MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945115043 · doi:10.1109/tte.2019.2912029

A Fast Plant-Controller Optimization Process for Mild Hybrid Vehicles

2019· article· en· W2945115043 on OpenAlexafffund
Nickolas Leahey, Jennifer Bauman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPowertrainFuel efficiencyTruckProcess (computing)Automotive engineeringDriving cycleController (irrigation)Computer scienceOptimal designLimitingSimulationControl engineeringEngineeringTorque

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid vehicles are an important technology for reducing oil use and transportation-related emissions, and there has been recent renewed interest in mild hybrid powertrains due to their ability to provide moderate fuel savings at a relatively low cost. Simulation plays a major role in the design of hybrid vehicles, but slow simulation run times can sometimes be a limiting factor in the optimization process. This paper proposes a fast script-based optimization process that speeds up optimization iterations by 130 times compared to running a full Simulink model in rapid accelerator mode. This increase in speed can allow larger amounts of real-world data to be used in the design process. To investigate the use of real-world data in the design process, 5400 km of pick-truck driving data is used to optimize one plant and one controller parameter in a mild hybrid powertrain, and the results are compared to the optimal parameters found using three standard drive cycles. It was found that when testing on a 500-km validation dataset, the optimal designs from the UDDS, HWFET, and a created combination cycle led to 2.1%-3.8% higher fuel consumption than the optimal design from the large real-world dataset.

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 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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.766
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Transportation ElectrificationSame topicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207