Model-Based Parameter Identification of Healthy and Aged Li-ion Batteries for Electric Vehicle Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Electric vehicles are receiving considerable attention because they offer a more efficient and sustainable transportation alternative compared to conventional fossil-fuel powered vehicles. Since the battery pack represents the primary energy storage component in an electric vehicle powertrain, it requires accurate monitoring and control. In order to effectively estimate the battery pack critical parameters such as the battery state of charge (SOC), state of health (SOH), and remaining capacity, a high-fidelity battery model is needed as part of a robust SOC estimation strategy. As the battery degrades, model parameters significantly change, and this model needs to account for all operating conditions throughout the battery's lifespan. For effective battery management system design, it is critical that the physical model adapts to parameter changes due to aging.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">In this paper, we present an effective method for offline battery model parameter estimation at various battery states of health. An equivalent circuit with one voltage source, one resistance in series, and several RC pairs modeled the battery charging and discharging dynamics throughout the lifespan of the battery. Accelerated aging tests using real-world driving cycles simulated battery usage. Three lithium nickel-manganese-cobalt oxide (LiNiMnCoO2) cells were tested at temperatures between 35°C and 40°C, with interruptions at every 5% capacity degradation to run reference performance tests for tracking changes in the battery model parameters. The equivalent circuit-based model was validated using real-world driving cycles. The parameter estimation procedure resulted in an efficient model that keeps track of the battery evolution as it ages.</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.
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 | 0.000 | 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".