Observational Evaluation of the Maximum Practical Utilization of Electric Vehicle DCFC Infrastructure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Central to the design of a direct current fast charging (DCFC) network is the question of how much energy a DCFC of a given power can supply to vehicles without users being forced to queue to charge. We define ‘utilization factor’ as the ratio of the energy delivered by a DCFC in a multi-day period to the maximum amount of energy it could deliver in period. Three and a half years of data from 12 DCFCs are examined, characterizing each charging event by both the utilization factor and the time lag since the termination of the previous charging event. Short lags between events are inferred to indicate queuing. To keep the fraction of would-be users who have to queue below 10%, the overall utilization of the DCFC must likewise be limited to 10% (or 7–17% in exceptionally heterogeneous or exceptionally homogeneous traffic patterns, respectively). E.g., a 100 kW DCFC should not be expected to deliver more than 240 kWh per day (100 kW × 24 h × 10%).
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".