Optimal Driving Range for Battery Electric Vehicles Based on Modeling Users’ Driving and Charging Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a simulation approach for the optimal driving range of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) by modeling the driving and charging behavior. The driving and charging patterns of BEV users are characterized by reconstructing the daily travel chain based on the practical data collected from Shanghai, China. Meanwhile, interdependent behavioral variables for daily trips and each trip are defined in the daily trip chain. To meet the goal of the fitness of driving range, a stochastic simulation framework is established by the Monte Carlo method. Finally, with consideration of user heterogeneity, the optimal driving range under different charging scenarios is analyzed. The findings include the following. (1) The daily trip chain can be reconstructed through the behavioral variables for daily trips and each trip, and there is a correlation between the variables examined by the copula function. (2) Users with different daily travel demand have a different optimal driving range. When choosing a BEV, users are recommended to consider that the daily vehicle kilometers traveled are less than 34% of the battery driving range. (3) Increasing the charging opportunity and charging power is more beneficial to drivers who are characterized by high daily travel demand. (4) On the premise of meeting travel demand, the beneficial effects of increased fast-charging power will gradually decline.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".