MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772739786 · doi:10.1109/tte.2017.2779267

Whole-Day Driving Prediction Control Strategy: Analysis on Real-World Drive Cycles

2017· article· en· W2772739786 on OpenAlexaff
Petru Palcu, Jennifer Bauman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive engineeringRange (aeronautics)Plug-inMarket penetrationBattery (electricity)Driving rangeControl (management)Electric vehicleComputer scienceSimulationEngineeringElectrical engineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Whole-Day Driving Prediction (WDDP) concept is a unique plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) control strategy that uses the day's planned travels to determine if a small range-extending engine should be turned on at the start of each day. This control strategy allows for the use of a very small engine, in contrast to commercially available PHEVs, which generally have engines large enough to propel the vehicle. This paper presents modeling and simulation results for WDDP vehicles on the real-world logged driving cycles of 100 drivers who were each logged for between 2 and 6 weeks. The simulation results show that with an engine size between 5 and 7 kW, the WDDP vehicle with a 35-kWh battery has similar range capabilities to a pure EV with a 60-kWh battery. The consequence is that purchase price can be decreased while keeping similar range performance, encouraging a higher market penetration of plug-in vehicles. The results of this paper show that the WDDP concept is viable for real-world use, and has the potential to reduce plug-in vehicle costs while achieving driving ranges similar to the new long-range EVs recently introduced to the market.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Transportation ElectrificationSame topicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207