Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Systematic review evaluates machine learning models' effectiveness in disaggregating energy consumption in various settings, highlighting performance disparities.
Non-Intrusive Load Monitoring (NILM) systems are increasingly applied in residential and commercial environments to disaggregate energy consumption without requiring additional hardware sensors. The integration of Machine Learning (ML) techniques has enhanced the accuracy and efficiency of load identification and classification in smart meter-based systems. This study presents a systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at identifying, classifying, and quantitatively evaluating ML models applied to NILM. Searches were conducted in the IEEE Xplore and Scopus databases, restricted to peer-reviewed publications from 2017 to 2024. Thirty studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the quantitative synthesis using a random-effects meta-analysis model (DerSimonian–Laird estimator). The primary effect measure was the F1-score. Statistical analyses were performed using R (version 4.5.0) and Python (version 3.10.0), including heterogeneity assessment and subgroup analyses according to model type. Hybrid models, such as SVDT-KNN-MLP, LE-CRNN, and RBFNN-MOGA, achieved the highest pooled F1-scores, although supported by a limited number of studies. Traditional approaches, including CNN, KNN, and Random Forest, demonstrated consistently strong performance and broader validation, whereas Boosted Trees and RNN-based models showed lower or more variable results. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across studies, highlighting the need for dataset standardization, reproducible evaluation frameworks, and further validation of emerging hybrid architectures in diverse operational scenarios. This study contributes by providing a quantitative synthesis of machine learning models applied to NILM using a structured PRISMA-based methodology and subgroup analysis by model architecture. Unlike previous narrative reviews, this work integrates scientometric analysis with meta-analytic performance aggregation, offering a consolidated and comparative evidence base for future NILM research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jaime et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: