MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049523782 · doi:10.1504/ijvd.2012.050085

An optimal power management strategy for power split plug-in hybrid electric vehicles

2012· article· en· W2049523782 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

VenueInternational Journal of Vehicle Design · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPowertrainAutomotive engineeringPlug-inEngineeringPower managementPower (physics)Fuel efficiencyEnergy managementModel predictive controlHybrid powerElectric vehicleManagement strategyDynamic programmingControl engineeringControl (management)Computer scienceTorqueEnergy (signal processing)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Model Predictive Control (MPC) can be an interesting concept for designing a power management strategy for Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs) according to its capability of online optimisation by receiving current information from the powertrain and handling hard constraints on such problems. In this paper, a power management strategy for a power split plug-in HEV is proposed using the concept of MPC to evaluate the effectiveness of this method on minimising the fuel consumption of those vehicles. Also, the results are compared with dynamic programming.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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