A Pattern-Driven Stochastic Degradation Model for the Prediction of Remaining Useful Life of Rechargeable Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, there has been a significant growth in the development of rechargeable battery-powered devices such as electric vehicles, leading to an urgent need for reliable and safe batteries. The remaining useful life (RUL) is a critical health indicator of battery, which is defined as the remaining number of charge and recharge cycles before the state-of-health falls below a user-specified threshold under certain operating settings. Substantially, the RUL can be estimated by adaptive stochastic processes or advanced machine learning techniques. However, the existing approaches either assume over-simplified degradation pattern in accordance with physics laws leading to poor generalizability or act as a black box offering no interpretation. To address these limitations, in this article, we develop a pattern-driven degradation process by integrating a recursive Gaussian distribution with its mean learnt from a gated recurrent unit (GRU) driven degradation pattern to capture degradation fluctuation into the model. Due to the non-Markovian state transitions, a joint-learning sampling-based expectation maximization algorithm was developed to estimate model parameters based on historical observations. Finally, numerical studies using real battery data showed that the proposed method achieves over 3% and 40% higher accuracy in RUL prediction than the GRU and adaptive Wiener process, respectively.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".