MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899855224 · doi:10.1142/s0218213018500367

Extreme Learning Machine Based Prognostics of Battery Life

2018· article· en· W2899855224 on OpenAlexaff
Roozbeh Razavi‐Far, Shiladitya Chakrabarti, Mehrdad Saif, Enrico Zio, Vasile Palade

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrognosticsComputer scienceScheme (mathematics)Battery (electricity)Battery capacityReliability engineeringMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningPower (physics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a prognostic scheme for estimating the remaining useful life of Lithium-ion batteries. The proposed scheme utilizes a prediction module that aims to obtain precise predictions for both short and long prediction horizons. The prediction module makes use of extreme learning machines for one-step and multi-step ahead predictions, using various prediction strategies, including iterative, direct and DirRec, which use the constant-current experimental capacity data for the estimation of the remaining useful life. The data-driven prognostic approach is highly dependent on the availability of high quantity of quality observations. Insufficient amount of available data can result in unsatisfactory prognostics. In this paper, the prognostics scheme is utilized to estimate the remaining useful life of a battery, with insufficient direct data available, but taking advantage of observations available from a fleet of similar batteries with similar working conditions. Experimental results show that the proposed prognostic scheme provides a fast and efficient estimation of the remaining useful life of the batteries and achieves superior results when compared with various state-of-the-art prediction techniques.

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)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Artificial Intelligence ToolsSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207