GNN 负荷预测诊断协议:拆分参数共享与邻居访问的贡献
A Diagnostic Protocol for GNNs in Electricity Load Forecasting: Separating Parameter Sharing from Neighborhood Access
用 GNN 做负荷预测的可以先看看,论文给了三个参照模型加重连测试,帮你判断图结构到底有没有用,还是只是参数共享在起作用。
论文提出一套诊断协议,用三个参照模型(每节点独立网络、无邻居的共享网络、去边 GNN)拆解图神经网络在负荷预测中的收益来源,并用度保持重连检验邻居身份是否重要。在英国低压馈线数据上,参数共享恢复了节点专用模型与 GNN 误差差距的约三分之二,加边带来的增益有一半以上在重连后消失。在法国区域负荷和公开客户用电序列上,边的贡献不稳定,三种数据集中边均未构成 GNN 相对节点专用模型优势的主要部分。论文结论是:预测收益需先与每节点和共享参照模型对比,才能归因于图结构。
A Diagnostic Protocol for GNNs in Electricity Load Forecasting: Separating Parameter Sharing from Neighborhood Access
A graph neural network (GNN) forecasting a collection of load series combines two mechanisms, sharing parameters across series and reading neighboring series, and a gain over a non-graph model may come from either; telling them apart decides whether a graph is worth maintaining. We propose a model diagnostic protocol that compares the GNN with three reference models: a per-node network, a network shared across nodes without neighbors, and the same GNN without edges. Degree-preserving rewiring tests whether neighbor identity matters. After a tuned benchmark on regional load in France and on low-voltage feeders in the UK, we apply the protocol to deliberately short node histories, as when non-stationary demand leaves only recent observations relevant: the feeders, within one week, and a public dataset of client consumption series. On the feeders, sharing parameters recovers most of the error gap between node-specific models and GNNs, about two thirds against a regularized one. Adding the edges to an otherwise identical backbone brings a smaller gain, half or more of which disappears under rewiring. On the client series, the neighbor mean degrades the per-node model on the shorter window and the edges' gain is not consistently distinguishable from zero; on the regions of France, where each node's own history is already informative, the ranking between per-node models and GNNs changes with tuning. A synthetic study points to noisy local measurements as one regime where neighbors help. In an exploratory online aggregation, graph and non-graph forecasters appear complementary, and the weight assigned to GNNs is not proportional to their contribution. In none of the three datasets do the edges account for most of a GNN's advantage over node-specific models, so a forecasting gain should be credited to the graph only after comparison with per-node and shared references.