MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796884273 · doi:10.3390/batteries4020019

Real-Time Implementation of an Extended Kalman Filter and a PI Observer for State Estimation of Rechargeable Li-Ion Batteries in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Applications—A Case Study

2018· article· en· W2796884273 on OpenAlexaff
Roxana-Elena Tudoroiu, Mohammed Zaheeruddin, Sorin Mihai Radu

Bibliographic record

VenueBatteries · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsJohn Abbott CollegeConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState of chargeEstimatorKalman filterComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Observer (physics)Robustness (evolution)Battery (electricity)MATLABMean squared errorElectric vehicleMathematicsControl (management)StatisticsPower (physics)Artificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Li-Ion battery state-of-charge estimation is an essential task in a continuous dynamic automotive industry for large-scale and successful marketing of hybrid electric vehicles. Also, the state-of-charge of any rechargeable battery, regardless of its chemistry, is an essential condition parameter for battery management systems of hybrid electric vehicles. In this study, we share from our accumulated experience in the control system applications field some preliminary results, especially in modeling, control and state estimation techniques. We investigate the design and effectiveness of two state-of-charge estimators, namely an extended Kalman filter and a proportional integral observer, implemented in a real-time MATLAB environment for a particular Li-Ion battery. Definitely, the aim of this work is to find the most suitable estimator in terms of estimation accuracy and robustness to changes in initial conditions (i.e., the initial guess value of battery state-of-charge) and changes in process and measurement noise levels. By a rigorous performance analysis of MATLAB simulation results, the potential estimator choice is revealed. The performance comparison can be done visually on similar graphs if the information gathered provides a good insight, otherwise, it can be done statistically based on the calculus of statistic errors, in terms of root mean square error, mean absolute error and mean square error.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBatteriesSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207