MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384502033 · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101283

Electric vehicles survey and a multifunctional artificial neural network for predicting energy consumption in all-electric vehicles

2023· article· en· W4384502033 on OpenAlexaff
Bukola Peter Adedeji

Bibliographic record

VenueResults in Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkElectric energy consumptionEnergy consumptionElectric vehicleAutomotive engineeringEngineeringFunction (biology)Computer scienceSimulationArtificial intelligenceElectric energyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study contains a survey on the architecture of electric vehicles and an artificial neural network application for prediction of energy consumption in all-electric vehicles. In this study, the term “electric vehicles” (EVs) refers to various types of electrified vehicles. The technologies behind these electric vehicles were also discussed. The survey focuses on hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), pure electric vehicles (PEVs), and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). The study also presents the design simulation of a typical HEV. A hybrid electric vehicle was designed using ADVISOR, and it was compared with another car known as the targeted car. The fuel consumption of the designed car was found to be lower than that of the targeted car. The study also introduced a multifunctional artificial neural network model for predicting electrical energy consumption in all-electric vehicles. The proposed model has nine input variables, which are virtual functions calculated from the nine selected parameters using a virtual function formula. The number of input variables was made to be equal to the number of output variables so that the artificial neural network could simulate a unique solution. The proposed model was compared with a multi-output inverse function model of an artificial neural network. The accuracy of the proposed model was 1.24–6.85 times higher than that of the inverse function model for the nine case studies considered in terms of mean square error.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations73
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResults in EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207