A Control-Oriented Electrothermal Model for Pouch-Type Electric Vehicle Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An accurate control-oriented electrothermal model is of great importance for onboard temperature monitoring and efficient performance management of lithium (Li)-ion batteries in automobile applications. This article presents a control-oriented electrothermal model for pouch-type electric vehicle batteries. This model uses the Chebyshev-Galerkin (CG) approximation method and captures the heat generation of positive and negative tabs, the heat flow between the tabs and the body, and the uneven heat generation inside the battery. This model consists of two lumped-mass submodels for positive and negative tabs and a 2-D CG submodel for the main battery body. The heat generation in the 2-D CG model is strongly dependent on the electrical parameters that are conversely functions of battery temperature. The lumped-mass models are decoupled from the 2-D CG model and parameterized separately by the particle swarm optimization algorithm and validated against the temperature measurements (covering three test scenarios) of a 20-Ah pouch-type Li-ion iron phosphate battery. The results demonstrate that the coupled model accurately predicts the temperatures of the tabs and the temperature distribution inside the battery. Besides, the computational complexity of the coupled model is also evaluated, and the result shows that the model has great potential for real-time temperature monitoring and efficient thermal management.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".