## 4 Experiments and Evaluation
### Real Scenario
#### 4.1.3 Analysis of Procedure to Discover Presence of Additional Sources  
To evaluate this procedure, we look into the case of the underperformance in the basement. We examine the extent to which the theoretical limit could be overestimated and still produce insights in our particular case. For the procedure to be applicable, there needs to be a value in the observed behaviour in the PT which is still higher than the overestimated theoretical limit.  
Table 2 presents the configuration of lights for the examined area, showing wattage and count, for each class of lights. The overestimated theoretical limit is achieved by discovering the number of lights that are possible to be changed (with increased wattage), while the total maximum still yields a value lower than the highest point in the observed behavior from the PT. Two of the lights are already rated at 60W, meaning that it is a matter of discovering how many additional lights would be able to be changed (by mistake, or in the model). We do this by assigning a certain percentage of lights to be changed to 60W, while the distribution of the remaining lights is unchanged. In order to search through various possibilities, we have run a script that explored various configurations of percentages of lights changed. The results from the execution of the script show that if 53 of the total lights are 60W and the rest of them maintain the same percentage of contribution to the consumption that they have had in the initial configuration, the theoretical limit would be the highest possible while still lower than the highest of the results from the PT.  
In Table 2, the column \"Contribution to old configuration (%)\" reveals the percentage with which each of the classes of lights is contributing to the setup of lights per class. The two lights already having 60W are not taken into account, as they are already at their maximum, and we are searching for a configuration for the rest of the lights. Thus, the percentages are calculated out of 105 lights, since we have removed the two out of the original 107. The column \"Contribution to new configuration scaled to remaining lights (54)\" is calculated by multiplying the percentage out of 105 lights and the number of remaining lights, 54. This way, the new configuration of lights are 53 60W lights, and each row of the fourth column multiplied by its respective wattage. By multiplying this wattage by 336 working hours (representing a two week period), we achieve 1,627,488 Wh/14 days.  
These values imply that if 49% of the lights assume the maximum wattage of all lights, the procedure would still be applicable. Considering that some of the lights are already with maximum wattage, if 47% of the lights in the basement were replaced by the maximum wattage lights, the procedure would still be able to detect an additional component that is measured by the same meter.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Wattage (Class)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**No. of Lights**} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Contribution to Old** \\ **Configuration (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Contribution to New Configuration** \\ **Scaled to Remaining Lights (54)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
10 & 10 & 9.34 & 5.13 \\
14 & 6 & 5.6 & 3.078 \\
15 & 8 & 7.47 & 4.104 \\
31 & 7 & 6.54 & 3.564 \\
36 & 69 & 64.48 & 35.478 \\
46 & 5 & 4.67 & 2.538 \\
60 & 2 & removed & removed \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Discovery of applicability limit.