A Balancing Current Ratio Based State-of-Health Estimation Solution for Lithium-Ion Battery Pack
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inevitable battery ageing is a bottleneck that hinders the advancement of battery-based energy storage systems. Developing a feasible health assessment strategy for battery pack is important but challenging due to the joint requirements of the computational burden, modeling cost, estimation accuracy, and battery equalization. This article proposes a balancing current ratio (BCR) based solution to achieve reliable state-of-health (SoH) estimations of all series-connected cells within a pack while significantly reduce the overall reliance on cell-level battery models. Specifically, after employing BCR to describe the properties of the balancing process, the voltage-based active balancing is combined into the SoH estimator design for the first time, leading to a weighted fusion strategy to effectively estimate SoHs of all cells within a pack. Hardware-in-the-loop experiments show that even if a parameter-fixed open-circuit-voltage-resistance model is used for modeling, the typical estimation error of our proposed solution can still be bounded by only 1.5%, which is 70% lower than that of the benchmarking algorithms. Due to the model-free nature of the integrated voltage-based balancing, the robustness and flexibility of the proposed pack SoH estimation solution are also significantly improved.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".