Fault Detection and Diagnosis of the Electric Motor Drive and Battery System of Electric Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) is of utmost importance in ensuring the safety and reliability of electric vehicles (EVs). The EV’s power train and energy storage, namely the electric motor drive and battery system, are critical components that are susceptible to different types of faults. Failure to detect and address these faults in a timely manner can lead to EV malfunctions and potentially catastrophic accidents. In the realm of EV applications, Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motors (PMSMs) and lithium-ion battery packs have garnered significant attention. Consequently, fault detection methods for PMSMs and their drives, as well as for lithium-ion battery packs, have become a prominent area of research. An effective FDD approach must possess qualities such as accuracy, speed, sensitivity, and cost-effectiveness. Traditional FDD techniques include model-based and signal-based methods. However, data-driven approaches, including machine learning-based methods, have recently gained traction due to their promising capabilities in fault detection. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive overview of potential faults in EV motor drives and battery systems, while also reviewing the latest state-of-the-art research in EV fault detection. The information presented herein can serve as a valuable reference for future endeavors in this field.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".