跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.08929 · v1

Grid-Oriented Probabilistic Load Forecasting for AI Data Centers

首次提交 2026-11-06 11:19
版本更新 2026-11-06 11:19
雷达观测 2026-11-09 10:16
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Probabilistic load forecasts for AI data centers need to represent both uncertainty under changing workloads and temporal dependence to support grid operations. This paper develops an open, grid-oriented benchmark using measured GPU power from a 448-GPU AI cluster. Forecasts are evaluated through four stages: probabilistic prediction, online uncertainty calibration, temporal scenario generation, and horizon-wide reserve sizing. Following a change in cluster utilization, a quantile LightGBM forecast achieves only 63.4% coverage for a nominal 90% interval, while online regime-conditioned calibration increases coverage to 87.3%. Even with well-calibrated marginal forecasts, independent sampling produces unrealistic ramp distributions and excessive reserve procurement. Reconstructing temporal dependence from historical forecast errors reduces the discrepancy in ramp statistics and lowers realized reserve cost by 7.4-10.6% across three forecasting tasks. These findings show that marginal forecast quality alone is insufficient for operational decisions and motivate joint evaluation of calibration, temporal structure, and decision outcomes.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-06 11:19 · 最新观测版本

Grid-Oriented Probabilistic Load Forecasting for AI Data Centers

Probabilistic load forecasts for AI data centers need to represent both uncertainty under changing workloads and temporal dependence to support grid operations. This paper develops an open, grid-oriented benchmark using measured GPU power from a 448-GPU AI cluster. Forecasts are evaluated through four stages: probabilistic prediction, online uncertainty calibration, temporal scenario generation, and horizon-wide reserve sizing. Following a change in cluster utilization, a quantile LightGBM forecast achieves only 63.4% coverage for a nominal 90% interval, while online regime-conditioned calibration increases coverage to 87.3%. Even with well-calibrated marginal forecasts, independent sampling produces unrealistic ramp distributions and excessive reserve procurement. Reconstructing temporal dependence from historical forecast errors reduces the discrepancy in ramp statistics and lowers realized reserve cost by 7.4-10.6% across three forecasting tasks. These findings show that marginal forecast quality alone is insufficient for operational decisions and motivate joint evaluation of calibration, temporal structure, and decision outcomes.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗