"background": "Chronic inefficiencies in power-distribution networks, characterised by high technical and commercial losses, present a significant barrier to sustainable development in many nations. A rigorous, data-driven methodology for evaluating equipment performance and forecasting efficiency gains is required to inform infrastructure investment. ", "purpose and objectives": "This study aims to develop and apply a novel methodological framework for evaluating power-distribution equipment systems, with the objective of constructing a robust time-series forecasting model to quantify potential efficiency gains within a national grid. ", "methodology": "A comprehensive dataset of operational parameters from primary substations was analysed. The core forecasting model is an autoregressive integrated moving average with exogenous variables (ARIMAX), specified as \ yt = \ + =1^{p\ \ yt-i + =1^q\ -j + =1^r\ Xk, t + \, where Xk represents exogenous technical variables. Model robustness was verified using heteroskedasticity-consistent standard errors. ", "findings": "The ARIMAX (2, 1, 2) model demonstrated strong predictive capability, indicating that targeted upgrades to ageing circuit-breakers and transformers could reduce aggregate technical losses by an estimated 18. 5% (95% CI: 16. 2% to 20. 7%) over a five-year forecast horizon, conditional on sustained investment. ", "conclusion": "The methodological framework provides a statistically rigorous tool for infrastructure assessment, confirming that strategic, data-led interventions in specific equipment categories can yield substantial and quantifiable improvements in distribution efficiency. ", "recommendations": "Utility planners should adopt this forecasting methodology for long-term infrastructure planning. Initial investment should be prioritised for substations identified as having the highest marginal return on loss reduction. ", "key words": "power distribution, time-series forecasting, infrastructure efficiency, ARIMAX, technical losses, grid modernisation",
Diop et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: