MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015843896 · doi:10.1109/ievc.2012.6183227

Quality of service in Plug-in Electric Vehicle charging infrastructure

2012· article· en· W2015843896 on OpenAlexaff
Melike Erol‐Kantarci, Jahangir H. Sarker, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrificationVehicle-to-gridSmart gridGridQuality of serviceAutomotive engineeringElectric vehicleEnergy managementPlug-inComputer scienceEngineeringComputer networkElectricityElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Energy (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrification of transportation is offering reduced vehicle emissions and operating costs in addition to increased energy-independence. Electric cars are anticipated to be adopted as passenger vehicles and in commercial fleets in the near future. Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) can drive on battery up to few hundred miles with the current battery technologies. Depleting PHEV batteries are charged from the power grid either with a Level 1 or Level 2 charger where the latter delivers more power than the former. Despite the advantages of PHEVs, charging several PHEVs simultaneously from the same distribution system may cause local outages due to transformer overloading. Thus, PHEV charging infrastructure calls for admission control schemes that operate on the smart grid. It is also essential to provide service differentiation to increase consumer satisfaction. In this paper, we propose a Quality of Service (QoS)-aware admission control scheme for the PHEV charging infrastructure. Our scheme operates on the Energy Management System (EMS) of the smart grid distribution system. The proposed approach relies on a wireless communication network that delivers the demands of PHEVs to the EMS and delivers the admission decisions of EMS to PHEVs. In our admission control scheme, PHEV owners who are willing to pay more can charge faster than the “best-effort” users similar to the Internet traffic service differentiation mechanisms. We provide mathematical analysis and simulation results for the proposed scheme. We show that high priority PHEVs are supplied with higher power rating, hence they are able to charge faster than low priority PHEVs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations39
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207