MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312201494 · doi:10.3390/en16010185

Review of the Li-Ion Battery, Thermal Management, and AI-Based Battery Management System for EV Application

2022· article· en· W4312201494 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Ghalkhani, Saeid Habibi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Battery packState of healthCommercializationState of chargeAutomotive engineeringEnergy managementManagement systemComputer scienceEnergy storageSystems engineeringEngineeringReliability engineeringEnergy (signal processing)Power (physics)Operations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the large-scale commercialization and growing market share of electric vehicles (EVs), many studies have been dedicated to battery systems design and development. Their focus has been on higher energy efficiency, improved thermal performance and optimized multi-material battery enclosure designs. The integration of simulation-based design optimization of the battery pack and Battery Management System (BMS) is evolving and has expanded to include novelties such as artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) to improve efficiencies in design, manufacturing, and operations for their application in electric vehicles and energy storage systems. Specific to BMS, these advanced concepts enable a more accurate prediction of battery performance such as its State of Health (SOH), State of Charge (SOC), and State of Power (SOP). This study presents a comprehensive review of the latest developments and technologies in battery design, thermal management, and the application of AI in Battery Management Systems (BMS) for Electric Vehicles (EV).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations121
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207