A Review of Range Extenders in Battery Electric Vehicles: Current Progress and Future Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emissions from the transportation sector are significant contributors to climate change and health problems because of the common use of gasoline vehicles. Countries in the world are attempting to transition away from gasoline vehicles and to electric vehicles (EVs), in order to reduce emissions. However, there are several practical limitations with EVs, one of which is the “range anxiety” issue, due to the lack of charging infrastructure, the high cost of long-ranged EVs, and the limited range of affordable EVs. One potential solution to the range anxiety problem is the use of range extenders, to extend the driving range of EVs while optimizing the costs and performance of the vehicles. This paper provides a comprehensive review of different types of EV range extending technologies, including internal combustion engines, free-piston linear generators, fuel cells, micro gas turbines, and zinc-air batteries, outlining their definitions, working mechanisms, and some recent developments of each range extending technology. A comparison between the different technologies, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of each, is also presented to help address future research needs. Since EVs will be a significant part of the automotive industry future, range extenders will be an important concept to be explored to provide a cost-effective, reliable, efficient, and dynamic solution to combat the range anxiety issue that consumers currently have.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".