MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292387292 · doi:10.1109/tte.2022.3200030

Maximizing Driving Range for Fuel Cell Range Extender Vehicles With Fixed Energy Storage Costs

2022· article· en· W4292387292 on OpenAlexaff
Jingting Dong, Jennifer Bauman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive engineeringDriving rangeBattery (electricity)Range (aeronautics)Electric vehicleFuel cellsDriving cycleEnergy storageComputer scienceFuel efficiencyMiles per gallon gasoline equivalentBattery electric vehicleEngineeringGreen vehiclePower (physics)Aerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industry and researchers are investigating both battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel cell hybrid vehicles (FCHVs) for the future of sustainable passenger vehicle technology. While BEVs have clear efficiency advantages, FCHVs have key benefits in terms of refueling time and energy density. This article first proposes the concept of a fuel cell range extender vehicle (FCREV) that uses whole-day driving prediction (WDDP) control, which uses driver destination inputs to determine whether the planned driving trips that day will exceed the useable battery energy capacity. If so, the fuel cell is turned on at the start of the day. The benefit of WDDP control is that a smaller, lower cost fuel cell can be used to greatly extend the driving range since the fuel cell can charge the battery during both driving and parked periods of the day. Furthermore, this research proposes a fast analytical optimization algorithm for designing a WDDP-FCREV to maximize the range on a given drive cycle for a set cost. The results show that an optimized WDDP-FCREV can greatly exceed the range of the same-cost BEV, by 105%–150% for no H2 refueling and by 150%–250% when H2 refueling is allowed every 4 h.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Transportation ElectrificationSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207