China, Computer Communications. 177 (2021) 176-184, doi:
10.1016/j.comcom.2021.06.023.
[10] X. Qiu, S. Yin, Z. Zhang, Z.Xie, M. Jiang, J. Zheng, Non-intrusive load identification method based
on V-I trajectory and high-order harmonic feature, Electric Power Engineering Technology. 46 (6)
(2021) 34-42, doi: 10.12158/j.2096-3203.2021.06.005. (In Chinese)
[11] W. Liu, C. Wang, Y. Li, Aggregation Method of Distributed Load Resources Based on Non-intrusive
Load Identification, Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2138 (2021) 24-25, doi: 10.1088/1742-
6596/2138/1/012004.
[12] M. Yu, B. Wang, L. Lu, Z. Bao, D. Qi, Non-intrusive adaptive load identification based on Siamese
network, IEEE Access. 2022, 10 (2022) 11564-11573, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3145982.
[13] S. Wang, L. Guo, H. Chen, X. Deng, Non-intrusive Load Identification Algorithm Based on Feature
Fusion and Deep Learning, Automation of Electric Power Systems. 44 (9) (2019) 103-110, doi:
10.7500/AEPS2019 0625010. (In Chinese)
[14] X. Xie, Z. Du, C. Hu, K. Yang, A. Wang, Reconfigurable design of Inception network, Computer
engineering and design. 43 (4) (2022) 1195-1201. (In Chinese)
[15] G. Qi, M. He, Convolutional Neural Network Image Classification Method Combined with Inception
Module, Software Guide. 19 (3) (2020) 79-82. (In Chinese)
[16] A. Wang, L. Yuan, C. Ding, G. Cao, P. Gao, Design and implementation of a non-intrusive power
load monitoring system, Journal of Xi’an University of Technology. 35 (3) (2019) 343-351, doi:
10.19322/j.cnk i.issn.1006-4710.2019.03.012. (In Chinese)
[17] J. Gao, E. C. Kara, S. Giri, M. Bergés, A feasibility study of automated plug-load identification from
high-frequency measurements, 2015 IEEE Global Conference on Signal and Information Processing
(GlobalSIP). (2015) 220-224, doi: 10.1109/GlobalSIP.2015.7418189.
[18] Lin M, Chen Q, Yan S, Network In Network, Computer Science. (2013).
[19] Q. Zhou, J. Wei, M. Sun, C. Wang, J. Rong, J. Hu, T. Yang, Feature Extraction for Non-intrusive Load
Monitoring System, 2021 6th Asia Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering (ACPEE). (2021)
503-507, doi: 10.1109/ACPEE51499.2021.9436971.
[20] C. Tian, Q. Zhang, G. Sun, Z. Song, S. Li, FFT consolidated sparse and collaborative representation
for image classification, Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering. 43 (2) (2017) 741-758, doi:
10.1007/s13369-017-2696-7.
[21] J. Li, H. Zhao, Power efficiency evaluation model for industrial users based on improved TOPSIS,
2020 IEEE 9th Joint International Information Technology and Artificial Intelligence Conference
(ITAIC). (2020) 1764-1768, doi: 10.1109/ITAIC49862.2020.9338785.
[22] J. Huang, Combining entropy weight and TOPSIS method for information system selection, 2008
IEEE conference on cybernetics and intelligent systems. (2008) 1281-1284, doi:
10.1109/ICCIS.2008.4670971.
[23] J. Yin, X. Du, H. Yuan, M. Ji, X. Yang, S. Tian, Q. Wang, Y. Liang, TOPSIS Power Quality
Comprehensive Assessment Based on A Combination Weighting Method, 2021 IEEE 5th Conference
on Energy Internet and Energy System Integration (EI2). (2021) 1303-1307, doi:
10.1109/EI252483.2021.9713201.
[24] R. Medico, L. D. Baets, J. Gao, S. Giri, E. Kara, T. Dhaene, C. Develder, M. Bergés, D. Deschrijver.
A voltage and current measurement dataset for plug load appliance identification in
households, Scientific data. 7 (1) (2020) 1-10, doi: 10.1038/s41597-020-0389-7.
[25] De Baets, Leen，J. Ruyssinck，C. Develder，T. Dhaene，D. Deschrijver, Appliance classification
using VI trajectories and convolutional neural networks, Energy and Buildings. 158 (2018) 32-36,
doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.09.087.
[26] F. Jazizadeh，B. Becerik-Gerber，M. Berges，L. Soibelman, An unsupervised hierarchical
clustering based heuristic algorithm for facilitated training of electricity consumption disaggregation
systems, Advanced Engineering Informatics. 28 (4) (2014) 311-326, doi: 10.1016/j.aei.2014.09.004.
Appendices
Fig. 1. Confusion Matrix for First Step Identification Results at 5dB


亮点（供审查）
Highlights
The highlights of this study are as follows:

1. Apply the Inception network to research non-intrusive load identification for the first time.
2. Improve the recognition rate effectively through a step-by-step recognition method.
3. Reduce the calculation cost greatly by the Inception network and the TOPSIS algorithm.
对审稿人的回应
Response to Reviewers’ Comments on the Paper Entitled “A Step-by-Step Identification

Method for Non-intrusive Loads based on Fused Features and Inception-TOPSIS”
We thank Editor and Anonymous Reviewers for their careful reading and thoughtful comments.
These comments are constructive for improving the quality and presentation of the manuscript
considerably in the revision of our manuscript.
We are now submitting a revised version of the manuscript. We have carefully considered all
reviewers’ comments and suggestions and made every possible effort to address the concerns raised
by the reviewers and improve the quality of the revised manuscript accordingly and thoroughly.
Detailed point-by-point revision notes to all reviewers’ comments are provided in the following
sections, see Responses to Reviewers 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
Note: The main changes appearing both in the revised version of the manuscript and in
this response have been highlighted in blue.
Response to Reviewer 1
Comments to the Author: The authors propose a Step-by-Step Identification Method for
Nonintrusive Loads based on Fused Features and Inception-TOPSIS. In my opinion, this article
cannot be accepted now, and it needs major revision. The detailed problem list is as follows.
Response: The authors thank Reviewer 1 for taking the time and effort dedicated to reviewing our
paper and for the constructive comments and suggestions. We have carefully considered your
comments and suggestions and made every possible effort to address your concerns and improve
the quality of the revised manuscript accordingly and thoroughly. Detailed point-by-point replies to
your comments are provided as follows.
Comment 1: Equations (5) and (7) are inconsistent with the explanation in this paper, and equation
(10) also has obvious errors. All equations should be rechecked to correct editing errors.
Response: Many thanks to reviewer 1 for this comment. We have made changes to the explanation
of Equations (5), (7), and (10) in the revised manuscript. The explanation of Equation (5) has been
modified according to the definition of the power factor; the explanation of Equation (7) has been
modified for a positive sample with a correct prediction; and the explanation of Equation (10) has
been correctly expressed for the harmonic mean. In addition, we have modified the explanation of
Equation (8). The revised paragraphs are as follows:
“While the power factor is generally expressed as λ and calculated from the active and
apparent power by Eq. (5), where apparent power is generally expressed as S  P2  Q2 .
P
λ (1)
S
”
“And the Precision is the proportion of positive samples with a correct prediction to those with
predicted positive. it can be calculated by Eq. (7).
TP
Pre  (2)
TP  FP
While the Recall is the proportion of positive samples with a correct prediction to those with
actual positive, it can be calculated by Eq. (8).
TP
Rec  (3)
TP  FN
”
“Finally, the F1-score is the harmonised mean of the Precision and Recall, it can be obtained
by Eq. (10).
2Pre  Rec
F1-score  (4)
Pre  Rec
”
Comment 2: In Figure 6, the D should be added to the text, and the reference number should be
added.
Response: Thanks a lot to reviewer 1 for this comment. We have described the similarity D (Di) in
the revised manuscript in section 4.2, page 9. In addition, reference [26] has been added and cited
in the revised manuscript. The revised paragraph and added reference are as follows:
“Finally, the identification results of the second step are obtained based on the similarity Di
between the load to be tested and the i -th load in the database [26].”
[26] Z. Zhang, N. Cao, H. Lu, W. Ku, H. Zhu, Non-intrusive load recognition method based on
combined weighting-TOPSIS algorithm, 2022 7th International Conference on Intelligent
Computing and Signal Processing (ICSP). (2022) 204-209.
Comment 3: In section 5. Experimental Verification and Comparative Analysis is not realistic.

Realistic experiment should be added.
Response: Thanks to reviewer 1 for this remarkable suggestion. The experimental validation in
section 5 is performed on a computer using the public dataset PLAID, combined with a step-by-step
recognition algorithm of Inception-TOPSIS model proposed in this paper. The comparative analysis
is compared with the traditional convolutional neural network and the Inception network, and also
compared with the existing models of non-intrusive load recognition methods. In addition, the
resistance of the proposed algorithm is verified under different signal-to-noise ratios of noise.
Unfortunately, laboratory conditions are limited, and we lack the sophisticated sampling equipment
to obtain realistic data for validation. So, a realistic experiment is lacking. We hope that a systematic,
comprehensive comparison of the algorithms will properly fill this gap.
Comment 4: Tables 1~3 are not sufficiently explained. The accuracy assessment of the proposed
framework should be demonstrated more by the numerical results in the table. In addition, the values
of MAPE, RMSE, and r etc are not added which measures accuracy. More metrics like DM test etc
must be used to validate the model accuracy.
Response: Thanks to reviewer 1 for this suggestion. In the revised manuscript, we have explained
the identification results of Tables 1 to 3 in more detail. In studies of non-intrusive load recognition,
the confusion matrices, F1-score, accuracy, etc. are usually the indicators used to evaluate the
recognition results. In this paper, we also used confusion matrices and the F1-score to evaluate the
performance of the Inception network model and the recognition results for each type of load. And
in the end, we used the average precision to evaluate the step-by-step recognition results. The
revised paragraphs are as follows:
“Table 1. Results for the Second Step Identification
ε (%) 98.12 99.07 98.56 97.23 100 100 100 100 96.57
Compared with the first step recognition results in Fig. 9, the recognition rate of each load has
improved significantly after the second step by using the TOPSIS algorithm, with 100% recognition
rates achieved for Heater, Bulb, Microwave and Vacuum. The results show that the second step
recognition can improve the efficiency of recognition by refining the recognition of loads on the
basis of the first step.
In summary, by fusing V-I trajectory features and numerical features, combined with the
Inception-TOPSIS model of recognition step-by-step recognition, an average recognition rate of
99.12% can be achieved for effective recognition of all types of loads.
”
“Compared with the recognition results of the first step in Fig. 13, the second step of
recognition by using the TOPSIS algorithm can achieve effective recognition of the load for loads
that were not even successfully identified in the first step of recognition, and the recognition
efficiency is greatly improved. However, the average accuracy of the conventional CNN and
TOPSIS step-by-step recognition is 97.02%, which is lower than the recognition rate of the proposed
algorithm. This is because the Inception-TOPSIS model can reduce the load types in the first step
of recognition, and then combined with the second step of recognition, the recognition rate is greatly
improved. Based on the above analysis, the step-by-step recognition model of Inception-TOPSIS
proposed in this paper takes advantage of the reduced training parameters and improved overfitting
resistance to effectively improve the recognition accuracy.
ε (%) 97.78 94.26 97.35 96.05 96.98 95.68 98.72 98.03 97.58 98.09 96.68
”
“Table 3. Comparison of Identification Performance of Different Algorithms
V-I CNN 12 85.51
V-I+ Numerical Inception network 14 97.87

Even though only using V-I trajectories for recognition takes less time, whether Inception
network or CNN is used, the recognition accuracy is poorer. Recognition time and efficiency are
poor when using only a single model for fused features. Despite the K-means clustering method
with a simple algorithm structure, the identification accuracy isn't high, because no fusion features
don't have a strong clustering effect. Therefore, the recognition rate of the Inception network
combined with K-means for step-by-step recognition of fused features is still lower than that of the
proposed algorithm. In summary, using V-I trajectory features to fuse numerical features for
recognition can greatly improve the recognition rate. The step-by-step recognition combining the
Inception network and TOPSIS algorithm reduces the recognition time and improves the recognition
efficiency. The recognition efficiency of the proposed algorithm model is also superior compared to
other algorithms.”
Comment 5: In Figure 10 does not represent the equal relationship between the predicted value and
the target value, and the order of magnitude of the two is not equal, so it must be recreated.
Response: Thanks to reviewer 1 for this suggestion. Figure 10 in the original manuscript shows the
variation of loss and accuracy with the epochs in the training process of the two methods. To better
present the superiority of the Inception network over the conventional CNN, we have modified
Figure 10 in the revised manuscript to show the changes in training accuracy and loss in Figure 10
and Figure 11, respectively. These two figures are as follows:
Fig. 10. Training Accuracy Comparison of Inception Network and Conventional CNN
Fig. 11. Training Loss Comparison of Inception Network and Conventional CNN”
Comment 6: In section 5.3.2 Comparative forecasting models, the results in presented in Tables are
not convincing which should be explained accordingly.
Response: Thanks to reviewer 1 for this suggestion. In order to compare the efficiency of existing
commonly used recognition algorithms in step by step recognition, the authors experimented with
the running time and recognition accuracy used by several algorithms and their combinations for
recognition of PLAID datasets, presented in Table 3. All the experiments were based on the PLAID
dataset, with a Win10 system as the experimental environment, Python 3.8 as the language, and
PyTorch 1.11.0 as the deep learning framework. In the revised manuscript, we have modified Table
3 and have explained the identification results in more detail. The revised paragraph is as follows:
“Table 3. Comparison of Identification Performance of Different Algorithms

V-I CNN 12 85.51

other algorithms.”
Comment 7: Correct editing and writing errors.

Response: Thanks to reviewer 1 for your careful reading and for pointing out the editing and writing
errors. We have corrected them in the revised manuscript.
Comment 8: The paper claims that one of the contributions is using step-by-step non-invasive loads
identification method based on fused features and Inception-TOPSIS. However, similar methods
already exist in literature.
Response: Thanks to reviewer 1 for this good suggestion. This paper proposes a step-by-step
recognition algorithm combining the Inception network with the TOPSIS algorithm. Some similar
literature has proposed the recognition using the TOPSIS algorithm, but the Inception network is
the first time to be applied to non-intrusive load recognition, and this paper also combines the
advantages of the Inception network and TOPSIS algorithm for step-by-step recognition, which
effectively improves the recognition efficiency.
Comment 9: It should be good if the paper compares prediction in various time scales; however,
only hourly data are presented in the paper. Readers would like to see plots of daily and monthly
data.
Response: Thank you very much for your positive comments. In this paper, the loads are not
identified in various time scales, and we only use the V-I trajectory features fused with numerical
features to identify loads in the public dataset PLAID, which consists of short voltage and current
measurements (in the order of a few seconds) for different residential appliances. Usually in actual
load recognition, the real-time performance of an algorithm is as important as its accuracy. Therefore,
in this paper, the performance of the algorithms is compared in terms of running time in the
comparative analysis of different algorithms.
Comment 10: Abstract, conclusion, introduction, must be improved and made as per the journal
and research standards. These sections has flaws.
Response: Thanks to reviewer 1 for your careful reading and for pointing out the abstract,
conclusion, and introduction errors. We have rewritten the abstract, introduction, and conclusion to
describe the work done in the revised manuscript in more detail.
Comments to the Author: The revised document presents a novel methodology for appliance
identification based on Fused Features and TOPSIS algorithm. The document is well written, the
information is presented in a clear way, and the topic is relevant to the industry. Before publishing,
authors must consider the following considerations.
Response: Thank you very much for your positive comments. The authors sincerely thank reviewer
2 for the time and effort dedicated to the review of our paper and the very helpful comments and
suggestions provided. We have taken into consideration of your comments and suggestions very
carefully, and have made every possible effort to address your concerns and improve the quality of
the revised manuscript accordingly and thoroughly. Detailed point-by-point replies to your
comments are provided as follows.
Comment 1: Don't use acronyms in the abstract.

Response: Thanks to reviewer 2 for your careful reading and for pointing out the abstract errors.
We have rewritten the abstract and corrected the problem of acronyms in the abstract.
Comment 2: Consider that readers are not experts in Inception Networks, and require more detailed
explanations and development of your proposal. E.G. page 6, the paragraph after Fig. 3, is not clear.
Please rewrite this section.
Response: Thank you very much for your positive comments. In the revised manuscript, we have
redrawn Fig. 3 on page 6 and explained the Inception module in Figure 3 in more detail. The revised
paragraph is as follows:
“The Inception module is shown in Fig. 3, where different convolutional layers are combined in
parallel to extract the features of the previous layer through different convolutional operations. And
at the end, the features of the four channels are concatenated. Each of these channels is cleverly
achieved dimensionality reduction using 1×1 convolution, and the output of each channel is pooled
using the same type of padding so that the output is padded to the same dimension as the input. This
allows the same layer of the network to sense the features of local regions for different sizes and to
fuse features with different scales. In addition, the pooling operation itself has the effect of extracting
features, and since no parameters would produce overfitting, the maximum pooling is added as a
channel in this module.
Fig. 3. Diagram of the Inception Module”
Comment 3: In section 4.1: Why do authors use only odd harmonics? Add some arguments and
references.
Response: Many thanks to the reviewer 2. In the revised manuscript, we have revised the reasons
for using odd harmonics and added references for explanation. The revised paragraph and added
reference are as follows:
“For domestic loads, switching power supply equipment based on electronic components is the main
cause of harmonics. Usually in a balanced three-phase system, the repeated even harmonics are
almost eliminated due to the symmetry. The harmonics are therefore mainly dominated by odd
harmonics. Even if there are uncancelled even harmonics, the even harmonics are significantly
smaller than the odd harmonics of household loads [21]. And the odd harmonic value will be already
small when the order of harmonics is greater than 11 [10]. Therefore, the higher harmonics can be
ignored, and the first five odd harmonics are chosen as the harmonic features [22].”
[21] S. Yu, Z. Liu, Y. Liu, Y. Li, Probing the structure of asymmetric planar molecules using odd-
even high harmonics, Laser & Optoelectronics Progress. 60 (01) (2023) 67-72,
doi:10.3788/LOP212931.
[22] Z. Zai, S. Zhao, X. Zhu, Z. Zhang, F. Dong, Non-intrusive load monitoring based on color
coding and harmonic feature fusion, Electrical Engineering. 23 (12) (2022) 9-16.
doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-3800.2022.12.002.”
Comment 4: In Eq. 3, the authors use [I^(0) and v^(0)] for the rms fundamental magnitude; is this
a standard nomenclature? There are some references that support this selection.
With harmonic usage, super index 0 is associated with zero sequence currents/voltages. Please
explain this or consider changing the nomenclature usage.
Response: Thank you very much for your positive comments. Through a search of the relevant
literature, we have modified the representation of the fundamental current and the RMS value of the
voltage, and have also modified Equations (3) and (4) in the revised manuscript. The revised
paragraphs are as follows:
“Additionally, the time domain voltage and current can be expressed by Eq. (3):
N 1
i (t )  I 0   2 I k cos  kwt  φik 
k 1
N 1
(5)
v(t )  V0   2Vk cos  kwt  φvk 
k 1
Where: w is the angular velocity. I 0 and V0 are the rms fundamental current and voltage,
respectively. I k and Vk are the rms values of k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively.
ik and vk are the phase angles of the k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively.
by Eq. (4):
N 1
P  V0 I 0  Vk I k cos  φvk  φik 
k 1
N 1
(6)
Q  Vk I k sin  φvk  φik 
k 1
Comment 5: Same situation with lambda in Eq. 5. Power factor (pf) is commonly expressed as cos
(phi).
Response: Many thanks to the reviewer 2 for this good comment. cos(phi) is also a representation
of the power factor, which is usually expressed as the ratio of active power to apparent power
according to the definition of power factor and is denoted by the letter λ . When determined by the
phase difference phi between voltage and current, the power factor λ = cos(phi).
Comment 6: It is not clear if the PLAID database is available to the public and where to find it.
Response: Many thanks to the reviewer 2. The PLAID dataset is known to be a public dataset, and
the PLAID dataset 2017 can be found via the URL: PLAID 2017 (figshare.com). and the PLAID
dataset 2018 via the URL: PLAID 2018 (figshare.com). In this paper, the data from PLAID 2018 is
used.
Comment 7: For validating the results, it is highly recommended to share the training databases,
developed algorithms, and results in an open-source online data repository hosted at Mendeley Data.
Response: Thanks to the reviewer 2 for this suggestion. The training databases is PLAID dataset,
readers can find it via the URL: PLAID 2018 (figshare.com).The algorithm code is available online
and we have made some modifications. We will consider making the developed algorithms publicly
available after the paper is published, or submit to the publisher as an attachment to our paper.
Comment 8: Authors should include a real-world test validation of the method using real measures.
In my perspective, for publication, it is mandatory to validate models and proposals with real data.
Response: Thanks to the reviewer 2 for this remarkable suggestion. The experimental validation
part of this paper was carried out only using the public dataset PLAID through a step-by-step
identification model of Inception-TOPSIS. In addition, one comparative analysis was performed
using Pytorch under different algorithms, and another comparative analysis was performed under
different signal-to-noise ratios of noise with our algorithm. Unfortunately, laboratory conditions
were limited and we lacked the advanced sampling equipment to obtain real data for validation.
Comment 9: Check more recent references and update the bibliography.

Response: Thank the reviewer 2 for pointing out the shortcomings of the paper. We have updated
four references in the revised manuscript. They are references [2], [3], [24] and [29] as follow:
[2] J. Lu, R. Zhao, B. Liu, Z. Yu, J. Zhang, Z. Xu, An overview of non-intrusive load monitoring based
on V-I trajectory signature, Energies. 16 (2) (2023) 939, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020939.
[3] C. Timplalexis, S. Krinidis, D. Ioannidis, D. Tzovaras, NILM applications: literature review of
learning approaches, recent developments and challenges, Energy and Buildings. 261 (2022)
111951, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.111951.
[24] C. Chen, A novel multi-criteria decision-making model for building material supplier selection
based on entropy-AHP weighted TOPSIS, Entropy. 22 (2) (2020) 259, doi:
https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020259.
[29] H.Wu, H. Liu, Non-intrusive load transient identification based on multivariate LSTM neural
network and time series data augmentation, Sustainable Energy, Grids and Networks. 27 (2021)
100490, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segan.2021.100490.
Comments to the Author：The paper discusses the importance of Non-intrusive Load Monitoring
(NILM) in managing electricity demand on the demand side. It explains that NILM technology can
help customers regulate their electricity consumption behavior to save electricity and allow the grid
to optimize the system's structure and increase the efficiency of power dispatch. Moreover, it
proposes a new method for non-intrusive load recognition that combines the Technique for Order
Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) algorithm and the Inception network to
reduce computational cost and enhance performance.
The proposed paper can inspire attractive solutions e depicts a possible contribution. However,
some aspects must be clarified to improve the manuscript.
Response: The authors are very grateful to Reviewer 3 for your comments, for the time and effort
dedicated to the review of our paper, and for the very helpful comments and suggestions provided.
We have taken into consideration of your comments and suggestions very carefully, and have made
every possible effort to address your concerns and improve the quality of the revised manuscript
accordingly and thoroughly. Detailed point-by-point replies to your comments are provided as
follows.
Comment 1：The proposed method has only been tested on a public dataset and has yet to be
validated on household datasets. Is it possible to test the technique in a more realistic condition?
Response: Thanks to the reviewer 3 for this remarkable suggestion. The experimental validation
part of this paper was carried out only using the public dataset PLAID through a step-by-step
identification model of Inception-TOPSIS. In addition, one comparative analysis was performed
under different algorithms using Pytorch, and another comparative analysis was performed under
different signal-to-noise ratios of noise with our algorithm. Unfortunately, laboratory conditions
were limited and we lacked the advanced sampling equipment to obtain real data for validation.
Comment 2: According to the authors, what is the estimated distance required to reach the
algorithm's scalability as embedded systems to achieve real-time load recognition?
Response: Many thanks to the reviewer 3 for this good comment. This embedded intelligent
terminal can obtain load data from the incoming end of smart meter. Users can enquire about the
detailed information such as start-up time, power level and electricity consumption of household
appliances, so as to understand the focus of household energy consumption, save on electricity bills
and promote scientific and rational use of electricity. We are very sorry that we have only done a
small part of the theoretical research for the terminal in the laboratory so far, and no experimental
research with real data. There are already some reports of pilot use in East China, but there is still a
long way to go before the use of terminal reaches thousands of households, constrained by factors
such as costs and technologies.
Comment 3: Which are the minimum configurations for the smart meters to provide accurate load
recognition?
Response: Thanks to the comment for the kind reminder. The configuration of smart meters is not
considered in our theoretical research, and we are very sorry that we cannot give you a professional
answer to this question. But we are happy to try to answer this question. We carried out our
experiments on the PLAID dataset. And PLAID provides a public library for high-resolution
appliance measurements, it currently includes current and voltage measurements sampled at 30 kHz
from 11 different appliance types present in more than 60 households. Therefore, the smart meters
should contain, at a minimum, a high-precision sampling module and a communication module
capable of real-time communication with the data center. To realize demand response, smart meters
may also require a metering and control management module. In summary, the minimum
configurations for a smart meter consist of approximately these three modules.
Comment 4: Can the author evaluate the computation burden of the proposed method for real-time
embedded applications?
Response: Thanks to the reviewer 3 for this good suggestion. Unfortunately, due to the lack of
advanced equipment, we have not realized the computation of the proposed method on real-time
embedded applications. Therefore, the evaluation of the proposed method is not possible. However,
the data center communicating with smart meters must be equipped with strong GPUs to realize
sufficient computility to handle large amounts of data. We believe that if the algorithm used takes
up less computational resources, then to some extent it is a reduced computational burden.
Revised manuscript with no changes marked(Clean)

Na Luo, Chunning Na, Feng Li and Huan Pan
intrusive load recognition method, besides the training parameters of the recognition model are too
many by using a conventional deep learning algorithm, and it also uses up more computer resources.
Therefore, the use of fused features and a step-by-step identification algorithm are provided for non-
intrusive loads combining the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution
algorithm and the Inception network in this paper. Firstly, the Inception network is applied to
recognize the loads with V-I trajectories in the first step; then the loads that are not successfully
identified in the first step can be identified using fused numerical features in the second step based
on the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution algorithm to achieve fast
and fine recognition. The proposed method reduces the computational cost and enhances the
performance of load recognition, according to the validation and comparative analysis with other
algorithms on the Plug-Load Appliance Identification Dataset.
Keywords: Non-intrusive load recognition, Fused features, Inception network, TOPSIS

Grant No. 2020BDE03003, the National Natural Science Foundation of Ningxia Province under
Grant No. 2022AAC03118 and the Key Research and Development Project-Special Project for
East-West Cooperation in Ningxia Province. Grant No. 2021BEE03016.
1. Introduction
presented in [4] compared with a classification method based on voltage-current (V-I) trajectories,
and the results showed that the classification method achieved a better recognition rate than the
conventional method. Based on V-I trajectories with the amplitude transformed to pixel values, a
method for distinguishing various kinds of loads was presented in [5] based on a two-dimensional
(2D) convolutional neural network (CNN). [6] further introduced color-coded V-I trajectories and
used pre-trained CNN to distinguish loads in the PLAID dataset. Both color-coded and pixelated V-
I trajectories have a higher recognition rate than conventional V-I trajectories, but there is a
states.
similarity matching algorithm based on the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity (TOPSIS),
but the recognition rate was insufficient since there was no feature fusion.
Based on the above, the fused features and a step-by-step recognition method are used to
identify loads with similar V-I trajectories based on Inception-TOPSIS in this paper. The main
contribution of this work lies in:
 It is the first time to apply the Inception network to research non-intrusive loads
 The step-by-step recognition method can effectively improve the recognition rate based
on multi-features.
TOPSIS algorithm. Section 5 identifies 11 classes of loads in the Plug-Load Appliance Identification
Dataset (PLAID) and demonstrates the effectiveness and accuracy of the proposed algorithm. And
the algorithms in this paper are also compared and analysed with other algorithms. Finally, Section
6 concludes this study.

2. Principles of step-by-step non-intrusive load identification based on
fused features and Inception-TOPSIS
3. First step identification based on the Inception network
3.1. Construction of V-I trajectories
the steady-state are linear, they can be converted to integers between 0 and n using Eq. (1),
I m min I
im n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max I min I
(1)
Vm min V
vm n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max V min V
I m , Vm are the raw current and voltage of the data point m , respectively. min I , minV are the
minimum values of current and voltage in a steady-state period, respectively. max I , maxV are the
maximum values of current and voltage in a steady-state period, respectively. n is the order of the
matrix;   is the downward rounding sign.
3.2. First step identification by the Inception network based on V-I trajectories
The Inception module is shown in Fig. 3, where different convolutional layers are combined in


4. Second step identification based on the TOPSIS algorithm
4.1. Acquisition of fused numerical features
As Eq. (2), X (k ) is the k -th signal of the frequency domain after the FFT during a specific
steady-state:
N 1 2 πkn
j
X (k )   in e N
, k  0,1,, N  1 (2)
n 0
X (k ) is the amplitude of the k -th signal, it is also the k -th harmonics. For domestic loads,
switching power supply equipment based on electronic components is the main cause of harmonics.
Usually in a balanced three-phase system, the repeated even harmonics are almost eliminated due
to the symmetry. The harmonics are therefore mainly dominated by odd harmonics. Even if there
are uncancelled even harmonics, the even harmonics are significantly smaller than the odd
harmonics of household loads [21]. And the odd harmonic value will be already small when the
order of harmonics is greater than 11 [10]. Therefore, the higher harmonics can be ignored, and the
first five odd harmonics are chosen as the harmonic features [22].
Additionally, the time domain voltage and current can be expressed by Eq. (3):
N 1
i (t )  I 0   2 I k cos  kwt  φik 
k 1
N 1
(3)
v(t )  V0   2Vk cos  kwt  φvk 
k 1
respectively. I k and Vk are the rms values of k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively. vk
and  ik are the phase angles of the k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively.
by Eq. (4):
N 1
P  V0 I 0   Vk I k cos  φvk  φik 
k 1
N 1
(4)
Q   Vk I k sin  φvk  φik 
k 1
While the power factor is generally expressed as λ and calculated from the active and apparent
power by Eq. (5), where apparent power is generally expressed as S  P2  Q2 .
P
λ (5)
S
4.2. Second step identification by TOPSIS based on fused numerical features

weight W j for the j -th feature as shown in Eq. (6):
W j1W j2W j3
Wj  M
(6)
W W W
j 1
1
j j
2
j
3
between the load to be tested and the i -th load in the database [26]. The greater the Di is, the more

5. Experimental verification and comparative analysis
5.1. Evaluation indicators
5.1.1. Evaluation indicators in the first step
And the Precision is the proportion of positive samples with a correct prediction to those with

TP
Pre  (7)
TP  FP

TP
Rec  (8)
TP  FN
calculated by Eq. (9).

TP  TN
Acc  (9)
Where: TP indicates the number of classes that are positive but are predicted to be positive.TN
indicates the number of classes that are negative but are predicted to be negative. FP indicates the
number of classes that are negative but are predicted to be positive. FN indicates the number of
classes that are positive but are predicted to be negative [29].

Finally, the F1-score is the harmonised mean of the Precision and Recall, it can be obtained
by Eq. (10).
2Pre  Rec
F1-score  (10)
Pre  Rec
5.1.2. Evaluation indicators in the second step
identified loads nture to the total number of loads ntext , it can be calculated by Eq. (11):
nture
ε=  100% (11)
ntest
5.2. Experimental verification
5.2.1. First step identification

5.2.2. Second step identification

ε (%) 98.12 99.07 98.56 97.23 100 100 100 100 96.57
5.3. Comparative analysis
5.3.1. Comparative analysis with conventional CNN
is shown in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11.
Fig. 11. Training Loss Comparison of Inception Network and Conventional CNN
The recognition accuracy and loss value also tend to be stable when the epoch number exceeds
60, and the difference in the accuracy in the training set between the Inception and conventional
CNN is about 0.1. And the loss value of Inception is significantly lower than CNN's. Therefore, the
Inception network has higher recognition accuracy, faster convergence, and smaller loss, compared
with the conventional CNN.
step.
Compared with the recognition results of the first step in Fig. 13, the second step of recognition
by using the TOPSIS algorithm can achieve effective recognition of the load for loads that were not
even successfully identified in the first step of recognition, and the recognition efficiency is greatly
improved. However, the average accuracy of the conventional CNN and TOPSIS step-by-step
recognition is 97.02%, which is lower than the recognition rate of the proposed algorithm. This is
because the Inception-TOPSIS model can reduce the load types in the first step of recognition, and
then combined with the second step of recognition, the recognition rate is greatly improved. Based
on the above analysis, the step-by-step recognition model of Inception-TOPSIS proposed in this
paper takes advantage of the reduced training parameters and improved overfitting resistance to
effectively improve the recognition accuracy.

ε (%) 97.78 94.26 97.35 96.05 96.98 95.68 98.72 98.03 97.58 98.09 96.68
5.3.2. Comparative analysis with other algorithms
are identified, and the ratio of the training set to the test set is still 8:2. The K-means algorithm from
[30] was introduced for comparison in the comparative analysis. Table 3 shows the identification
time and accuracy of different methods.

V-I CNN 12 85.51
other algorithms.
5.3.3. Comparative analysis of noise resistance
noise with different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), and the SNR is calculated by Eq. (12).
L
 (x ) i
2
SNR  10lg i 1
L
(12)
 (n )
i 1
i
2
Different SNRs
noise.
SNR (dB) 5 10 20 30 40
Accuracy (%) 81.34 86.97 90.03 91.27 94.46
6. Conclusion
experimental validation and comparative analysis using the PLAID dataset.

References
10.1109/TSG.2016.2598872.
learning approaches, recent developments and challenges, Energy and Buildings. 261 (2022) 111951,
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.111951.
[4] H. Y. Lam, G. S. K. F., W. K. Lee, A novel method to construct taxonomy of electrical appliances
based on load signatures, IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics. 53 (2007) 653-660,
doi: 10.1109/TCE.2007.381742.
[5] Z. Shi, B. Yin, An improved non-intrusive load identification method for V-I trajectory based on
Automation Control Conference (ITNEC). (2021) 1510-1516, doi:
10.1109/ITNEC52019.2021.9587263.
[6] Y. Liu, X. Wang, W. You, Non-intrusive load monitoring by voltage–current trajectory enabled
transfer learning, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. 10 (5) (2019) 5609-5619, doi:
10.1109/TSG.2018.2888581.
[7] Du, L., He, D., Harley, R. G., Habetler, T. G, Electric load classification by binary voltage–current
trajectory mapping. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. 7 (1) (2016) 358-365, doi:
10.1109/TSG.2015.2442225.
[8] J. Huan, C. Wang, H. Hong, Y. Sui, M. Yu, X. Pan, Non-intrusive load monitoring method based on
color encoding and deep learning, Science Technology and Engineering. 21 (21) (2021) 8901-8908.
10.1016/j.comcom.2021.06.023.
(2021) 34-42, doi: 10.12158/j.2096-3203.2021.06.005.
[11] W. Liu, C. Wang, Y. Li, Aggregation method of distributed load resources based on non-intrusive load
identification, Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2138 (2021) 24-25, doi: 10.1088/1742-
6596/2138/1/012004.
network, IEEE Access. 10 (2022) 11564-11573, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3145982.
[13] S. Wang, L. Guo, H. Chen, X. Deng, Non-intrusive load identification algorithm based on feature
fusion and deep learning, Automation of Electric Power Systems. 44 (9) (2019) 103-110, doi:
10.7500/AEPS2019 0625010.
engineering and design. 43 (4) (2022) 1195-1201.
[15] G. Qi, M. He, Convolutional neural network image classification method combined with Inception
module, Software Guide. 19 (3) (2020) 79-82.
10.19322/j.cnk i.issn.1006-4710.2019.03.012.
[18] Lin M, Chen Q, Yan S, Network in Network, Computer Science. (2013).
[19] Q. Zhou, J. Wei, M. Sun, C. Wang, J. Rong, J. Hu, T. Yang, Feature extraction for non-intrusive load
monitoring system, 2021 6th Asia Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering (ACPEE). (2021)
503-507, doi: 10.1109/ACPEE51499.2021.9436971.
10.1007/s13369-017-2696-7.
[21] S. Yu, Z. Liu, Y. Liu, Y. Li, Probing the structure of asymmetric planar molecules using odd-even
high harmonics, Laser & Optoelectronics Progress. 60 (01) (2023) 67-72, doi:10.3788/LOP212931.
[22] Z. Zai, S. Zhao, X. Zhu, Z. Zhang, F. Dong, Non-intrusive load monitoring based on color coding
and harmonic feature fusion, Electrical Engineering. 23 (12) (2022) 9-16. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-
3800.2022.12.002.
(ITAIC). (2020) 1764-1768, doi: 10.1109/ITAIC49862.2020.9338785.
[24] C. Chen, A novel multi-criteria decision-making model for building material supplier selection based
on entropy-AHP weighted TOPSIS, Entropy. 22 (2) (2020) 259, doi:
https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020259.
[25] J. Yin, X. Du, H. Yuan, M. Ji, X. Yang, S. Tian, Q. Wang, Y. Liang, TOPSIS power quality
comprehensive assessment based on a combination weighting method, 2021 IEEE 5th Conference on
Energy Internet and Energy System Integration (EI2). (2021) 1303-1307, doi:
10.1109/EI252483.2021.9713201.
[26] Z. Zhang, N. Cao, H. Lu, W. Ku, H. Zhu, Non-intrusive load recognition method based on combined
weighting-TOPSIS algorithm, 2022 7th International Conference on Intelligent Computing and
Signal Processing (ICSP). (2022) 204-209.
doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.09.087.
[29] H.Wu, H. Liu, Non-intrusive load transient identification based on multivariate LSTM neural network
and time series data augmentation, Sustainable Energy, Grids and Networks . 27 (2021) 100490, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segan.2021.100490.
[30] Z. Li, Z. Wang, W. Feng, G. An, Q. Wang, H. Chen, Non-intrusive electrical appliance load
identification method based on CNN and K-means clustering, Journal of University of Science and
Technology. 43 (4) (2022) 365-373, doi:10.7535/hbkd.2022yx04004.
Appendices


Revised Manuscript with Changes Marked


1. Introduction
states.
on multi-features.

I m min I
im n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max I min I
(1)
Vm min V
vm n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max V min V
matrix;   is the downward rounding sign.


steady-state:
N 1 2 πkn
j
X (k )   in e N
, k  0,1,, N  1 (2)
n 0
N 1
i (t )  I 0   2 I k cos  kwt  φik 
k 1
N 1
(3)
v(t )  V0   2Vk cos  kwt  φvk 
k 1
respectively. I k and Vk are the rms values of k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively. vk
and  ik are the phase angles of the k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively.
by Eq. (4):
N 1
P  V0 I 0   Vk I k cos  φvk  φik 
k 1
N 1
(4)
Q   Vk I k sin  φvk  φik 
k 1
power by Eq. (5), where apparent power is generally expressed as S  P2  Q2 .
P
λ (5)
S

W j1W j2W j3
Wj  M
(6)
W W W
j 1
1
j j
2
j
3


TP
Pre  (7)
TP  FP

TP
Rec  (8)
TP  FN

TP  TN
Acc  (9)

by Eq. (10).
2Pre  Rec
F1-score  (10)
Pre  Rec
nture
ε=  100% (11)
ntest


ε (%) 98.12 99.07 98.56 97.23 100 100 100 100 96.57
step.

ε (%) 97.78 94.26 97.35 96.05 96.98 95.68 98.72 98.03 97.58 98.09 96.68

V-I CNN 12 85.51
other algorithms.
L
 (x ) i
2
SNR  10lg i 1
L
(12)
 (n )
i 1
i
2
Different SNRs
noise.
SNR (dB) 5 10 20 30 40
Accuracy (%) 81.34 86.97 90.03 91.27 94.46
6. Conclusion

References
10.1109/TSG.2016.2598872.
doi: 10.1109/TCE.2007.381742.
10.1109/ITNEC52019.2021.9587263.
10.1109/TSG.2018.2888581.
10.1109/TSG.2015.2442225.
10.1016/j.comcom.2021.06.023.
(2021) 34-42, doi: 10.12158/j.2096-3203.2021.06.005.
6596/2138/1/012004.
10.7500/AEPS2019 0625010.
10.19322/j.cnk i.issn.1006-4710.2019.03.012.
503-507, doi: 10.1109/ACPEE51499.2021.9436971.
10.1007/s13369-017-2696-7.
3800.2022.12.002.
(ITAIC). (2020) 1764-1768, doi: 10.1109/ITAIC49862.2020.9338785.
https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020259.
10.1109/EI252483.2021.9713201.
doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.09.087.
Appendices


Revised manuscript PDF with no changes marked(Clean) - FOR
REVIEW PURPOSE


1. Introduction
states.
on multi-features.

I m min I
im n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max I min I
(1)
Vm min V
vm n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max V min V
matrix;   is the downward rounding sign.
Fig. 2. Binary V-I Trajectories with n = 32 for the Loads in PLAID


steady-state:
N −1 2 πkn
−j
X (k ) =  in e N
, k = 0,1,, N − 1 (2)
n=0
N −1
i (t ) = I 0 +  2 I k cos ( kwt + φik )
k =1
N −1
(3)
v(t ) = V0 +  2Vk cos ( kwt + φvk )
k =1
respectively. Ik and Vk are the rms values of k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively. vk
and ik are the phase angles of the k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively.
by Eq. (4):
N −1
P = V0 I 0 +  Vk I k cos ( φvk − φik )
k =1
N −1
(4)
Q =  Vk I k sin ( φvk − φik )
k =1
power by Eq. (5), where apparent power is generally expressed as S = P2 + Q2 .
P
λ= (5)
S

W j1W j2W j3
Wj = M
(6)
W W W
j =1
1
j j
2
j
3


TP
Pre = (7)
TP + FP

TP
Rec = (8)
TP + FN

TP + TN
Acc = (9)
TP + FP + TN + FN

by Eq. (10).
2 Pre  Rec
F1-score = (10)
Pre + Rec
nture
ε=  100% (11)
ntest


ε (%) 98.12 99.07 98.56 97.23 100 100 100 100 96.57
step.

ε (%) 97.78 94.26 97.35 96.05 96.98 95.68 98.72 98.03 97.58 98.09 96.68

V-I CNN 12 85.51
other algorithms.
L
 (x ) i
2
SNR = 10lg i =1
L
(12)
 (ni )2
i =1
Different SNRs
noise.
SNR (dB) 5 10 20 30 40
Accuracy (%) 81.34 86.97 90.03 91.27 94.46
6. Conclusion

References
10.1109/TSG.2016.2598872.
doi: 10.1109/TCE.2007.381742.
10.1109/ITNEC52019.2021.9587263.
10.1109/TSG.2018.2888581.
10.1109/TSG.2015.2442225.
10.1016/j.comcom.2021.06.023.
(2021) 34-42, doi: 10.12158/j.2096-3203.2021.06.005.
6596/2138/1/012004.
10.7500/AEPS2019 0625010.
10.19322/j.cnk i.issn.1006-4710.2019.03.012.
503-507, doi: 10.1109/ACPEE51499.2021.9436971.
10.1007/s13369-017-2696-7.
3800.2022.12.002.
(ITAIC). (2020) 1764-1768, doi: 10.1109/ITAIC49862.2020.9338785.
https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020259.
10.1109/EI252483.2021.9713201.
doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.09.087.
Appendices


Revised manuscript PDF with changes marked - FOR REVIEW
PURPOSE


1. Introduction
states.
on multi-features.

I m min I
im n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max I min I
(1)
Vm min V
vm n m 1, 2,3, ,n
max V min V
matrix;   is the downward rounding sign.
Fig. 2. Binary V-I Trajectories with n = 32 for the Loads in PLAID


steady-state:
N −1 2 πkn
−j
X (k ) =  in e N
, k = 0,1,, N − 1 (2)
n=0
N −1
i (t ) = I 0 +  2 I k cos ( kwt + φik )
k =1
N −1
(3)
v(t ) = V0 +  2Vk cos ( kwt + φvk )
k =1
respectively. Ik and Vk are the rms values of k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively. vk
and ik are the phase angles of the k -th harmonic current and voltage, respectively.
by Eq. (4):
N −1
P = V0 I 0 +  Vk I k cos ( φvk − φik )
k =1
N −1
(4)
Q =  Vk I k sin ( φvk − φik )
k =1
power by Eq. (5), where apparent power is generally expressed as S = P2 + Q2 .
P
λ= (5)
S

W j1W j2W j3
Wj = M
(6)
W W W
j =1
1
j j
2
j
3


TP
Pre = (7)
TP + FP

TP
Rec = (8)
TP + FN

TP + TN
Acc = (9)
TP + FP + TN + FN

by Eq. (10).
2 Pre  Rec
F1-score = (10)
Pre + Rec
nture
ε=  100% (11)
ntest


ε (%) 98.12 99.07 98.56 97.23 100 100 100 100 96.57
step.

ε (%) 97.78 94.26 97.35 96.05 96.98 95.68 98.72 98.03 97.58 98.09 96.68

V-I CNN 12 85.51
other algorithms.
L
 (x ) i
2
SNR = 10lg i =1
L
(12)
 (ni )2
i =1
Different SNRs
noise.
SNR (dB) 5 10 20 30 40
Accuracy (%) 81.34 86.97 90.03 91.27 94.46
6. Conclusion

References
10.1109/TSG.2016.2598872.
doi: 10.1109/TCE.2007.381742.
10.1109/ITNEC52019.2021.9587263.
10.1109/TSG.2018.2888581.
10.1109/TSG.2015.2442225.
10.1016/j.comcom.2021.06.023.
(2021) 34-42, doi: 10.12158/j.2096-3203.2021.06.005.
6596/2138/1/012004.
10.7500/AEPS2019 0625010.
10.19322/j.cnk i.issn.1006-4710.2019.03.012.
503-507, doi: 10.1109/ACPEE51499.2021.9436971.
10.1007/s13369-017-2696-7.
3800.2022.12.002.
(ITAIC). (2020) 1764-1768, doi: 10.1109/ITAIC49862.2020.9338785.
https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020259.
10.1109/EI252483.2021.9713201.
doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.09.087.
Appendices


A Step-By-Step Identification Method For Non-Intrusive Loads Based On Fused Features

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

A Step-By-Step Identification Method For Non-Intrusive Loads Based On Fused Features

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Step-By-Step Identification Method For Non-Intrusive Loads Based On Fused Features

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Electric Power Systems Research

A Step-by-Step Identification Method for Non-intrusive Loads based on Fused Features

Manuscript Number: EPSR-D-23-00960R1

Article Type: Research Paper

Keywords: Non-intrusive load recognition; Fused features; Inception network; TOPSIS

A Step-by-Step Identification Method for Non-intrusive

Na Luo, Chunning Na, Huan Pan and Feng Li

Appliance Identification Dataset (PLAID).

Keywords: Non-intrusive Load Recognition, Fused Features, Inception Network, TOPSIS

significantly improve recognition rates compared to conventional CNN.

TOPSIS in this paper.

The main contribution of this work lies in:

the Inception network and the TOPSIS algorithm.

on Fused Features and Inception-TOPSIS

Fig. 1. Flow Chart of The Algorithm in This Paper

3. First Step Identification based on Inception Network

3.1 Construction of V-I Trajectories

the differences in V-I trajectories.

n is the order of the matrix;   is the downward rounding sign.

trajectories can be effectively distinguished.

Fig. 2. Binary V-I Trajectories with n  32 for the Loads in PLAID

Concat is used to fuse the output data from each channel.

Fig. 3. Diagram of the Inception Module

Fig. 4. Flow Chart for Inception Network Recognition

4. Second Step Identification based on the TOPSIS algorithm

4.1 Acquisition of Fused Numerical Features

five odd harmonics are chosen as the harmonic features.

Where: w is the angular velocity.

power by Equation (5).

4.2 Second Step Identification by TOPSIS based on Fused Numerical Features

TOPSIS algorithm is an efficient multi-objective decision-making method, it enables the

comparison and selection of multiple schemes [21].

6 shows the identification process of the TOPSIS algorithm.

weight W j for the j -th feature as shown in Equation (6):

CRITIC weight, and PCA weight of the j -th feature, respectively.

the recognition rate can be obtained.

5.1 Evaluation Indicators

5.1.1 Evaluation Indicators in the First Step

can be obtained from Precision and Recall.

samples with positive predictions, it can be calculated by Equation (7).

positive results, it can be calculated by Equation (8).

calculated by Equation (9).

5.1.2 Evaluation Indicators in the Second Step

5.2 Experimental Verification

5.2.1 First Step Identification

Fig. 7. Training Process of Inception Network

Fig. 9. F1-scores of Inception Network of All Types of Loads

5.2.2 Second Step Identification

Table 1. Results for the Second Step Identification

not interfere with the identification of the Fan.

of the Inception-TOPSIS model. And it is possible to recognize different loads effectively by

combining numerical features and V-I trajectories.

5.3 Comparative Analysis

5.3.1 Comparative Analysis with Conventional CNN

loss, compared with the conventional CNN.

Fig. 12. F1-score of Conventional CNN of All Types of Loads

after classification with the Inception network.

5.3.2 Comparative Analysis with Other Algorithms