MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923630316 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2019.2906487

xEV Li-Ion Battery Low-Temperature Effects—Review

2019· article· en· W2923630316 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Electric vehicleAutomotive engineeringLithium-ion batteryDegradation (telecommunications)Reliability engineeringBattery capacityComputer scienceFadeLithium (medication)State of chargePower (physics)EngineeringElectrical engineeringThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to review the recent literature regarding the effects of low temperatures on Lithium ion (Li-ion) batteries for electric vehicle, plug-in hybrid electric vehicle, and hybrid electric vehicle applications. Special consideration is given to nine major effects that directly or indirectly impact the battery use at low temperatures and it is presented that they are correlated to each other. The main discussions in this paper are capacity loss, power loss, life degradation, safety hazard, unbalanced capacity, charging difficulty, thermal management system complexity, battery model and state estimation method complexity, and incremental cost. The effects correlations and possible solutions are explained to provide a detailed, yet broader understanding of the Li-ion batteries low-temperature operating scenarios.

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.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.223 · 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