MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521647072 · doi:10.1504/ijehv.2015.074671

Automated topology optimisation of hybrid electric vehicle powertrains

2015· article· en· W2521647072 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam H. Ing, John McPhee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Electric and Hybrid Vehicles · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPowertrainNetwork topologyAutomotive engineeringTopology (electrical circuits)Fuel efficiencyComponent (thermodynamics)ComputationSizingEngineeringControl engineeringGraphElectric vehicleComputer scienceTorqueAlgorithmElectrical engineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gasoline and electric powertrain components can be connected in numerous configurations to create hybrid powertrains. Owing to the exponential increase of permutations as the number of components increases, a framework to determine the best possible powertrain configuration that minimises fuel consumption was developed. This framework uses enumeration to discover all powertrains, the Graph-Theoretic Method to generate system equations, dynamic programming to evaluate fuel consumption and generate an objective score, and Pattern Search to optimise the sizing of each component. A multi-stage screening process was used to reduce computation time. Parallel and powersplit-like topologies with additional discrete gearboxes were found to be the most efficient. The best performing topology is a powersplit hybrid type: a discrete gearbox connected to the final drive, with the output gear of the planetary carrier and electric motor in parallel.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Electric and Hybrid VehiclesSame topicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207