MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962736777 · doi:10.1049/joe.2018.9234

State‐of‐Charge estimation of Li‐ion battery at different temperatures using particle filter

2019· article· en· W2962736777 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)State of chargeParticle filterResidualComputer scienceHeuristicTransient (computer programming)AlgorithmFilter (signal processing)Control theory (sociology)ComputationPower (physics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State‐of‐Charge (SOC) estimation is one of the fundamental functions undertaken by Battery Management System (BMS) in an Electric Vehicle (EV) to assess the residual service time of the battery during operation. Thus, an accurate model of the battery that efficiently describes its dynamic characteristics is necessary for precise SOC estimation. The variation in temperature effects battery parameters, and consequently, the estimation of SOC is subject to change in temperature. In this paper, the identification of parameters of battery model is considered as an optimisation problem and solved using meta‐heuristic Ageist Spider Monkey Algorithm (ASMO) under the influence of varying temperature. The developed model is used for SOC estimation using three Recursive Bayesian filtering based adaptive filter algorithms. Further, the efficiency of the implemented adaptive filter algorithms is compared in terms of solution quality and computation time required for evaluation of SOC.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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