MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186024736 · doi:10.1109/tpel.2021.3098445

Multi-fault Detection and Isolation for Lithium-Ion Battery Systems

2021· article· en· W3186024736 on OpenAlexaff
Kai Zhang, Yonggang Liu, Xianke Lin, Wenxue Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Electronics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFault detection and isolationResidualRobustness (evolution)VoltageEngineeringKalman filterState of chargeFault indicatorComputer scienceElectronic engineeringControl theory (sociology)Reliability engineeringBattery (electricity)Electrical engineeringAlgorithmPower (physics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various faults in the lithium-ion battery system pose a threat to the performance and safety of the battery. However, early faults are difficult to detect, and false alarms occasionally occur due to similar features of the faults. In this article, an online multifault diagnosis strategy based on the fusion of model-based and entropy methods is proposed to detect and isolate multiple types of faults, including current, voltage, and temperature sensor faults, short-circuit faults, and connection faults. An interleaved voltage measurement topology is adopted to distinguish voltage sensor faults from battery short-circuit or connection faults. Based on the established comprehensive battery model, structural analysis is performed to develop diagnostic tests that are sensitive to different faults. Residual generation based on the extended Kalman filter and residual evaluation based on the statistical inference are conducted to detect and isolate sensor faults. Sample entropy is used to further distinguish between the short-circuit faults and connection faults. The effectiveness of the proposed diagnostic method is verified by multiple fault tests with different fault types and sizes. The results also show that the proposed method has good robustness to noise and inconsistencies in the state of charge and temperature.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations156
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power ElectronicsSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207