Efficiency Upgrade of Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles’ Energy Management Strategies by Online Systemic Management of Fuel Cell
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, an approach for boosting the efficiency of energy management strategies (EMSs) in fuel cell hybrid electric vehicles using an online systemic management of the fuel cell system (FCS) is put forward. Unlike other similar works which solely determine the requested current from the FCS, this article capitalizes on simultaneous regulation of current and temperature, which have different dynamic behavior. In this regard, first, an online systemic management scheme is developed to guarantee the supply of the requested power from the stack with the highest efficiency. This scheme is based on an updatable three-dimensional map which relates the requested power from the stack to its optimal temperature and current. Second, two different EMSs are used to distribute the power between the FCS and battery. The EMSs' constraints are constantly updated by the online model to embrace the stack performance drifts owing to degradation and operating conditions variation. Finally, the effect of integrating the developed online systemic management into the EMSs' design is experimentally scrutinized under two standard driving cycles and indicated that up to 3.7% efficiency enhancement can be reached by employing such a systemic approach. Moreover, FCS's health adaptation unawareness can increase the hydrogen consumption up to 6.6%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".