A Dynamic Programming Algorithm for HEV Powertrains Using Battery Power as State Variable
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the first steps in powertrain design is to assess its best performance and consumption in a virtual phase. Regarding hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), it is important to define the best mode profile through a cycle in order to maximize fuel economy. To assist in that task, several off-line optimization algorithms were developed, with Dynamic Programming (DP) being the most common one. The DP algorithm generates the control actions that will result in the most optimal fuel economy of the powertrain for a known driving cycle. Although this method results in the global optimum behavior, the DP tool comes with a high computational cost. The charge-sustaining requirement and the necessity of capturing extremely small variations in the battery state of charge (SOC) makes this state vector an enormous variable. As things move fast in the industry, a rapid tool with the same performance is required. The present work proposes a novel approach in defining the state variables of the DP algorithm with the objective of reducing the computational time at a low cost of accuracy. The commonly used state variable, SOC, is replaced by the cumulative battery power vector discretized twice: the first one being the macro-discretization that runs throughout DP to get associated to control actions, and the second one being the micro-discretization that is responsible for capturing the smallest power demand possible and updating the final SOC profile.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".