Using the Pareto Set Pursuing Multiobjective Optimization Approach for Hybridization of a Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) can improve fuel economy and emission reduction significantly compared to hybrid electric vehicles and conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. Currently there lacks an efficient and effective approach to identify the optimal combination of the battery pack size, electric motor, and engine for PHEVs in the presence of multiple design objectives such as fuel economy, operating cost, and emission. This work proposes a design approach for optimal PHEV hybridization. Through integrating the Pareto set pursuing (PSP) multiobjective optimization algorithm and powertrain system analysis toolkit (PSAT) simulator on a Toyota Prius PHEV platform, 4480 possible combinations of design parameters (20 batteries, 14 motors, and 16 engines) were explored for PHEV20 and PHEV40 powertrain configurations. The proposed approach yielded the optimal solution in a small fraction of computational time, as compared to an exhaustive search. This confirms the efficiency and applicability of PSP to problems with discrete variables. In the design context we have found that battery, motor, and engine collectively define the optimal hybridization scheme, which also varies with the drive cycle and all electric range (AER). The proposed method and software platform could be applied to optimize other powertrain designs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".