MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Average Reward Reinforcement Learning for Optimal On-route Charging of Electric Buses

2020· article· en· W3132515107 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wenzhuo Chen, Hao Liang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduleReinforcement learningMarkov decision processComputer scienceBattery (electricity)GridProcess (computing)Markov processOperations researchAutomotive engineeringEngineeringPower (physics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, due to the severe environmental concerns caused by the emissions from the conventional transportations which use traditional fossil sources, people want to find an alternative method imperatively. Under this condition, electric buses attract transit service providers' attention. However, since the degradation of the battery and charging load for the local grid, the charging schedule is a critical issue to be addressed. In this paper, in order to obtain the optimal on-route charging schedule, a specific physical model and battery degradation model is built for the calculation of the energy consumption and the cost. Semi-Markov decision process (SMDP) is utilized to simulate the running process of the EBs, and the average reward reinforcement learning (ARRL) is introduced to optimize the on-route charging schedule for the EBs. The charging policy and the performance is compared with the default charging schedule according to the real EB operation data provided by the St. Albert Transit, AB, Canada.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207