Energy Logistics Cost Study for Wireless Charging Transportation Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many cities around the world encourage the transition to battery-powered vehicles to minimize the carbon footprint of the transportation sector. Deploying large-scale wireless charging infrastructures to charge electric transit buses when loading and unloading passengers have become an effective way to reduce emissions. The standard plug-in electric vehicles have a limited amount of power stored in the battery, resulting in frequent stops to refill the energy. Optimal siting of wireless charging bus stops is essential to reducing these inconveniences and enhancing the sustainability performance of a wireless charging bus fleet. Wireless charging is an innovation of transmitting power through electromagnetic induction to portable electrical devices for energy renewal. Online Electric Vehicle (OLEV) is a new technology that allows the vehicle to be charged while it is in motion, thus removing the need to stop at a charging station. Developed by the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), OLEV picks up electricity from power transmitters buried underground. This paper aims to investigate the cost of the energy logistics for the three types of wireless charging networks: stationary wireless charging (SWC), quasi-dynamic wireless charging (QWC), and dynamic wireless charging (DWC), deployed at stops and size of battery capacity for electric buses, using OLEV technology for a bus service transit in the borough of Manhattan (MN) in New York City (NYC).
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.
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 it