Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38649776›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Non-parametric quantile regression-based modelling of additive effects to solar irradiation in Southern Africa.

Amon Masache, Daniel Maposa, Precious Mdlongwa, Caston Sigauke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Amon MasacheDepartment of Statistics and Operations Research, National University of Science and Technology, Ascot, P.O. Box AC 939, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe.
Daniel Maposa *Department of Statistics and Operations Research, University of Limpopo, Private Bag X1106, Polokwane, Sovenga, 0727, South Africa. danmaposa@gmail.com.
Precious Mdlongwa *Department of Statistics and Operations Research, National University of Science and Technology, Ascot, P.O. Box AC 939, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe.
Caston Sigauke *Department of Mathematical and Computational Sciences, University of Venda, Venda, Thohoyandou, 0950, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modelling of solar irradiation is paramount to renewable energy management. This warrants the inclusion of additive effects to predict solar irradiation. Modelling of additive effects to solar irradiation can improve the forecasting accuracy of prediction frameworks. To help develop the frameworks, this current study modelled the additive effects using non-parametric quantile regression (QR). The approach applies quantile splines to approximate non-parametric components when finding the best relationships between covariates and the response variable. However, some additive effects are perceived as linear. Thus, the study included the partial linearly additive quantile regression model (PLAQR) in the quest to find how best the additive effects can be modelled. As a result, a comparative investigation on the forecasting performances of the PLAQR, an additive quantile regression (AQR) model and the new quantile generalised additive model (QGAM) using out-of-sample and probabilistic forecasting metric evaluations was done. Forecasted density plots, Murphy diagrams and results from the Diebold-Mariano (DM) hypothesis test were also analysed. The density plot, the curves on the Murphy diagram and most metric scores computed for the QGAM were slightly better than for the PLAQR and AQR models. That is, even though the DM test indicates that the PLAQR and AQR models are less accurate than the QGAM, we could not conclude an outright greater forecasting performance of the QGAM than the PLAQR or AQR models. However, in situations of probabilistic forecasting metric preferences, each model can be prioritised to be applied to the metric where it performed slightly the best. The three models performed differently in different locations, but the location was not a significant factor in their performances. In contrast, forecasting horizon and sample size influenced model performance differently in the three additive models. The performance variations also depended on the metric being evaluated. Therefore, the study has established the best forecasting horizons and sample sizes for the different metrics. It was finally concluded that a 20% forecasting horizon and a minimum sample size of 10000 data points are ideal when modelling additive effects of solar irradiation using non-parametric QR.

Indexed as

Additive effectsAdditive modelsNon-parametric quantile regressionPinball lossQuantile splinesSolar irradiation

Identifiers

PMID38649776
PMCPMC11035626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.