ArticleScientific reports2026
Loss functions in deep residual networks for short-term load forecasting: a systematic analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Understanding the influence of training schedules on short-term load forecasting via deep residual networks: An empirical study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The dependable and effective operation of contemporary electricity systems depends on short-term load forecasting (STLF). Although Deep Residual Networks (DRNs) have proven to be highly predictive, little is known about how loss functions affect forecasting performance and optimization behavior. This study presents a systematic evaluation of various loss functions within the original DRN and Principal Component Analysis-Deep Residual Network (PCA-DRN) frameworks under a unified experimental setting. Traditional, robust, and task-specific Penalized loss functions are examined using real-world datasets with distinct climatic and load characteristics. The results show that the Charbonnier loss consistently achieves the best overall performance across all evaluation metrics under the original DRN framework. However, under the PCA-DRN framework, a performance divergence emerges: while the Charbonnier loss remains optimal for point-forecast error metrics, the Penalized loss demonstrates superior performance in squared-error-based and correlation-oriented metrics. Moreover, PCA-DRN consistently outperforms the original DRN, highlighting the effectiveness of dimensionality reduction in improving feature representation and generalization capability. The statistical significance of the reported improvements is further confirmed using bootstrap-based statistical analysis. These findings suggest that loss function selection should be jointly considered with data characteristics and feature representation, rather than treated as an isolated design choice, to achieve robust and accurate STLF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.