The Role of Charging Infrastructure in Electric Vehicle Implementation within Smart Grids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the integration of electric vehicle (EV) fleets into the smart grid context, charging infrastructure serves as the interlinkage between EV fleets and the power grid and, as such, affects the impacts of EV operation on the smart grid. In this study, the impacts of charging infrastructure on the effectiveness of different EV operational modes were simulated using a multi-component modelling approach, which accounts for both stochastic EV fleet charging behaviors as well as optimal energy vector dispatch operation. Moreover, a campus microgrid case study was presented to demonstrate the various design factors and impacts of charging infrastructure implementation affecting EV fleet adoption and operation. Based on results from the study, it was shown that charging infrastructure should be adopted in excess of the minimum required to satisfy EV charging for driving needs. In addressing uncontrolled charging behaviors, additional charging infrastructure improves EV owner convenience and reduces queuing duration. Meanwhile, controlled charging strategies benefit from increased resilience against uncertain charging behavior and operate more optimally in systems subject to time-of-use (TOU) electricity pricing. Lastly, it was demonstrated that successful vehicle-to-grid (V2G) implementation requires charging infrastructure to emulate the availability and fast response characteristics of stationary energy storage systems, which translates to excess charging port availability, long EV plug-in durations, and bi-directional power flow capabilities well beyond the level 2 charging standard.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".