Benchmarking State Space Models, Transformers, and Recurrent Networks for US Grid Forecasting

Fuente: arXiv
Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hong, Sunki, Lee, Jisoo
Formato: Preprint
Publicado: 2026
Materias:
Acceso en línea:
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
_version_ 1866910070006087680
author Hong, Sunki
Lee, Jisoo
author_facet Hong, Sunki
Lee, Jisoo
contents Selecting the right deep learning model for power grid forecasting is challenging, as performance heavily depends on the data available to the operator. This paper presents a comprehensive benchmark of five modern neural architectures: two state space models (PowerMamba, S-Mamba), two Transformers (iTransformer, PatchTST), and a traditional LSTM. We evaluate these models on hourly electricity demand across six diverse US power grids for forecast windows between 24 and 168 hours. To ensure a fair comparison, we adapt each model with specialized temporal processing and a modular layer that cleanly integrates weather covariates. Our results reveal that there is no single best model for all situations. When forecasting using only historical load, PatchTST and the state space models provide the highest accuracy. However, when explicit weather data is added to the inputs, the rankings reverse: iTransformer improves its accuracy three times more efficiently than PatchTST. By controlling for model size, we confirm that this advantage stems from the architecture's inherent ability to mix information across different variables. Extending our evaluation to solar generation, wind power, and wholesale prices further demonstrates that model rankings depend on the forecast task: PatchTST excels on highly rhythmic signals like solar, while state space models are better suited for the chaotic fluctuations of wind and price. Ultimately, this benchmark provides grid operators with actionable guidelines for selecting the optimal forecasting architecture based on their specific data environments.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2602_21415
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Benchmarking State Space Models, Transformers, and Recurrent Networks for US Grid Forecasting
Hong, Sunki
Lee, Jisoo
Machine Learning
Systems and Control
68T07, 62M20
I.2.6; G.3; J.2
Selecting the right deep learning model for power grid forecasting is challenging, as performance heavily depends on the data available to the operator. This paper presents a comprehensive benchmark of five modern neural architectures: two state space models (PowerMamba, S-Mamba), two Transformers (iTransformer, PatchTST), and a traditional LSTM. We evaluate these models on hourly electricity demand across six diverse US power grids for forecast windows between 24 and 168 hours. To ensure a fair comparison, we adapt each model with specialized temporal processing and a modular layer that cleanly integrates weather covariates. Our results reveal that there is no single best model for all situations. When forecasting using only historical load, PatchTST and the state space models provide the highest accuracy. However, when explicit weather data is added to the inputs, the rankings reverse: iTransformer improves its accuracy three times more efficiently than PatchTST. By controlling for model size, we confirm that this advantage stems from the architecture's inherent ability to mix information across different variables. Extending our evaluation to solar generation, wind power, and wholesale prices further demonstrates that model rankings depend on the forecast task: PatchTST excels on highly rhythmic signals like solar, while state space models are better suited for the chaotic fluctuations of wind and price. Ultimately, this benchmark provides grid operators with actionable guidelines for selecting the optimal forecasting architecture based on their specific data environments.
title Benchmarking State Space Models, Transformers, and Recurrent Networks for US Grid Forecasting
topic Machine Learning
Systems and Control
68T07, 62M20
I.2.6; G.3; J.2
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.21415