MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011987043 · doi:10.4271/2014-01-1815

Energy Efficient Routing for Electric Vehicles using Particle Swarm Optimization

2014· article· en· W2011987043 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)Multi-swarm optimizationEnergy (signal processing)Mathematical optimizationComputer networkAlgorithmPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Growing concerns about the environment, energy dependency, and unstable fuel prices have increased the market share of electric vehicles. This has led to an increased demand for energy efficient routing algorithms that are optimized for electric vehicles. Traditional routing algorithms are focused on finding the shortest distance or the least time route between two points. These approaches have been working well for fossil fueled vehicles. Electric vehicles, on the other hand, require different route optimization techniques. Negative edge costs, battery power and capacity limits, as well as vehicle parameters that are only available at query time, make the task of electric vehicle routing a challenging problem. In this paper, we present a simulated solution to the energy efficient routing for electric vehicles using Particle Swarm Optimization. Simulation results show improvements in the energy consumption of the electric vehicle when applied to a start-to-destination routing problem.</div></div>

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.240 · 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