MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379142708 · doi:10.1504/ijpelec.2023.131192

Review of on-board conductive charger topologies for electric transportation

2023· article· en· W4379142708 on OpenAlexaff
N. Vijaya Anand, A.V. Jaya Sai Praneeth, Naveen Yalla, Vijay K. Sood

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Power Electronics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetwork topologyAutomotive industryElectrical engineeringBattery chargerBattery (electricity)EngineeringConvertersElectric vehicleAutomotive batteryAutomotive engineeringPower (physics)Topology (electrical circuits)Computer scienceVoltageComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an overview of on-board conductive charger topologies for electric vehicles (EVs). Battery packs in electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (EVs/PHEVs) need frequent energy refills to fulfil their duty cycles and overcome the range anxiety of vehicle owners. Due to the limited availability of fast charging infrastructures, all automotive manufacturers prefer an on-board battery charger in their vehicles. However, there are power level limitations for these chargers because of the weight, space and cost constraints. On-board charging systems can be either conductive or inductive. This paper reviews the topologies that are involved in conductive charging only. Globally, all automotive companies provide levels 1 and 2 for residential charging of vehicles. Single- and two-stage power converter topologies are summarised with their limitations. Furthermore, the current trends in the DC-DC converters for the two-stage conversion battery charger topologies are also outlined. This paper provides an overview of various topologies and configurations involved in EV charging with their limitations.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Power ElectronicsSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207