Applications of Clustering Methods for Different Aspects of Electric Vehicles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growing penetration of electric vehicles can pose several challenges for power systems, especially distribution systems, due to the introduction of significant uncertain load. Analysis of these challenges becomes computationally expensive with higher penetration of electric vehicles due to various preferences, travel behavior, and the battery size of electric vehicles. This problem can be addressed using clustering methods which have been successfully used in many other sectors. Recently, there have been several studies published on applying clustering methods for various aspects of electric vehicles. To summarize the existing efforts and provide future research directions, this contribution presents a three-step analysis. First, the existing clustering methods, including hard and soft clustering, are discussed. Then, the recent literature on the application of clustering methods for different aspects of electric vehicles is reviewed. The review concentrates on four major aspects of electric vehicles: the behavior of the user, driving cycle, used batteries, and charging stations. Then, several representative studies are selected from each category and their merits and demerits are summarized. Finally, gaps in the existing literature are identified and directions for future research are presented. They indicate the need for further research on the impact on distribution circuits, charging infrastructure during emergencies, equity and disparity in rebate allocations, and the use of big data with cluster analysis to assist transportation network management.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it