Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models for Short Term Electricity Price Forecasting in Australia's National Electricity Market

arXiv cs.LG / 4/28/2026

📰 NewsIdeas & Deep AnalysisModels & Research

Key Points

  • The paper addresses the high volatility, irregularity, and non-stationarity of short-term electricity price series in Australia’s National Electricity Market, with emphasis on South Australia’s renewable-driven price swings and five-minute settlement effects.
  • It proposes a unified benchmark framework that standardizes preprocessing and feature engineering (lag features, rolling statistics, cyclic temporal encodings) and compares six models (AWMLSTM, CatBoost, GBRT, LSTM, LightGBM, SVR) using a chronological 85%/15% split.
  • For price forecasting, tree-based methods generally outperform neural models and SVR, with GBRT reporting an R² of 0.88, but overall accuracy remains challenging (MAPE above 90%, and over 65% of GBRT predictions have relative errors above 10%).
  • For demand forecasting, performance is much stronger across models, and AWMLSTM plus GBRT reach R² of 0.96 with MAPE below 32% and GBRT achieving 74.37% of samples within 5% error.
  • The authors suggest future work using hybrid tree+transformer approaches, data augmentation for extreme events, and error-correction mechanisms to better capture price spikes.

Abstract

Short term electricity price forecast is essential in competitive power markets, yet electricity price series exhibit high volatility, irregularity, and non-stationarity. This phenomenon is pronounced in the South Australian region of the National Electricity Market, where high renewable penetration drives price volatility and frequent negative price intervals, while structural changes such as the transition to five-minute settlement further complicate forecast. To address these challenges, this study develops a unified benchmark framework. Under identical data preprocessing, feature engineering with lag features, rolling statistics, cyclic temporal encodings, and so on, and an 85% to 15% chronological train test split, six algorithms are systematically compared, including AWMLSTM, CatBoost, GBRT, LSTM, LightGBM, and SVR. The results show that for price prediction, tree-based models, especially GBRT with an R squared value of 0.88, generally outperform LSTM and SVR. However, all models achieve a mean absolute percentage error above 90%, and more than 65% of GBRT predictions have relative errors above 10%, which highlights the inherent difficulty of price forecast. For demand prediction, all models perform substantially better than in price prediction. AWMLSTM and GBRT achieve an R2 value of 0.96 with mean absolute percentage error below 32%, and GBRT has 74.37% of samples within 5% error, while LSTM and SVR perform less accurately in both tasks. Future improvements should focus on hybrid models such as tree plus transformers, data augmentation for extreme events, and error correction to better capture price spikes.