Lithium-Ion Battery Health Estimation Using an Adaptive Dual Interacting Model Algorithm for Electric Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To ensure reliable operation of electrical systems, batteries require robust battery monitoring systems (BMSs). A BMS’s main task is to accurately estimate a battery’s available power, referred to as the state of charge (SOC). Unfortunately, the SOC cannot be measured directly due to its structure, and so must be estimated using indirect measurements. In addition, the methods used to estimate SOC are highly dependent on the battery’s available capacity, known as the state of health (SOH), which degrades as the battery is used, resulting in a complex problem. In this paper, a novel adaptive battery health estimation method is proposed. The proposed method uses a dual-filter architecture in conjunction with the interacting multiple model (IMM) algorithm. The dual filter strategy allows for the model’s parameters to be updated while the IMM allows access to different degradation rates. The well-known Kalman filter (KF) and relatively new sliding innovation filter (SIF) are implemented to estimate the battery’s SOC. The resulting methods are referred to as the dual-KF-IMM and dual-SIF-IMM, respectively. As demonstrated in this paper, both algorithms show accurate estimation of the SOC and SOH of a lithium-ion battery under different cycling conditions. The results of the proposed strategies will be of interest for the safe and reliable operation of electrical systems, with particular focus on electric vehicles.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".