IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2005.14670.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The energy distance for ensemble and scenario reduction

Author

Listed:
  • Florian Ziel

Abstract

Scenario reduction techniques are widely applied for solving sophisticated dynamic and stochastic programs, especially in energy and power systems, but also used in probabilistic forecasting, clustering and estimating generative adversarial networks (GANs). We propose a new method for ensemble and scenario reduction based on the energy distance which is a special case of the maximum mean discrepancy (MMD). We discuss the choice of energy distance in detail, especially in comparison to the popular Wasserstein distance which is dominating the scenario reduction literature. The energy distance is a metric between probability measures that allows for powerful tests for equality of arbitrary multivariate distributions or independence. Thanks to the latter, it is a suitable candidate for ensemble and scenario reduction problems. The theoretical properties and considered examples indicate clearly that the reduced scenario sets tend to exhibit better statistical properties for the energy distance than a corresponding reduction with respect to the Wasserstein distance. We show applications to a Bernoulli random walk and two real data based examples for electricity demand profiles and day-ahead electricity prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Florian Ziel, 2020. "The energy distance for ensemble and scenario reduction," Papers 2005.14670, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2020.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2005.14670
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.14670
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrychowicz, Mateusz & Olek, Blazej & Przybylski, Jakub, 2017. "Review of the methods for evaluation of renewable energy sources penetration and ramping used in the Scenario Outlook and Adequacy Forecast 2015. Case study for Poland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 703-714.
    2. Aude Geneway & Gabriel Peyré & Marco Cuturi, 2017. "Learning Generative Models with Sinkhorn Divergences," Working Papers 2017-83, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    3. Gneiting, Tilmann & Raftery, Adrian E., 2007. "Strictly Proper Scoring Rules, Prediction, and Estimation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 102, pages 359-378, March.
    4. Martin Glanzer & Georg Ch. Pflug, 2020. "Multiscale stochastic optimization: modeling aspects and scenario generation," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 1-34, January.
    5. Di Somma, M. & Graditi, G. & Heydarian-Forushani, E. & Shafie-khah, M. & Siano, P., 2018. "Stochastic optimal scheduling of distributed energy resources with renewables considering economic and environmental aspects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(PA), pages 272-287.
    6. René Henrion & Christian Küchler & Werner Römisch, 2009. "Scenario reduction in stochastic programming with respect to discrepancy distances," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 67-93, May.
    7. Carsten Gottschlich & Dominic Schuhmacher, 2014. "The Shortlist Method for Fast Computation of the Earth Mover's Distance and Finding Optimal Solutions to Transportation Problems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-10, October.
    8. Patrizia Beraldi & Maria Bruni, 2014. "A clustering approach for scenario tree reduction: an application to a stochastic programming portfolio optimization problem," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(3), pages 934-949, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Espen Bernton & Pierre E. Jacob & Mathieu Gerber & Christian P. Robert, 2019. "Approximate Bayesian computation with the Wasserstein distance," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 81(2), pages 235-269, April.
    2. Weiguo Zhang & Xiaolei He, 2022. "A New Scenario Reduction Method Based on Higher-Order Moments," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1903-1918, July.
    3. Azar, Pablo D. & Micali, Silvio, 2018. "Computational principal agent problems," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    4. Angelica Gianfreda & Francesco Ravazzolo & Luca Rossini, 2023. "Large Time‐Varying Volatility Models for Hourly Electricity Prices," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 85(3), pages 545-573, June.
    5. Tobias Fissler & Yannick Hoga, 2024. "How to Compare Copula Forecasts?," Papers 2410.04165, arXiv.org.
    6. Davide Pettenuzzo & Francesco Ravazzolo, 2016. "Optimal Portfolio Choice Under Decision‐Based Model Combinations," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(7), pages 1312-1332, November.
    7. Rubio, F.J. & Steel, M.F.J., 2011. "Inference for grouped data with a truncated skew-Laplace distribution," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(12), pages 3218-3231, December.
    8. Hwang, Eunju, 2022. "Prediction intervals of the COVID-19 cases by HAR models with growth rates and vaccination rates in top eight affected countries: Bootstrap improvement," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    9. Nazim Hajiyev & Klaudia Smoląg & Ali Abbasov & Valeriy Prasolov, 2020. "Energy War Strategies: The 21st Century Experience," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, November.
    10. R de Fondeville & A C Davison, 2018. "High-dimensional peaks-over-threshold inference," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 105(3), pages 575-592.
    11. Armantier, Olivier & Treich, Nicolas, 2013. "Eliciting beliefs: Proper scoring rules, incentives, stakes and hedging," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 17-40.
    12. Domenico Piccolo & Rosaria Simone, 2019. "The class of cub models: statistical foundations, inferential issues and empirical evidence," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 28(3), pages 389-435, September.
    13. Finn Lindgren, 2015. "Comments on: Comparing and selecting spatial predictors using local criteria," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 24(1), pages 35-44, March.
    14. Chuliá, Helena & Garrón, Ignacio & Uribe, Jorge M., 2024. "Daily growth at risk: Financial or real drivers? The answer is not always the same," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 762-776.
    15. Laura Liu & Hyungsik Roger Moon & Frank Schorfheide, 2023. "Forecasting with a panel Tobit model," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(1), pages 117-159, January.
    16. Warne, Anders, 2023. "DSGE model forecasting: rational expectations vs. adaptive learning," Working Paper Series 2768, European Central Bank.
    17. James Mitchell & Aubrey Poon & Dan Zhu, 2024. "Constructing density forecasts from quantile regressions: Multimodality in macrofinancial dynamics," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(5), pages 790-812, August.
    18. Rafael Frongillo, 2022. "Quantum Information Elicitation," Papers 2203.07469, arXiv.org.
    19. Karimi, Majid & Zaerpour, Nima, 2022. "Put your money where your forecast is: Supply chain collaborative forecasting with cost-function-based prediction markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 1035-1049.
    20. Peysakhovich, Alexander & Plagborg-Møller, Mikkel, 2012. "A note on proper scoring rules and risk aversion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 357-361.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2005.14670. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.