Transfer Learning With Deep Neural Network for Capacity Prediction of Li-Ion Batteries Using EIS Measurement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, transfer learning (TL) technique is used in conjunction with deep neural network (DNN) to predict the capacity of lithium-ion batteries. First, the base DNN model is trained and validated based on the source dataset containing electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurement at temperatures of 25 °C and 35 °C. Then, the base DNN model is retrained and validated using different proportions, i.e., the first 50% and 20% of the target dataset, which contains EIS measurement at the temperature of 45 °C. This will create a new model called DNN-TL carrying the knowledge from the base model. The DNN-TL model is used to predict the second proportions, i.e., the second 50% and 80% of the target dataset considered as missing data. The maximum mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), when the first 50% and 20% of the target dataset are used for retraining DNN-TL with no fixed-layer, is found to be 0.605% and 0.999%, respectively, which indicates the accuracy of the model to estimate the capacity of batteries. The average <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$R$ </tex-math></inline-formula> -squared of 0.9683 is achieved by DNN-TL with no fixed-layer indicating the goodness of its fit and its capability to follow the actual missing datasets.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".