Machine Learning Applied to Electrified Vehicle Battery State of Charge and State of Health Estimation: State-of-the-Art
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growing interest and recent breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) have actively contributed to an increase in research and development of new methods to estimate the states of electrified vehicle batteries. Data-driven approaches, such as ML, are becoming more popular for estimating the state of charge (SOC) and state of health (SOH) due to greater availability of battery data and improved computing power capabilities. This paper provides a survey of battery state estimation methods based on ML approaches such as feedforward neural networks (FNNs), recurrent neural networks (RNNs), support vector machines (SVM), radial basis functions (RBF), and Hamming networks. Comparisons between methods are shown in terms of data quality, inputs and outputs, test conditions, battery types, and stated accuracy to give readers a bigger picture view of the ML landscape for SOC and SOH estimation. Additionally, to provide insight into how to best approach with the comparison of different neural network structures, an FNN and long short-term memory (LSTM) RNN are trained fifty times each for 3000 epochs. The error is somewhat different for each training repetition due to the random initial values of the trainable parameters, demonstrating that it is important to train networks multiple times to achieve the best result. Furthermore, it is recommended that when performing a comparison among estimation techniques such as those presented in this review paper, the compared networks should have a similar number of learnable parameters and be trained and tested with identical data. Otherwise, it is difficult to make a general conclusion regarding the quality of a given estimation technique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it