MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289658263 · doi:10.1109/iscc.2015.7405606

Mobility impact on the performance of electric vehicle-to-grid communications in smart grid environment

2015· article· en· W2289658263 on OpenAlexaff
Yamen Y. Nasrallah, Irfan Al‐Anbagi, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGridSmart gridComputer scienceElectric vehicleTelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringEngineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plug-in Electric Vehicles (PEVs) are expected to be widely utilized in the near future if issues related to the availability of charging infrastructure are resolved and if PEVs are efficiently integrated with the smart grid. The Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) system is an emerging technology that enables the communication and control between PEVs and the smart grid. This promising concept is designed to provide the vehicles with information about where and when to charge their batteries, and allows the smart grid to acquire power from a PEV. An essential element to the success of V2G systems is reliable and secure communication system. Wireless communications in highly mobile V2G environment introduce serious challenges, such as reliability and real-time communication. In this paper, we present a comprehensive analysis of the impact of speed on the end-to-end delay and throughput in V2G communication scenarios. We focus on situations where authentication is performed when essential information such as payment data is exchanged between PEVs and its charging infrastructure. Furthermore, we present realistic delay analysis of the proposed communication infrastructure. Our simulation results show the impact of traffic density and speed on both the end-to-end delay and the throughput. We draw recommendations based on our test scenarios and simulation results.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)French-language works237,207