Variability of Behaviour in Electricity Load
Profile Clustering; Who Does Things at the
Same Time Each Day?
Ian Dent1 , Tony Craig2 , Uwe Aickelin1 , and Tom Rodden1

arXiv:1409.1043v1 [cs.LG] 3 Sep 2014

1

School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK,
psxid@nottingham.ac.uk,
WWW home page: http://ima.ac.uk/dent
2
The James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, UK

Abstract. UK electricity market changes provide opportunities to alter
households’ electricity usage patterns for the benefit of the overall electricity network. Work on clustering similar households has concentrated
on daily load profiles and the variability in regular household behaviours
has not been considered. Those households with most variability in regular activities may be the most receptive to incentives to change timing.
Whether using the variability of regular behaviour allows the creation
of more consistent groupings of households is investigated and compared
with daily load profile clustering. 204 UK households are analysed to find
repeating patterns (motifs). Variability in the time of the motif is used
as the basis for clustering households. Different clustering algorithms are
assessed by the consistency of the results.
Findings show that variability of behaviour, using motifs, provides more
consistent groupings of households across different clustering algorithms
and allows for more efficient targeting of behaviour change interventions.

1

Background and Motivation

The electricity market in the UK is undergoing dramatic changes. Legal, social
and political drivers for a more carbon efficient electricity network, along with
the dramatically increased flow of data from households through the deployment
of smart meters, requires a transformation of existing practices. In particular, the
change of the frequency of sampling of electricity usage, by using smart meters,
alters the level of understanding of households’ behaviour that is possible [1].
One approach to address the pressures on the electricity network is the application of Demand Side Management (DSM) techniques to achieve changes
in consumer behaviour. DSM is defined as “systematic utility and government
activities designed to change the amount and/or timing of the customer’s use
of electricity” for the collective benefit of society, the utility company, and its
customers [2]. The peak time for electricity usage in the UK is during the early
evening and the successful application of techniques to reduce, or move, the peak
usage would improve the overall efficiency of the electricity network.

To allow selection of appropriate DSM interventions, a good understanding
of the existing behaviour of households is needed. Firstly, knowledge is needed
on an individual household that can be deduced from house-wide electricity
metering. Secondly, a method is required to group large numbers of households
into a manageable number of archetypal groups where the members display
similar characteristics. This approach allows for cost effective targeting of the
most appropriate subset of customers whilst allowing the company management
to deal with a manageable number of archetypes [3].
There is an extensive body of work on clustering households which includes
comparing or combining timed meter readings to create additional attributes
that contribute to the quality of the clustering [4]. However, little work has
focused on how the daily activity patterns of the household vary from day to
day and how this can be used for clustering. For instance, some households will
be creatures of habit and will eat their evening meal at almost the same time
each evening, whilst others have a much more variable activity pattern and will
eat at different times. Ellegȧrd and Palm [5] have investigated the variability of
behaviour using diaries and interviews but have not used analysis of meter data.
Clustering households using their degree of variability in behaviour, as shown
by electricity consumption, provides a way of identifying the subset of electricity
users who may be most receptive to an intervention to influence their activity
patterns. The intervention may be to reward households for NOT changing their
current pattern of usage if it is already as desired by the utility company.
This paper addresses the question of whether making use of the variability of
behaviour (as shown by the electricity meter data) provides “better” groupings
of households for the purpose of DSM than those provided by using daily load
profiles. The judgement of “better” is measured by implementing a number of
different clustering techniques and measuring the degree of overlap between the
clusters found. A consistent set of clusters across the different clustering algorithms implies a better, and more useful, approach to generating the clusters.
The investigation of household electricity load profiles is an important area of
research given the centrality of such patterns in directly addressing the needs of
the electricity industry, both now and in the future. This work extends existing
load profile work by taking electricity meter data streams and developing new
ways of representing the household that can be used as the basis for clustering
using existing data mining techniques. The identification of repeating motifs and
the investigation of how the timing of the motifs varies from day to day, as a key
behavioural trait of the household, is a novel area of research. An improvement in
creating useful archetypes can have major financial and environmental benefits.

2
2.1

Methods and Technical Solutions
Load Profiling

There has been extensive research on determining daily load profiles to represent
a household’s electricity usage [6]. In many cases, (e.g., [7]), the daily load profiles

are used as the basis for clustering “similar” households together to develop a
small set of archetypal profiles which can be used for targeting of behaviour
change interventions. Previous work has used different clustering techniques with
the majority of the published literature using hierarchical clustering.
The common approach is to define a subset of the data (e.g. by season and/or
by day of the week) and then to create average daily profiles for a household from
the electricity meter data. The shapes of these daily profiles are then clustered
to group similar shapes together. A representative profile is defined (e.g. by
averaging all the members of the cluster) to produce a archetypal daily load
profile for that cluster of households.
Previous work has not investigated how households may exhibit different
behaviour from day to day and how these differences may be used as a distinguishing feature of the household and a basis for clustering.
2.2

Motifs

The electricity meter data reading stream from a household can be plotted as
a graph of usage against time and regular activities appear as similar shaped
patterns. Short patterns that repeat are defined as “motifs” and detection of
these motifs, and their timing, can inform understanding of household behaviour.
This work uses the SAX (Symbolic Aggregate approXimation) technique
which allows symbolic representation of time series data [8,9]. Other motif finding
algorithms could also be incorporated into the proposed approach to identify the
flexibility of behaviour (e.g. [10]). To assess variability within a household, it is
necessary to detect the repeating motifs that are assumed to signify particular
activities (e.g., cooking the evening meal). These are generally of a similar shape
on different days but show some differences due to noise caused by other activities
within the household (e.g., a fridge automatically running). The SAX approach of
symbolising the real valued meter readings is useful as it allows for approximate
matching (as various ranges of readings map to a single symbol).
Lines et al [11] applies motif finding to UK data to detect the use of particular
appliances, drawn from a set of known appliances. This contrasts with the focus
in this paper which is to find interesting, repeating patterns of behaviour without
the need to define the activity that the motif represents. Appliances that can
be consistently and accurately detected can be used with the approach detailed
here by extending the analysis of the timing of repeating motifs to the analysis
of variability of timing of appliance usage.
2.3

North East Scotland Electricity Monitoring Project (NESEMP)

This study makes use of data collected as part of the ongoing NESEMP which
is examining the relationship between different types of energy feedback and
psycho-social measures including individual environmental attitudes, household
characteristics, and everyday behaviours. As part of this ongoing project, several
hundred households are being monitored and the electricity usage is recorded
every five minutes using CurrentCost monitors [12].

After removing data for households with insufficient readings, the data is
loaded into a MySQL database and the readings are aligned with exact 5 minute
boundaries (e.g. 1pm, 1.05pm, etc.) by interpolation between the actual readings.
This is achieved by calculating the reading at an exact 5 minute point (e.g.
1.05pm) by considering the actual readings before and after that time and by
calculating the reading such that the total usage over a longer period is the same
whether the interpolated readings or the original actual readings are used [13].
This results in a set of 288 readings (one for every 5 minute period in the day)
for each of the households in the database.
Each day of sampling is labelled in a number of ways such as “working day”
or “summer” to aid selection of particular subsets of data.
2.4

Detecting Motifs

To find motifs within the data, each period of interest within the day (e.g.,
the peak period) for each household is examined by taking a moving window
over the period. The subset of the meter readings within the moving window
is then converted into a string and stored. Next, the window moves on by one
time period (5 minutes) and the conversion into a string is repeated. Using an
alphabet size of 5 and a motif size of 6 (i.e., 30 minutes), analysing the 4pm
to 8pm period provides a total of 49 x 5 minute readings for each day. As the
interest is in changes in usage rather than absolute usage, these readings are
compared with adjacent readings in time to produce 48 values (one for each 5
minute period) representing the change in usage since the last 5 minute reading.
This results in 42 motifs stored for each day for each household (one for each
possible 30 minute period within the peak time). Fig. 1 shows an example of how
the symbolised motifs are built up. The top graph shows the 5 minute readings
for the 4 hour peak period. A sliding window of 6 readings (30 minutes) is
taken across the peak period with the first 2 and the last window shown. Each
window is normalised within the values in the window and then translated into
the symbolised representations as shown at the bottom of the diagram.
The analysis uses an alphabet of 5 symbols (i.e., the letters “a” to “e”) to
represent the motifs. 5 is selected as a reasonable compromise between having
too few symbols, and thus not detecting changes in electricity consumption, and
having too many and thus generating too many patterns that do not repeat. The
symbolisation translates readings within a particular range into a given letter
and thus similar, although not identical, readings are translated into the same
letter. The resulting motifs for 2 windows may be identical whereas the original
readings may only be approximately similar.
The motif size selected is 6 corresponding to a 30 minute (i.e., 6 x 5 minutes)
period. This figure was selected as the UK electricity settlement market uses a
30 minute period [14] and 30 minutes is also a reasonable period that will allow
time for activities such as showering.
The motifs are built from the graph shape without regard to absolute value
of the data. A possible effect of this is to find motifs within what is the general

Fig. 1. Example of symbolisation (alphabet of 5, motif length of 6)

noise associated with the meter readings. This is avoided by ignoring any motifs
within a window which have a range of less than 100W.
As the motifs are created by shifting a moving window over the stream of
data, overlapping periods are considered and periods with no activity except for
one change in meter reading will lead to a series of motifs that are similar. For
example, a long period of no activity except for a jump of +200W will lead to
motifs being found such as ccccca, ccccac, cccacc, etc. As only one of these is
interesting for further analysis, the others are excluded.
The top motif (the one that occurs most often within a household) is further
examined for the times when the motif occurs on each day. The number of
times the motif occurs, and the standard deviation of the time of occurrence,
are calculated for each household. Similarly, the second and third most common
motifs within a household are identified and the variability in timing calculated.
Other useful measures relating to the motifs found within a household are
also calculated including the number of different motifs (occurring at least twice)
and the number of different motifs occurring on at least 30% of the days sampled
for the household. The 30% figure is selected as a reasonable number to ensure
only regularly repeating patterns are considered.
The attributes calculated for each household and used as input to the clustering algorithms are:

1. Number of occurrences of the motif occurring most frequently during the
peak period.
2. Variability in timing of the occurrence of the most frequent motif within
the household. This is represented by the standard deviation of the timing
(measured in minutes) around the mean start time.
3. Number of occurrences of the second most frequent motif.
4. Variability in timing of the second most frequent motif.
5. Number of occurrences of the third most frequent motif.
6. Variability in timing of the third most frequent motif.
7. Total number of motifs for the household that occur at least twice.
8. Total number of different motifs that occur on at least 30% of days.
2.5

Clustering Algorithms

Various clustering techniques are selected for evaluation of the different approaches to analysing the data. Note that, whilst possibly a useful additional
benefit, this work does not focus on selecting the “best” clustering algorithm
but uses a selection of algorithms to assess the benefits or otherwise of making
use of the motif variability information.
Based on the review by Chicco [6] the following clustering algorithms are
selected as the most commonly used in previous work:
1. Kmeans is a well known algorithm that occurs in a number of examples of
previous load profiling work. The algorithm requires a number of clusters (k)
and works by randomly selecting an initial k locations for the centres of the
clusters. Each data point is then assigned to one of the clusters by selecting
the centre nearest to that data point. Once all the data points are assigned,
each collection of points is considered, the new centre of the allocated points
is calculated and the centre for that cluster is reassigned. The points are then
reallocated to their new nearest centre and the algorithm continues until no
changes are made to the allocations of points for an iteration [15].
2. Fuzzy c means. This provides an extension of the kmeans algorithm allowing
partial membership to more than one cluster. The algorithm provides additional output showing the degree of membership that each household has of
each of the derived clusters [16]. For this analysis, each household is assigned
to the cluster for which they have the highest degree of membership.
3. Self Organising Maps. The Self Organising Map (SOM) is a neural network
algorithm that can be used to map a high dimension set of data into a lower
dimension representation. In this paper, the mapping is to a 2 dimensional set
of representations which are arranged in a hexagonal map. Each sample (e.g.,
the average load profile for a given household) is assigned to a position in the
map depending on the closeness of the sample to the existing nodes assigned
to each position in the map (using a Euclidean measure of distance). Initially
the nodes are assigned at random but, over time, the map produces an
arrangement where similar samples are placed closely together and dissimilar
samples are placed far apart [17].

4. Hierarchical clustering. Most of the published load profiling work has used
hierarchical clustering and this approach has the benefit of providing easily
understood rules for cluster membership. The algorithm uses a dissimilarity
matrix for the households and, starting initially with each household in its
own cluster, proceeds by joining clusters which are most similar. The hierarchy is cut at a point to provide the desired number of clusters [18]. The
Euclidean distance is used when creating the dissimilarity matrix and the
Ward agglomeration method [19] is used for combining clusters. The Ward
method minimises the sum of squares of possible clusters when selecting
households to combine. Other agglomeration techniques tend to create a few
small clusters containing extreme valued households plus one large cluster
containing the remainder of the households.
5. Random Forests [20] is used to create a dissimilarity matrix which is used
with Partitioning Around Medoids (pam) to form clusters. This is implemented using the R package randomForest [21].
A common issue is the appropriate setting for the number of clusters. To
match common practice within the electricity industry, 8 clusters are selected.
The UK electricity industry has worked with 8 load profiles since the 1990s
[22]. Figueiredo et al [23] report that the Portuguese electricity utility aim for a
number of clusters between 6 and 9.
2.6

Cluster Validity Measures

To assess the benefits of a particular cluster solution an appropriate cluster
validity index needs to be used. Many have been considered in the literature
with the Mean Index Adequacy (MIA) and the Cluster Dispersion Indicator
(CDI) [24] used in most of the published load profiling work. Lower values for
the CDI and MIA measure denote “better” solutions.
The data to be clustered consists of M records numbered as m = 1, ..M .
Each record has H attributes numbered as h = 1, ..H. The hth attribute for the
ith record is designated as mi (h).
The data is clustered into K clusters (numbered as k = 1, .., K). Each cluster
has Rk members where r(k) is the rth record assigned to cluster k and C(k) is
the calculated centre of the cluster k.
The distance (d) between 2 records is defined as:
v
u
H
u1 X
(mi (h) − mj (h))2
(1)
d(mi , mj ) = t
H
h=1

where mi (h) and mj (h) are the hth attributes for two records, mi and mj .
ˆ
The “within set distance” d(S)
of the members of a set, S with N members
(sj where j = 1, .., N ) is defined as:
v
u
N X
N
u 1 X
ˆ
d(S) = t
d2 (sn , sp )
(2)
2N n=1 p=1

The MIA gives a value which relies on the amount by which each cluster is
compact - i.e., if the members in the cluster are close together the MIA is low.
v
u
K X
u1 X
M IA = t
d2 (r(k) , C(k) )
(3)
K
r
k=1

The CDI depends on the distance between the members of the same cluster
(as for the MIA) but also incorporates information on the distances between the
representative load diagrams (i.e., the centroids) for each cluster. This therefore
measures both the compactness of the clusters and the amount by which each
cluster differs from the others.
v
u
K
X
1 u
t1
dˆ2 (Rk )
(4)
CDI =
ˆ
K
d(C)
k=1

where C is the set of cluster centres and Rk is the kth cluster members set.
2.7

Processing

UK specific data is used to generate average daily load profiles for each household
which are clustered to provide a baseline for comparison. Selected clustering
algorithms are applied to the data and validity indexes are used to produce a
measure of the quality of the partitions found.
Next, the novel approach of identifying motifs within the data, and measuring
the variability in timing of the motifs, is used to generate a new set of derived
data using the same UK dataset. The same clustering algorithms and validity
indexes are then applied to this dataset. In addition, the results are compared
with the baseline obtained from the average daily load profiles in the first step.
2.8

Assessing the Results

To assess the consistency of clustering solutions, the different arrangements of
households into clusters are compared. The consistency of the clusters obtained
from the different clustering algorithms is used as a measure of the quality of
the results with more consistency between the results suggesting a more useful
method of identifying the clusters.
Measuring consistency across the clustering results using the different sets of
data (load profiles and motifs) may be criticised as not necessarily providing a
true measure of quality as clustering results may be consistent but not necessarily
represent useful, “true” clusters within the data.
The Rand index compares the different pairs of samples (i.e., each possible
pair of households) and assesses the number in which each pair are in the same
partition in the 2 different clustering solutions, the number where each member
of the pair are in different partitions in both solutions, and the case where the
members are in the same partition in one solution but a different partition in

the other solution. The corrected Rand index [25] builds on the original work
but adjusts the calculated value for the expected matching that would occur
in a random arrangement. The corrected Rand index ranges from -1 to 1 with
a higher value signifying better agreement between the partitions and hence a
better solution.

3
3.1

Empirical Evaluation
Data Selection

A subset of the data is extracted for the peak period of 4pm to 8pm and for working days from Spring (March, April and May) 2011. Working days are weekdays
excluding Scottish public holidays. Not all households have a full set of meter
readings and those with less than 4 days of valid readings are excluded. The
dataset has around 440,000 individual meter readings from 204 households.
The activities of interest within a household are related to switching appliances on or off (e.g., the use of electrical appliances in cooking) and it is the
changes in the readings, rather than the absolute readings, that are of most
interest and are used as the basis for analysis when using motifs.
3.2

Clustering Using the Load Profile Data

The data for the evening peak period (4pm to 7.55pm) are averaged to create a
representative load profile for each household. For example, all the readings for
4pm for the household are averaged to create a representative reading for 4pm,
similarly for 4:05pm, etc. The 204 representative profiles, each with 48 attributes
(one for each time point), are then normalised within the 0 to 1 range and used
with a variety of clustering algorithms.
3.3

Non-Motif Variability Clustering

Various different measures of variability of behaviour within the household can
be defined without the use of motifs (e.g., [26]) and two methods are considered.
One approach is to consider the time at which the maximum usage occurred
on each day during the period of analysis. These times are then used to calculate
the standard deviation of the time around the mean for each household.
A second approach is to consider the total usage during the peak period on
each day during Spring 2011. The standard deviation of the total per day around
the mean total per day also provides a measure of variability of behaviour. Each
of the 2 measures are calculated and used as the basis of simple clustering using
kmeans (k = 8). The households in each of the clusters are shown in Fig. 2.
There is little correspondence between the cluster assignments for the 2 methods. The corrected Rand index of 0.01 shows no correspondence beyond that expected by chance. Furthermore, there is little correspondence with the clusters
obtained from the motif variability approach (detailed below). A Spearman’s rho

Fig. 2. Results for alternative variability measures

value of 0.23 shows there is little correlation between the two different variability
measures.
It is therefore concluded that neither of the non-motif measures give a useful,
consistent measure of the variability of each household.
3.4

Clustering Using the Motif Data

This paper finds the motifs in the stream of meter data and then examines how
the times of these repeating patterns vary from day to day within a household.
Furthermore, the number of times a pattern repeats within a household is also
used as an indication of the variability of behaviour of that household.
The motifs in the data are discovered and the attributes detailed in Section
2.4 are generated. The same clustering algorithms as used for the load profile
clustering are then applied to produce 8 archetypal clusters.

3.5

Results

Various measures that represent the variability of behaviour can be constructed
and this paper considers the variability in time of maximum usage and the variability in total usage. However, as each measure is intended to represent the same
thing (i.e., the variability of behaviour), the fact that there is little correlation
between the measures, or the membership of the clusters generated using the
measures, means that they provide a poor representation of the characteristic.
Comparing the load profile results with the motif variability results, Table 1
shows, for each of the clustering algorithms used and for each set of data, the
sizes of the partitions in the solution and the values for the MIA and CDI cluster
validity indexes (lower is better).
Table 1. Clustering Results and Validity indexes

Load Profiles

Kmeans
Fuzzy
SOM
Hier
RF

Motifs

Cluster sizes

MIA

CDI

Cluster sizes

MIA

CDI

10,16,19,20,20,27,44,48
14,17,20,23,23,23,35,49
13,15,16,20,28,31,36,45
9,10,13,20,22,37,43,50
14,18,19,28,29,29,30,37

0.593
0.679
0.595
0.61
0.794

1.34
2.14
1.337
1.386
1.131

2,5,7,26,29,37,41,57
12,15,19,26,28,30,34,40
2,5,24,25,28,29,40,51
2,3,5,26,31,34,40,63
18,18,19,21,25,32,35,36

0.445
0.551
0.451
0.46
0.628

0.641
2.084
0.733
0.64
1.34

The MIA and CDI values show that the kmeans and SOM techniques produce
similar quality solutions using the load profiles. The hierarchical algorithm is less
good with the Fuzzy Cmeans algorithm being significantly poorer. The random
forest and pam combination provides a good result for the CDI measure but
scores poorly on the compactness of the clusters (as measured by MIA).
When using the motif variability data, the kmeans, SOM and hierarchical
algorithms produce similar quality results with the Fuzzy Cmeans algorithm
again producing poorer results. The random forest and pam combination provides middling results.
The MIA and CDI validity index calculations are not comparable between
datasets due to the different number of attributes used.
Table 2 gives information on the consistency of the cluster partitions as the
clustering algorithm changes. The results for the Rand index show that the values
are consistently closer to 1 in the case of the clusters built using motif variation.
The mean values for the Rand index (after omission of the values on the diagonal)
are 0.4549 for the load profiles and 0.5183 for the motif variability approach.
This shows a more consistent set of partitions are created when using the motif
variability than the partitions created using the load profile information.

Table 2. Modified Rand index of clusters using different clustering algorithms

Kmeans
Fuzzy
SOM
Hier
RF

Profiles

Motifs

Kmeans Fuzzy SOM Hier RF

Kmeans Fuzzy SOM Hier RF

1
0.544
0.629
0.668
0.251

1
0.592
0.794
0.622
0.358

0.544
1
0.562
0.491
0.355

0.629
0.562
1
0.49
0.287

0.668
0.491
0.49
1
0.272

0.251
0.355
0.287
0.272
1

0.592
1
0.626
0.511
0.447

0.794
0.626
1
0.591
0.33

0.622
0.511
0.591
1
0.312

0.358
0.447
0.33
0.312
1

The results from the kmeans algorithm using the motif variability data can
be seen at Fig. 3. The cluster with 26 houses shows very little variability in the
timing of their regular activities and can be assumed to be “creature of habit”
households who may not respond well to an incentive to change behaviour. The
2 house and the 29 house clusters show lots of repeating activities and may be
best to target for interventions as there are likely to be many activities that
often repeat and that may be modifiable.

Fig. 3. kmeans clusters using motif variability

Examining the 29 house cluster in more detail, Fig. 4 show the motifs found
for one of the houses and how the time of occurrence of the motif varies across
the 4pm to 8pm period. In contrast, the motifs for one of the houses in the 26
house cluster are shown in Fig. 5 and the timings can be seen to be less variable.
As a comparison, the average load profiles for each of the households in
the 29 house cluster are shown at Fig. 6. There is little similarity between the
households and hence, using the load profile shapes as the basis, little likelihood
of the households being clustered together. However, the variability in timing

Fig. 4. Example
(high variability)

house Fig. 5. Example house (low Fig. 6. Load profiles for
variability)
high variability cluster

of the motifs can be used as a method for selecting appropriate households to
target and allows groupings to be designated as high or low variability.

4

Significance and Impact

The ability to cost effectively partition domestic households into a few meaningful archetypes based on the household electricity usage is an important problem
for the electricity industry. Identifying a few archetypal representations of households is essential for cost effective implementation of DSM techniques which itself
is necessary to allow the electricity industry to meet the upcoming challenges.
Producing more consistent and more descriptive archetypes than currently possible will allow the deployment of effective behaviour modification interventions.
Previous work does not incorporate any measure of the variability of regular
behaviour when clustering households. The variability is an important characteristic as one of the major uses of the results is to target incentives for households
to vary their behaviour to provide benefit to the electricity network.
The results presented show that the “variability in timing of motifs” approach produces more consistent clusters across different clustering algorithms
compared to the consistency of clustering using just the daily load profiles.
The symbolisation technique is effective in detecting repeating patterns (motifs) that are approximately the same shape. Depending on the type of intervention planned for a subset of the households (for example, incentives to change
overall electricity usage from day to night, or to influence short periods of usage
during the peak period), different sizes of motifs may be used.
This work shows a novel approach to using electricity meter data to cluster
households that enhances and complements the existing techniques based on the
daily load profiles.

Acknowledgements
This work was possible thanks to RCUK Energy Programme and EPSRC grant
references EP/I000496/1 and EP/G065802/1 and forms part of the Desimax
project [27].
Thanks are due to Pavel Senin for providing R code implementing the SAX
method.

References
1. DECC: Towards a Smarter Future, Government Response to the Consultation on
Electricity and Gas Smart Metering. (2009)
2. River: Primer on demand-side management with an emphasis on price-responsive
programs. prepared for The World Bank by Charles River Associates, Tech. Rep
(2005)
3. Mooi, E., Sarstedt, M.: A concise guide to market research: The process, data, and
methods using IBM SPSS statistics. Springer (2011)
4. Ramos, S., Figueiredo, V., Rodrigues, F., Pinhero, R., Vale, Z.: Knowledge extraction from medium voltage load diagrams to support the definition of electrical
tariffs. International Journal of Engineering Intelligent Systems for Electrical Engineering and Communications 15(3) (2007) 143
5. Ellegård, K., Palm, J.: Visualizing energy consumption activities as a tool for
making everyday life more sustainable. Applied Energy 88(5) (2011) 1920–1926
6. Chicco, G.: Overview and performance assessment of the clustering methods for
electrical load pattern grouping. Energy Volume 42, Issue 1 (June 2012) 6880
7. Ramos, S., Duarte, J., Soares, J., Vale, Z., Duarte, F.: Typical load profiles in
the smart grid context - A clustering methods comparison. In: Power and Energy
Society General Meeting, IEEE (2012) 1–8
8. Lin, J., Keogh, E., Wei, L., Lonardi, S.: Experiencing SAX: a novel symbolic
representation of time series. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 15(2) (2007)
107–144
9. Shieh, J., Keogh, E.: i SAX: indexing and mining terabyte sized time series. In:
Proceeding of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge
discovery and data mining, ACM (2008) 623–631
10. Mueen, A., Keogh, E., Zhu, Q., Cash, S., Westover, B.: Exact discovery of time
series motifs. In: Proc. of 2009 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining.
(2009) 1–12
11. Lines, J., Bagnall, A., Caiger-Smith, P., Anderson, S.: Classification of household
devices by electricity usage profiles. Intelligent Data Engineering and Automated
Learning (2011) 403–412
12. Craig, T., Polhill, J.G., Dent, I., Galan-Diaz, C., Heslop, S.: The North East
Scotland Energy Monitoring Project: Exploring relationships between household
occupants and energy usage. Energy and Buildings (2014)
13. Dent, I., Craig, T., Aickelin, U., Rodden, T.: A Method for Cleaning and Storing
Electicity Meter Data for Flexible Analysis. In: BeHave 2012, Helsinki. (2012)
14. Elexon: The Electricity Trading Arrangements: A Beginners Guide. Technical
report, Elexon (2012)
15. Jain, A., Dubes, R.: Algorithms for clustering data. Number 978-0130222787.
Prentice Hall College Div (1988)

16. Bezdek, J.C.: Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms. Kluwer
Academic Publishers (1981)
17. Kohonen, T.: The self-organizing map. Proceedings of the IEEE 78(9) (2002)
1464–1480
18. Everitt, B.S., Landau, S., Leese, M., Stahl, D.: Cluster analysis. Edward Arnold,
London (2001)
19. Ward Jr, J.H.: Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal
of the American statistical association 58(301) (1963) 236–244
20. Breiman, L.: Random forests. Machine learning 45(1) (2001) 5–32
21. Liaw, A., Wiener, M.: Classification and Regression by randomForest. R News
2(3) (2002) 18–22
22. Electricity Association: Load profiles and their use in electricity settlement. UKERC (1997)
23. Figueiredo, V., Rodrigues, F., Vale, Z., Gouveia, J.: An electric energy consumer
characterization framework based on data mining techniques. Power Systems,
IEEE Transactions on 20(2) (2005) 596–602
24. Chicco, G., Napoli, R., Postolache, P., Scutariu, M., Toader, C.: Customer characterization options for improving the tariff offer. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions
on 18(1) (2003) 381–387
25. Hubert, L., Arabie, P.: Comparing partitions. Journal of classification 2(1) (1985)
193–218
26. Dent, I., Craig, T., Aickelin, U., Rodden, T.: Finding the creatures of habit;
Clustering households based on their flexibility in using electricity. In: Digital
Futures, Aberdeen, UK. (2012)
27. Kiprakis, A., Dent, I., Djokic, S., McLaughlin, S.: Multi-scale Dynamic Modeling
to Maximize Demand Side Management. In: IEEE Power and Energy Society
Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe 2011, Manchester, UK. (2011)

