MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216709334 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2021.3130580

Multi-Objective Design Optimization of a Novel Dual-Mode Power-Split Hybrid Powertrain

2021· article· en· W3216709334 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaolin Tang, Jieming Zhang, Xiangyang Cui, Xianke Lin, Lech M. Grzesiak

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersState Key Laboratory of Advanced Design and Manufacturing for Vehicle BodyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPowertrainPareto principleMathematical optimizationDual (grammatical number)Mode (computer interface)Multi-objective optimizationComputer sciencePower (physics)EngineeringControl theory (sociology)MathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to explore the performance potential of a novel dual-mode power-split hybrid powertrain. First, the steady-state power split characteristics for the proposed hybrid powertrain in different modes are analyzed. The mode switching strategy is developed to maximize powertrain efficiency, which is verified by using dynamic programming based on direct transmit points (DTPs). Moreover, a novel multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on the decomposition (MOEA/D) method used in a nested way with dynamic programming is proposed to solve the multi-objective optimization of the PS-HEVs for the first time, and the computational efficiency and superiority of the proposed algorithm is compared with the commonly used NSGA-II algorithm. The results show that the MOEA/D based multi-objective optimization framework has similar performance in the search for the Pareto frontier but significantly higher computational efficiency than that of the NSGA-II algorithm. The obtained Pareto frontier provides optimal design candidates for hybrid powertrain systems.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations41
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207