Research Article

Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models

Volume: 6 Number: 1 February 27, 2026

Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models

Abstract

This study presents a comprehensive framework for short-term solar irradiance forecasting in the Adana Organized Industrial Zone, one of Türkiye’s most solarrich regions. High-resolution irradiance data collected throughout 2024 using ISO 9060–compliant pyranometers were analyzed to capture seasonal and daily variations, with annual cumulative global horizontal irradiance measured at ~1346 kWh/m2. Two machine learning approaches were applied to predict hourly irradiance: Random Forest (RF) regression and multilayer perceptron (MLP) neural networks. Input features included persistence-based irradiance values, diurnal and seasonal indicators, and time-series variables. Model performance was evaluated using mean absolute error, root mean square error (RMSE), and R2 metrics. Results indicated that RF achieved superior accuracy (R2 = 0.891, RMSE = 0.472 kWh/m2) compared to MLP (R2 = 0.874, RMSE = 0.514 kWh/m2), highlighting the robustness of ensemble methods for short-term forecasting. Uncertainty analysis confirmed that measurement errors and cloudy-day conditions remain key challenges. Unlike previous studies, this work provides one of the first high-resolution, region-specific datasets for industrial-scale solar forecasting in Türkiye. Overall, the findings demonstrate that data-driven forecasting can effectively support photovoltaic (PV) system operation, smart grid integration, and regional energy planning, providing valuable insights for the sustainable energy transition in Türkiye.

Keywords

References

  1. 1. “İklim Değişikliğine uyum Stratejisi ve eylem planı 2024-2030,” Available: https:// iklim.go v.tr/db/ turkce/i cerikler /files/.
  2. 2. A. J. Samimi, and M. Ahmadpour, “Comparison of Environmental Performance Index (EPI) in OIC countries: Before and after financial crisis,” Adv. Environ. Biol., pp. 201–209, 2011.
  3. 3. M. S. Naveed, I. Iqbal, M. F. Hanif, J. Xiao, X. Liu, and J. Mi, “Enhanced accuracy in solar irradiance forecasting through machine learning stackbased ensemble approach,” Int. J. Green Energ., vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 2126–2149, 2025.
  4. 4. S. T. Asiedu, A. Suvedi, Z. Wang, H. M. Rekabdarkolaee, and T. M. Hansen, “Spatiotemporal downscaling model for solar ırradiance forecast using nearest-neighbor random forest and Gaussian process,” Energies, vol. 18, no. 10, p. 2447, 2025.
  5. 5. Y. Mariappan, K. Ramasamy, and D. Velusamy, “An optimized deep learning based hybrid model for prediction of daily average global solar irradiance using CNN SLSTM architecture,” Sci. Rep., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 10761, 2025.
  6. 6. O. Trull, J. C. García-Díaz, and A. Peiró-Signes, “A comparative study of statistical and machine learning methods for solar irradiance forecasting using the Folsom PLC dataset,” Energies, vol. 18, no. 15, p. 4122, 2025.
  7. 7. S. R. Pattnaik, R. Bisoi, and P. K. Dash, “Solar irradiance forecasting using hybrid long-short-term-memory-based recurrent ensemble deep random vector functional link network,” Comput. Electr. Eng., vol. 123, p. 110174, 2025.
  8. 8. U. Singh, S. Singh, S. Gupta, M. A. Alotaibi, and H. Malik, “Forecasting rooftop photovoltaic solar power using machine learning techniques,” Energy Rep., vol. 13, pp. 3616–3630, 2025.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Electrical Engineering (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

February 27, 2026

Submission Date

October 12, 2025

Acceptance Date

November 19, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 6 Number: 1

APA
Yıldırım, R. S. (2026). Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 6(1), 48-58. https://doi.org/10.5152/tepes.2026.25039
AMA
1.Yıldırım RS. Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models. TEPES. 2026;6(1):48-58. doi:10.5152/tepes.2026.25039
Chicago
Yıldırım, Rabia Sultan. 2026. “Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models”. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 6 (1): 48-58. https://doi.org/10.5152/tepes.2026.25039.
EndNote
Yıldırım RS (February 1, 2026) Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 6 1 48–58.
IEEE
[1]R. S. Yıldırım, “Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models”, TEPES, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 48–58, Feb. 2026, doi: 10.5152/tepes.2026.25039.
ISNAD
Yıldırım, Rabia Sultan. “Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models”. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 6/1 (February 1, 2026): 48-58. https://doi.org/10.5152/tepes.2026.25039.
JAMA
1.Yıldırım RS. Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models. TEPES. 2026;6:48–58.
MLA
Yıldırım, Rabia Sultan. “Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models”. Turkish Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 6, no. 1, Feb. 2026, pp. 48-58, doi:10.5152/tepes.2026.25039.
Vancouver
1.Rabia Sultan Yıldırım. Machine Learning Approaches to Short-Term Solar Irradiance Forecasting: Performance Comparison of Random Forest and Multilayer Perceptron Models. TEPES. 2026 Feb. 1;6(1):48-5. doi:10.5152/tepes.2026.25039