Tail reliability in probabilistic electricity price forecasts: comparing model combination and conformal prediction in the GB day-ahead market
Abstract
Probabilistic forecasts of day-ahead electricity prices are increasingly used to manage price risk, yet competing models are usually ranked on aggregate scores that average over the price regimes in which uncertainty matters most. This study evaluates probabilistic forecasts of hourly EPEX SPOT GB day-ahead prices over a full held-out calendar year, applying a common pre-auction information boundary and rolling-origin design to linear quantile regression, a quantile regression forest (QRF), a LEAR-QRA benchmark and an encoder-decoder quantile long short-term memory (LSTM) network. Two routes to more reliable intervals are then compared: conformal recalibration and Quantile Regression Averaging (QRA). Aggregate scores separate the LSTM and QRF only weakly, with a non-significant 4.4% difference in continuous ranked probability score (CRPS), but their conditional behaviour differs sharply. Above 200 GBP/MWh the LSTM covered 0.12 of outcomes and QRF 0.71, consistent with the forest retaining realised spikes in its leaf distributions while the network learned a smooth upper tail. Conformal recalibration corrected marginal coverage but did not improve the interval score or materially repair spike coverage. QRA combining the LSTM, QRF and LEAR-QRA forecasts reduced CRPS to 5.14 GBP/MWh and raised coverage above 200 GBP/MWh to 0.65 at unchanged interval width. Recalibration and combination therefore address different failures and are not substitutes.
Related
- Quantile Regression Postprocessing with Negative Electricity Price Forecasts
- Combining Weather Forecast Aggregation and State-Space Models for Adaptive Probabilistic Electricity Load Forecasting
- Learning joint probabilistic weather forecasts from station observations alone
- Probabilistic Streamflow Forecasts for Mississippi River Navigation Risk and Parametric Insurance
- Privacy-Preserving Distributed Online Dispatch of Low-Carbon Microgrids with TCN–BiLSTM Probabilistic Photovoltaic Forecasts
BibTeX
@misc{agrawal2026tail,
title = {{Tail reliability in probabilistic electricity price forecasts: comparing model combination and conformal prediction in the GB day-ahead market}},
author = {Anirudh Agrawal and Aidan O'Sullivan},
howpublished = {arXiv},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2611.03661},
eprint = {2611.03661},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.03661},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Tail reliability in probabilistic electricity price forecasts: comparing model combination and conformal prediction in the GB day-ahead market
AU - Anirudh Agrawal
AU - Aidan O'Sullivan
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/01
PB - arXiv
DO - 10.48550/arxiv.2611.03661
UR - https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.03661
AB - Probabilistic forecasts of day-ahead electricity prices are increasingly used to manage price risk, yet competing models are usually ranked on aggregate scores that average over the price regimes in which uncertainty matters most. This study evaluates probabilistic forecasts of hourly EPEX SPOT GB day-ahead prices over a full held-out calendar year, applying a common pre-auction information boundary and rolling-origin design to linear quantile regression, a quantile regression forest (QRF), a LEAR-QRA benchmark and an encoder-decoder quantile long short-term memory (LSTM) network. Two routes to more reliable intervals are then compared: conformal recalibration and Quantile Regression Averaging (QRA). Aggregate scores separate the LSTM and QRF only weakly, with a non-significant 4.4% difference in continuous ranked probability score (CRPS), but their conditional behaviour differs sharply. Above 200 GBP/MWh the LSTM covered 0.12 of outcomes and QRF 0.71, consistent with the forest retaining realised spikes in its leaf distributions while the network learned a smooth upper tail. Conformal recalibration corrected marginal coverage but did not improve the interval score or materially repair spike coverage. QRA combining the LSTM, QRF and LEAR-QRA forecasts reduced CRPS to 5.14 GBP/MWh and raised coverage above 200 GBP/MWh to 0.65 at unchanged interval width. Recalibration and combination therefore address different failures and are not substitutes.
ER -