MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127612696 · doi:10.1109/tte.2021.3056432

Powertrain Design and Control in Electrified Vehicles: A Critical Review

2021· review· en· W3127612696 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Han, Xiaolin Tang, Xianke Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersState Key Laboratory of Advanced Design and Manufacturing for Vehicle BodyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPowertrainEnergy managementSizingAutomotive engineeringComponent (thermodynamics)MechatronicsComputer scienceEngineeringSystems engineeringControl engineeringEnergy (signal processing)Torque

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrified vehicles are considered a promising technology for energy savings and emission reductions. Both powertrain design (configuration design and component sizing) and energy management strategies (EMSs) for electrified vehicles have been studied extensively. However, powertrain design and energy management need to be examined holistically and optimized simultaneously, from a mechatronic viewpoint, for maximizing the potential of electrified powertrains. This article provides a comprehensive, critical review of the current state, and prospects of electrified powertrain design and energy management. The research status in both powertrain design and energy management development is reviewed and discussed. First, the modeling techniques for rapid configuration design are thoroughly reviewed and summarized. Then, the optimization methods for component sizing are elucidated. Next, the classical EMSs are categorized, and several near-optimal strategies used for powertrain design are elaborated. Finally, the current challenges and future trends of electrified powertrain design and control are discussed, which provides a useful reference to researchers in this area.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations136
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Transportation ElectrificationSame topicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207