1 Group control and identification of residential appliance using Non-intrusive method

2 Sunil SEMWAL a, Munendra SINGH b, Rai Sachindra PRASADc

a,b,c
3 Graphic Era University, Dehradun, India

4 Corresponding author email: sunil.111213@gmail.com

5
 6 Abstract

7 Identification and controlling (ON/OFF) of electrical appliance(s) from a remote

8 location is an essential part of energy management. This motivates us to design a system

9 which can collect the aggregate load signature from a single point, obtain the features

10 and finally identify the ON state of electrical appliance(s). The proposed disaggregation

11 technique can be divided into two modules: First part proposes an electrical installation

12 system to disaggregate the appliance at the circuit level whereas the second part

13 comprises of feature selection, dimension reduction and classification algorithms. Load

14 signatures of electrical appliances are added with white Gaussian noise to analyze how

15 the noise affects the classification results. Amplitudes of major eight harmonics of load

16 signature are selected as a feature for the classification. Various classification

17 algorithms are applied to check their feasibility on data. The comparative evaluation

18 shows that among considered classifiers Multilayer Perceptron-Artificial Neural

19 Network (MLP-ANN) classifier leads in classification accuracy with 99.18%. If the

20 system is added with noise the accuracy is decreased to 93.10%.This paper also shows

21 that the proposed technique reduces the space complexity and decision time of the smart

22 meter.

23 Keywords - Smart meter, load signature, harmonic amplitude, ANN, SVM, Bayes

24 classifier.

25 1. Introduction

26 In most of the developing countries the limited sources of power generation are

27 not capable to fulfill the electricity demand which raises the gap between demand and

28 supply. This gap can be reduced mainly with the help of three means: i) Curtailment of

29 load (outage); this method leads to revenue loses or consumer dissatisfaction. ii)
30 Increase in the power generation; beneficial but a long term process which requires a lot

31 of investment. iii) Load management; a better solution for present scenario. A smart

32 meter can be efficiently used for the load management purpose which includes features

33 like appliance identification, control and fault analysis of household appliances.

34 Additionally smart meter allows the billing transparency and dynamic pricing

35 technology. Generating more power than actually needed from conventional sources is

36 accompanied with CO2 emission. Thus, it is essential to incorporate renewable sources

37 with conventional system. In this context the role of the smart grid system has assumed

38 greater importance. The nonconventional energy sources which are used at domestic

39 levels can be incorporated in distributed network with the help of smart meter. This is

40 where smart meter is different from the electronic version of the energy meter. Use of

41 smart meter helps to meet electricity demand of consumers during peak load periods, or

42 supplement the increase in demand by incorporating the renewable energy and storage

43 system. A full length discussion on merits of the use of smart meters in smart grids and

44 micro-grids can be seen in [1, 2]. In Smart meter system, device identification is an

45 important application to recognize different household appliances. In the case of various

46 appliances connected together, this feature allows user to monitor the load profile and

47 power consumption separately. Hence the smart meter ought to be installed in every

48 household. There are two means to carry out the device identification: I) Intrusive

49 method II) Non-intrusive method. In the first method, each appliance is connected

50 through a dedicated sensor termed as plug meter, which detects load profile and power

51 consumption of the connected load. This technique is reliable in terms of accuracy;

52 however association of each appliance with a sensor makes it expensive along with it

53 demands change in electric wiring of household. The second method NILM (Non
54 Intrusive Load Profile Monitoring) consists of following steps: i) Acquisition of load

55 signature, ii) Extraction of features and events, and iii) Classification of features and

56 events. Despite the complex signal processing, this method is economical in nature and

57 works with the existing electrical wiring system of household. One of the earliest

58 approaches to non-intrusive load monitoring, developed in 1980 at MIT by Fed

59 Schweppe and George Hart, has its origin in load monitoring for residential buildings

60 [3].

61 As shown in Table 1 multiple features have been chosen and/or low

62 classification accuracy were obtained. Recently Zhenyu Wang and Guilin Zheng [10]

63 proposed a method for residential appliance identification wherefirst they categorized

64 the appliances according to the working stylethen appliances were classified by

65 choosing multiple features. Even after applying the Principle Component Analysis

66 (PCA), it was seen that large number of features increased the time and space

67 complexity of the system. Spectral components as the feature is used in [6], authors

68 performed simulation rather perform real time experiment and obtained results in ideal

69 conditions, further noise was added to mimic it like the original obtained average

70 accuracy 92%. Table 1 summarizes the recent related research work, methodologies and

71 their limitations/ remark. This paper proposes a simple method for appliance

72 disaggregation where single feature, multi algorithm approach gives the solution with

73 best known accuracy. The authors worked on the real time system which was developed

74 in laboratory to acquire the current signature of various appliances and extract the

75 features from it. The Figure 1 demonstrated the framework of the experiment.

76 2. Methodology

77 2.1 System overview

 78 Figure 2 demonstrates the electrical installation overview, which is designed

79 according to Central Public Works Department of India (CPWD). Specifications of

80 CPWD for internal electrical installation (IEI) are:

81 (i) Low power circuit shall feed appliances like light/fan/call bell/mobile

82 charger etc. Each circuit in the home will be connected with either 800-Watt

83 load capacity or not more than 10 utility points. However, in case of less

84 power appliance points, where load per point may be less, number of points

85 may suitably increase.

86 (ii) Each high power circuit in residential building can feed following outlets:

87 a) Not more than two 16A outlets.

88 b) Not more than three 6A outlets.

89 c) Not more than one 16A and two 6A outlets.

90 (iv) Load more than 1 KW shall be controlled by suitably rated MCB and cable

91 size shall be decided as per the calculations.

92 These specifications provide a primary desegregation between low and high power

93 consumption appliances and limit the number of appliances at one circuit board. Figure

94 2 shows schematic of electric installation system where the main distribution board

95 received single-phase power supply which is evenly distributed among various circuit

96 boards. One circuit board consist of four circuit breaker (CB) to control the four

97 different switch boards in which CB1, CB2 reserve to control low power outlets

98 (switch board) and CB3, CB4 reserve to control power circuit outlets. Current sensors

99 (CS) are coupled with the phase wire departing toward switch boards (lighting and

100 power outlets) and the output of current sensors connected to the analog port of Arduino

101 mega 2560 development board which can be seen in Figure 3.

102 3. Implementation

103 Figure 3 shows an overall schematic of the home appliance identification system

104 which was designed and developed at laboratory. A current sensor (SCT-013-030) was

105 installed on the phase line which acquires the load signature of an individual or

106 composite load. This current sensor is a current transformer which is based on Hall

107 Effect and converts the heavy mains line current into the low voltage. This voltage

108 works as the input signal for the Arduino Mega 2560 board. This board is basically a

109 data acquisition card which provides an interface between personal computer and

110 current sensor. A PC having MATALB®v.12, updated with MATALB-Arduino

111 interface package receives signal from the Arduino Mega 2560 board. Arduino works as

112 data acquisition card (DAQ) where all signals are acquired and further processed on

113 MATLAB® platform. The signal is acquired with sampling rate of 20K samples/

114 second. Features i.e. harmonic amplitude was online obtained by applying FFT

115 algorithm on acquired load signature, these features are used for further classification

116 process. After disaggregation of home appliance, logic developed to control the

117 appliance using relays which is our further research motivation. The experiment was

118 performed for eight household appliances. Total possible combinations of load

119 signature of eight appliances became 256.

120 For each combination the representation of the result would be difficult to

121 understand well the data samples were huge to train the network. To analyze only

122 feasibility at the experiment level we simple random chose 60 classes out of total 256

123 and equally divide into 5 different sets. Random sampling method avoided the set fixed

124 pattern that might be a probability. The classification accuracy is obtained for each of

125 the five sets in which 12 combinations are presented.

126 3.1 Feature extraction

127 Figure 4 shows the current signature and respective spectral plots for some of selected

128 appliances. The analysis of the waveform is nearly impossible whereas analysis of

129 spectrum is easy and its property can be used as the features because the current

130 signature of each appliance or any combination of appliances has its unique Fourier

131 transform. Harmonics amplitudes (mh) of load signature are the potential feature for

132 disaggregation of home appliances [14]. First 8 odd harmonics are selected as the

133 features. Low amplitude of higher harmonics contains insignificant information at the

134 cost of large data set. Table 2 shows the list of appliances and their specification which

135 used in the experimentation.

136 The dimension of feature matrix is further reduced using PCA. PCA is a

137 dimension reduction method which uses orthogonal transformation to convert a set of

138 features of possibly correlated variables into a set of values of linearly

139 uncorrelated variables. These linearly uncorrelated variables are known as principal

140 component (PC). Maximum variation in the input information mapped by the first

141 principal component (PC1), other principal component PC2, PC3 and so on are in

142 descending order of variation without losing too much input information. We restricted

143 our input data to only two principal components PC1 and PC2. The reduced input

144 vectors are fed to the various classifiers.

145 4. Data classification

146 The aim of this competitive study was to identify the most appropriate classifier

147 to predict the state of appliances i.e. ON/OFF. The data sets were analyzed using

148 classifiers based on supervised learning namely Bayes, SVM and MLP- ANN. Initially

149 the data is randomly divided into two sets, training and testing sets. Training sets are
150 used as input data to train the classifier network. After the completion of training,

151 classifiers are able to discriminate the test data in to various target classes.

152 4.1 Noise analysis of current signatures

153 To evaluate the classifier performance it would be checked for the noisy signal,

154 the acquired electric signals generally contained the white Gaussian noise[15], the

155 classifier was tested with white noise( 50db S/N ratio) added signal to simulate the real

156 time environment. Figure 5 shows the effect of noise on spectral amplitude of current

157 signature. It is observed that if noise is present in the signal then some additional

158 harmonics are present in spectral analysis. It is also seen that as the noise level increases

159 (S/N ratio decrease), there is fluctuation in the amplitude of harmonics. In the feature

160 space the feature vector found inseparable due to added noise as shown in Figure 6,

161 hence leading to poor classification accuracy.

162 4.1 Bayes classifier

163 A Bayes classifier is optimal in minimizing the probability of misclassification.

164 For a given “zero-one” loss function it minimizes the risk in misclassification.

165 However, it requires a full knowledge of underlying class conditional density for

166 classification. In practice, the class conditional density is never known however a good

167 estimate can be extracted from training data using maximum likelihood (ML),

168 expectation maximization (EM) and some other standard nonparametric methods. For

169 the general case with risks, the discriminate function is 𝑔𝑖 𝑥 = −𝑅 𝛼𝑖 𝑥 since the

170 maximum discriminate function will then correspond to the minimum conditional risk.

171 For the minimum error-rate case, we can simplify things further by taking 𝑔𝑖 𝑥 =

172 𝑃 𝜔𝑖 𝑥 so that maximum discriminate function corresponds to the maximum posterior

173 probability. Clearly, the choice of discriminate functions is not unique. More generally,
174 if we replace every 𝑔𝑖 𝑥 by 𝑓(𝑔𝑖 𝑥 )where 𝑓 ∙ is a monotonically increasing function,

175 the resulting classification is unchanged. This observation can lead to significant

176 analytical and computational simplifications.

177 4.2 Support vector machine (SVM)

178 Recently, a new tool from the artificial intelligence field called a support vector

179 machine (SVM) [16] has gained popularity in the machine learning community. SVM

180 classifies the data by finding the hyperplane that can easily separate one class of data

181 points from other class. Thus, it aims at finding the best hyperplane with maximum

182 marginal distance between two classes. The simplest way to divide two groups is with a

183 straight line, flat plane or an N-dimensional hyperplane. But what if the points are

184 separated by a nonlinear region, in this case we need a nonlinear dividing line. Rather

185 than fitting nonlinear curves to the data, SVM handles this by using a kernel function to

186 map the data into a different space where a hyperplane can be used to do the separation.

187 4.3 MLP-ANN

188 The classifier network consists of multiple layers of computational units. The

189 working principal of MLP is based on to minimize the error function using gradient

190 back propagation algorithm. This error function can be computed by comparing the

191 output value and actual value. This error is feedback through the network. The weights

192 of network adjust in order to reduce the value of error function. The considered network

193 has input layer, output layer and 30 hidden layers.

194 5. Results and discussion

195 Table 3 presents the performance of different classifiers for five sets of current

196 signatures and current signatures with added noise. Overall result in terms of accuracy

197 obtained by averaging the accuracy of all 5 sets. The experimental results suggested that
198 the Naïve Bayes and ANN classifiers are more favorable for load segregation than the

199 SVM. It is investigated that if noise is present in the signal, it leads to the inaccuracy in

200 classification. MLP-ANN is more adaptive to noise signal in this study. Presence of

201 noise degrades the performance of classifiers but still the results are acceptable.

202 Figure 7 shows the PCA plot and confusion bar plot for set-4 which has 12

203 classes. In PCA plot plus sign (+) shows the training sample data and box sign (□)

204 shows the tested data. It can be observed that test and train data of same classes have

205 overlapped clusters. The confusion bar plot helps in better understanding of the same In

206 confusion bar plot it can be seen that the class from 1 to 11 are successfully classified

207 by the Naïve Bayes classifier whereas class 12 could not classify accurately, the data of

208 this class is mixed with class 2, 3, 5 and 8. After analiyzing all four classifiers, total 20

209 results were obtained for all 5 sets.

210 Figure 8 shows the PCA plot and confusion bar plot for set-4 using SVM

211 (RBFN) classifier whereas Figure 9 shows the PCA plot and confusion bar plot for set-2

212 using linear SVM classifier. Figure 10 shows the confusion matrix and performance

213 evaluation for set -3 data. Confusion matrix shows that optimized ANN-MLP classifier

214 clearly classifies all the class of set-3 data except class 10 in which one element out of

215 10 is misclassified with class 2. The performance evaluation of ANN-MLP classifier in

216 shows how the minimum mean square error (MSE) is decreasing for training, testing

217 and validation. After 13 iterations classifier obtained the minimum MSE.

218 The algorithm execution time calculated for each of the five sets, by acquiring

219 the CPU timing for MATLAB® v.12 software simulation on Windows 7 Home

220 Premium, PC configuration Intel® Core™ i5 CPU @ 2.53GHz with 4GB DDR3 RAM.
221 The results shown in Table 5 prove single feature reduces the execution time by

222 comparing it with the execution time of multiple features. The difference between

223 execution time of multi feature and single feature will further increase on increasing the

224 number of appliances.

225 6. Conclusion

226 The experiment setup was designed according to CPWD specifications. Selected

227 appliances for the experiment were installed in this circuit. Odd harmonic amplitudes of

228 load signature chose as single feature which reported as necessary and sufficient feature.

229 This technique reduced execution time 16.14% over the multi feature techniques.SVM,

230 Bayes and MLP-ANN classifiers were investigated where MLP-ANN was found the

231 most effective classifier for home appliance identification. Even in the presence of extra

232 white Gaussian noise, system performed well with acceptable accuracy. There is

233 provision in circuit to control the appliance(s) using relay from the remote location.

234 References

235 [1] Depuru SSSR, Wang L, Devabhaktuni V. Smart meters for power grid: Challenges,

236 issues, advantages and status. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2011; 15: 2736-2742.

237 [2] McDaniel P, McLaughlin S. Security and privacy challenges in the smart grid. IEEE

238 SecurPriv 2009; 7: 75-77.

239 [3] Hart GW. Nonintrusive appliance load monitoring. In: Proceedings of the IEEE;

240 Dec 1992; New York, USA. New York, NY, USA: IEEE. pp. 1870-1891.

241 [4] Srinivasan D, Ng WS, Liew AC. Neural-network-based signature recognition for

242 harmonic source identification. IEEE Trans Power Del 2006; 21: 398-405.
243 [5] Liang J, Ng S, Kendall G, Cheng J. Load signature study—Part I: Basic concept,

244 structure, and methodology. IEEE Trans Power Del 2010; 25: 551-560.

245 [6] Liang J, Ng SK, Kendall G, Cheng JW. Load signature study—Part II:

246 Disaggregation framework, simulation, and applications. IEEE Trans Power Del 2010;

247 25: 561-569.

248 [7] Erişti H, Uçar A, Demir Y. Wavelet-based feature extraction and selection for

249 classification of power system disturbances using support vector machines.

250 ElectrPowSyst Res 2010; 80: 743-752.

251 [8] Zeifman M, Roth K. Nonintrusive appliance load monitoring: Review and outlook.

252 IEEE Trans ConsumElectr 2011; 57: 76-84.

253 [9] Chang HH, Chen KL, Tsai YP, Lee WJ. A New Measurement Method for Power

254 Signatures of Nonintrusive Demand Monitoring and Load Identification. IEEE Trans

255 IndAppl 2012; 48: 764-771.

256 [10] Wang Z, Zheng G. Residential appliances identification and monitoring by a

257 nonintrusive method., IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2012; 3: 80-92.

258 [11] Dong M, Meira PC, Xu W, Chung CY. Non-intrusive signature extraction for

259 major residential loads. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2013; 4: 1421-1430.

260 [12] Prasad RS, Semwal S. A simplified new procedure for identification of appliances

261 in smart meter applications.In:IEEE 2013 International Systems Conference (SysCon);

262 April 2013; Orlando Florida USA. New York, NY, USA: IEEE. pp. 339-344.
263 [13] Semwal S, Joshi D, Prasad RS, Raveendhra D. The practicability of ICA in home

264 appliances load profile separation using current signature: a preliminary study. In:

265 International Conference on Power, Energy & Control; Feb 2013; DindigulTamilnadu

266 India. New York, NY, USA: IEEE. pp. 765-759.

267 [14] Chiang JT, Zhang T, Chen B, Hu YC. Load disaggregation using harmonic

268 analysis and regularized optimization. In: Signal & Information Processing Association

269 Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC), 2012 Asia-Pacific; Dec 2012;

270 Hollywood California USA. New York, NY, USA: IEEE. pp. 1-4.

271 [15] Chang, Hsueh-Hsien. "Non-intrusive demand monitoring and load identification

272 for energy management systems based on transient feature analyses." Energies 5.11

273 (2012): pp4569-4589.

274 [16] Burges CJ. A tutorial on support vector machines for pattern recognition. Data Min

275 Knowl Disc 1998; 2: pp121-167.

276

277

278

279

280

281

282
283

284

CPWD Electrical installation

Specification system

Current signature
acquisition system

Spectral analysis

Feature reduction

Bayes SVM ANN

Linear RBFN

Decision
285

286 Figure 1. Framework of the experiment

287

288
CB1- Low power circuit
P CB1 CB2 CB3 CB4 CB2- Low power circuit
CB3- High power circuit
MAINS
CB4=High power circuit
1-ø DISTRIBUTION
P - Phase wire
BOARD N- Neutral Wire
N

P
Current sensor
N P Current sensor
To Arduino and PC N
To Arduino and PC

6A Low powercircuitoutlets 16A Power Circuit outlets

289
290 Figure 2. Diagram of electrical installation according CPWD specification for
291 domestic utility
292
 P
E P: Phase Line
MCB
E: Earth Line
N N: Neutral Line
CS: Current Sensor
Load 1 Load 2 Load 3 MCB: Magnetic
Circuit Breaker
Control signal

Arduino Mega Feature extraction

MATLAB Arduino
2560 board Interface (MAI) and classification

293
294 Figure 3. Overview of the system
 0.01
Amplitude------------------------------>

0.005

-0.005

-0.01

-0.015

-0.02
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Sample-------------------------------------------------->
0.025
0.02
Amplitude----------------------->

0.015
0.01
0.005
0
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
-0.02
-0.025
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Sample------------------------------>
0.5
0.4
Amplitude-------------------------->

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Sample----------------------------------->
0.08

0.06
Amplitude-------------------------->

0.04

0.02

-0.02

-0.04

-0.06

-0.08
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Sample--------------------------------->

295 Figure 4. Current signature and spectral component of a) CFL b) AC c) TV d)

296 Combination of IL, Tube-light, CFL and Laptop

297
298

299
3
0.8

2.5 0.7
Harmonics
Harmonics
apmplitude of 0.6 amplitude of
2 filtered signal
Harmonics filterd signal
Harmonics 0.5
due to noise
1.5 due to noise
Harmonics 0.4 Harmonics
apmplitude of amplitude of
1 0.3 non-filterd signal
non-filtered signal
0.2
0.5
0.1
0
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

300
301 Figure 5.Effect of noise on harmonic component of signal
302
Observations by Predicted and Actual Groups
Overall PCC: 98.8889%
0.3
0.03
1
1
Clean signal 2
0.2
3 Noisy signal 2
5 0.025 3
4 4
0.1 5 4
5
Number of Observations

6 0.02 6
3
7 7
0 8 8
PC2

2
9 9
0.015
10 1
10
-0.1
PC 2

11 11
0
12 12
1 0.01
-0.2 2
3
4
5 12
6 11
10
7
-0.3 0.005 8 8
9
9 7
10 6
11 5
4
12 3
2
-0.4 0 Group
1
Actual
-0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 Group
Predicted 0.25
PC1 PC1
303

304 Figure 6.Feature space comparison of noisy and filtered signal in Naïve Bayes classifier

305

306
 Observations by Predicted and Actual Groups
Overall PCC: 98.8889%
0.3
1 307
2
0.2
3
5
4
0.1 5 4
PC2

Number of Observations
6
3
7
0 8
PC2

2
9
10 1
-0.1
11
0
12
1
-0.2 2
3
4
5 12
6 11
10
7 9
-0.3 8
7
8
9
10 6
11 5
4
PC1 12
2
3

-0.4 1
Actual Group
-0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 Predicted Group
309 PC1

310 Figure 7. PCA plot and confusion bar plot for Set- 4 using Naïve Baeys classifier

311
Observations by Predicted and Actual Groups
Overall PCC: 96.6667%
0.4
1
0.35 2
3
0.3 5
4
Number of Observations

5 4
0.25
6
PC2

7 3
0.2
8
2
0.15 9
PC2

10 1
0.1 11
12 0
0.05
1
2
3
0 4
PC1 5
6 11
12
7 9 10
8
-0.05 9
10 7 8
11
12 5 6
-0.1 3 4
-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Actual Group 1 2
Predicted Group
PC1
312

313 Figure 8. PCA plot and confusion matrix for Set-4 using multi class SVM classifier in
314 RBFN

315

316

317

318

319
 Observations by Predicted and Actual Groups
Overall PCC: 94.7222%
0.3
1
2
0.2
3
4 5

Number of Observations
0.1 5
4
6
7 3
0 8
2
PC2

9
10 1
-0.1
11
0
-0.2 1
2
3
4
5 12
6 11
-0.3 7 9 10
8
9
10 7 8
11
12 5 6
-0.4 3 4
-0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 Actual Group 1 2
Predicted Group
PC1
320 Figure 9.PCA plot and confusion matrix for Set-2 using multi class linear SVM
321 classifier

322

323

324

325
Confusion Matrix
10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100%
Best Validation Performance is 0.03428 at epoch 13
1 0
8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
10
2
0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 90.9% Train
0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 9.1%
Validation
0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100%
3 Test
0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Best
Mean Squared Error (mse)

0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100%
4
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100%
5
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 100%
6
Output Class

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 100% -1
7
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 100%
8
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 100%
9
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 100%
10
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 100%
11
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0%

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 100%
12
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0%
-2
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90.0% 100% 100% 99.2% 10
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
326 Target Class 19 Epochs

327 Figure 10. Confusion matrix and performance chart for Set 3 using MLP-ANN

328

329

330

331

332

333

334
335 Table 1. Related works in area of load segregation

Sr. Load segregation Features Year Limitations/

technique Remarks
1 Artificial neural Spectral components (real Complex and time
network approach and imaginary) consuming, claimed
2006
for harmonic source avg. accuracy
detection was92% [4]
2 Pattern-recognition Active power (P), Reactive Huge number of
algorithms, power (Q), Power factor (PF), features increased
Committee Decision Admittance waveform ratio the complexity of
Mechanism (CDM). (I/V), Power waveform, 2010 system [5, 6]
Eigen values of waveform,
and transient waveform
power over half cycle.
3 Wavelet analysis is Wavelet transform instead of Accuracy was not
used for feature FFT for feature calculation, claimed [7]
extraction wavelets features of several 2010
consumers’ electronics
appliances
4 Event detection and Steady state current, Accuracy was not
classification switching transient current 2011 claimed [8]
and working style of
appliance.
5 Home electrical P,Q, pf, changes in real power Complexdecision
signal disaggregation along with appliance-specific rules and pattern
using ANN and decision rules and pattern 2012 recognition
wavelet technique. recognition approach. approach, accuracy
was around 95% [9]
6 Residential Event detection, STC, P, Q Accuracy around
appliances clustering technique is 80%, claimed for
identification and applied, effectiveness of
2012
monitoring by a method in presence
nonintrusive method of noise but analysis
was not done[10]
7 Observations of Steady state and switching Needs several days
features over several transient current working for observations.
days, identification styles identification and Controlling of
on NIAFE feasibility analysis 2013 appliances were not
discussed, accuracy
was less than
70%[11]
 8 Simplified procedure Real and reactive more features, leads
for appliance power(P,Q), pf, harmonics(h), to system slow, no
2013
identification harmonic amplitude(mh) accuracy was
claimed[12]
9 Independent ICA was used to separate the Useful for two
component current signature of appliance
analysis(ICA) for individual appliances for the 2013 disaggregation,
home appliance composite load. accuracy was
separation around 80% [13]
336

337 Table 2. Appliances name and their specifications

Serial No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Appliance Incandescent Tube- CFL Laptop TV Fan Induction stove Monitor
Name lamp light
Specifications 60W, 230V 40W, 15W, 19.3V, 168- 50W variable 19W,
230V 240V,50 3.1A 240V, wattage level 18.5 inch
Hz .4A, 85W 600W -1400W

338

339 Table 3. Classification accuracy of classifier for noisy and clean signal

Sr. Sets SVM Bayes (%) MLP-ANN

Linear (%) RBFN (%) (%)
Without Added Without Added Without Added Without Added
noise noise noise noise noise noise noise noise
1 Set 1 77.3 66.0 82.2 74.1 98.1 84.0 98.7 90.7
2 Set 2 79.0 66.6 84.5 76.2 98.8 85.8 100.0 94.0
3 Set 3 76.1 63.0 81.3 73.3 98.1 86.1 99.2 93.2
4 Set 4 78.0 64.6 86.6 75.6 99.0 89.0 98.6 93.6
5 Set 5 75.3 67.3 80.2 71.2 96.4 87.2 99.4 94.0
Over all 77.14 65.5 82.96 74.1 98.08 86.42 99.18 93.1
Accuracy
340

341

342

343
344

345 Table 4. Algorithm execution time for multi-feature and single feature

Sr. Set Number Multi feature Single feature (sec) % Difference

(sec)

1 Set 1 1.2792 1.2012 6.07%

2 Set 2 1.2948 1.0608 18.07%
3 Set 3 1.2798 1.0764 15.89%
4 Set 4 1.4508 1.1544 20.43%
5 Set 5 1.3884 1.1076 20.22%
Average reduction time 16.14%
346