arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.09255

Full-Feature versus Limited-Input Machine Learning for Residential Energy Estimation: A Comparative Analysis of RECS and ResStock Under Realistic Input Constraints

Aditya Ramnarayan·Fatih Evren·Patti Gunderson·Samuel Rosenberg
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Residential energy estimates are often needed before detailed envelope characteristics, equipment efficiencies, infiltration, sensor, or billing data are available. This study quantifies the trade-off between predictive accuracy and input accessibility using two nationally representative U.S. residential-energy datasets: the survey-based Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and the simulation-based ResStock dataset. Full-feature models were first used to establish dataset-specific performance benchmarks. For total-energy estimation, the models were subsequently restricted to ten low-burden variables obtainable from occupants, administrative records, or location-based weather data without an on-site energy audit. Among CatBoost, XGBoost, LightGBM, Random Forest, and Neural Networks, CatBoost consistently achieved the highest predictive performance for the full-feature analysis, reaching R2 = 0.90 for ResStock and R2 = 0.73 for RECS. When the feature set was restricted to ten homeowner-accessible inputs to simulate realistic deployment conditions, model performance converged to R2 = 0.61 for RECS and R2 = 0.62 for ResStock, showing that algorithmic complexity cannot fully compensate for missing physical and behavioral information. However, for a more homogeneous ResStock cohort consisting of single-family detached, natural-gas-heated homes in Climate Zone 6A constructed between 2000 and 2010, a reduced-input model improved accuracy to R2 = 0.85, demonstrating the value of targeted modeling for homogeneous populations. The results indicate that tree-based ensemble models can serve as high-fidelity emulators of national-scale residential energy datasets. However, careful consideration of feature availability, dataset origin (empirical vs. synthetic), and applicable use cases are also important.

Explore related subjects

cs.LG

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Aditya Ramnarayan, Fatih Evren, Patti Gunderson, Samuel Rosenberg. 2026-08-10. Full-Feature versus Limited-Input Machine Learning for Residential Energy Estimation: A Comparative Analysis of RECS and ResStock Under Realistic Input Constraints. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.09255

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG↗