Chevrolet Volt On-Road Test Programs in Canada. Part 2: Evaluation of Gasoline Displacement and Extreme Weather Performance in Comparison with Other Vehicles Types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two test programs were conducted to investigate the on-road performance of model year 2012 Chevrolet Volts in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Specific testing routes were defined for various types of city and highway driving. Data loggers and additional instrumentation were installed in the vehicles to accurately monitor variables indicating the use of electricity for driving, as well as the use of fuel by the gasoline engine. The vehicles were tested during various seasons of the year to record their performance over the full range of climate conditions representative for a large part of Canada (from -27 °C to +37 °C). The test results were subsequently processed and analysed to compare the Volt’s performance in charge depletion mode (electric drive) to its operation in charge sustaining mode (hybrid drive). A ‘Gasoline Displacement Factor’ was introduced, which reflects the amount of grid electricity needed to replace one litre of gasoline used for driving the Volt. Test results show very low Gasoline Displacement Factors of 2 – 3.5 kWh/L for summer driving, while values of 3 – 9 kWh/L were observed for winter driving. The test results were also used to evaluate the additional amount of energy that the vehicles would need for driving, and cabin conditioning (heating in winter, air conditioning in summer) under conditions different from the more optimal 20-25 °C temperature range used for most standard performance tests. The Volt’s relative performance under extreme temperature conditions was compared to those of conventional gasoline vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles and battery electric vehicles. Additionally, recommendations for a more optimal use of the Volt under extreme temperature conditions are provided.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".