MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941845971 · doi:10.7176/isde/10-3-03

Efficiency for Large Fleets: An Analysis of How Industrial Customers Use Electric and Hybrid Vehicles

2019· article· en· W2941845971 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adam-Alexander Manowicz, Jan Frenz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsGeotab (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Computer scienceIBMAutomotive engineeringFleet managementOperations researchEnvironmental scienceTransport engineeringTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents methods and results which allow an analysis of relevant driving parameters of hybrid and electric vehicles. In order to gain crucial insights into how industrial customers use hybrid and electric vehicles, the paper investigates the following parameters: information about odometer, charging processes and battery charging levels. The data used for this purpose was provided by the Canadian fleet management company Geotab Inc. They were evaluated by means of ‘Google BigQuery’ and the statistics programme ‘IBM SPSS Statistics’. It turned out that correlations between ‘charging time’ and ‘battery charging level’ exist, as well as between ‘battery level’ and ‘distance per day’. One of the main questions in the present study asks whether long charging times of car batteries lead to decreased average battery charging levels. As a result of this study, the longer a hybrid vehicle is charged per day, the lower sink its average battery charging level. The findings of this research help managers of car fleets to enhance their existing fleet management for establishing more efficient fleets with respect to ecological and economical aspects. Our research is particularly significant as this will save money across such fleets worldwide, and at the same time, preserve the environment as much as possible. Keywords: fleet management, electric and hybrid vehicles, big data, battery charging DOI : 10.7176/ISDE/10-3-03 Publication date :March 31 st 2019

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207