MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1593427113 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2015.7129164

Modeling and optimization of PHEV charging queues

2015· article· en· W1593427113 on OpenAlexaff
Hesam Akbari, Xavier Fernando

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueueing theoryQueueBattery (electricity)Computer scienceDriving rangeCharging stationAutomotive engineeringEnergy consumptionState of chargeRange (aeronautics)Quality of serviceMarkov processSimulationElectric vehicleReal-time computingEngineeringComputer networkElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of PHEVs (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles) is fast expanding due to their low energy cost and low environmental pollution. However, the biggest hurdle is that PHEVs have short driving range and long battery charging time even when using supercharging stations. Therefore, better queuing models are necessary to improve the quality of services using public charging stations. In this paper, first the PHEV queue is simulated based on the M/M/1 queuing model, where M denotes a Markov process for both inter-arrival time and service times. Then, the electrical consumption of PHEVs is simulated for urban driving standard (FTP-72) to better understand of the behavior the battery state of charge (SOC). In addition, discharging characteristics of the PHEVs' batteries in urban city are analyzed using different cycles. Moreover, a computer model is implemented to study waiting time of PHEV at public charging stations. Simulation results suggest that, assigning charging stations by considering the queue length at each charging nodes (station), as well as the distance, considerably reduces the queue length at each station.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207