MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386536271 · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3313553

An Adaptive Regenerative Braking Strategy Design Based on Naturalistic Regeneration Performance for Intelligent Vehicles

2023· article· en· W4386536271 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marwa Ziadia, Sousso Kélouwani, Ali Amamou, Kodjo Agbossou

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsRegenerative brakeComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringPowertrainEngine brakingController (irrigation)MaximizationControl theory (sociology)EngineeringControl (management)TorqueBrakeArtificial intelligenceMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effectiveness of regenerative braking strategies plays an important role in extending the driving range of electric vehicles. Since the driver is still an essential factor in levels 3 and 4 of intelligent electric vehicles, improving user acceptance and adoption of the braking control strategy is crucial. This paper puts forward a new regenerative braking strategy to find a compromise between optimal braking control performance and naturalistic regeneration performance while satisfying the maximum speed preference when driving between two-stop events. Unlike other similar works that only maximize regenerative braking energy while satisfying the physical limits of an electrified powertrain, this paper considers naturalistic regeneration performance. To achieve this, firstly, the power regenerated by three drivers is predicted with a long-horizon (30 seconds), using long-short-term memory networks (LSTM) and non-linear autoregressive exogenous model (NARX). Subsequently, an estimation of the energy recovery maximization rate is performed to give a perception of the naturalistic regeneration performance. As this performance varies, the deceleration planning employs three horizon scales of long, medium, and short, determined by the energy recovery maximization rate. Finally, dynamic programming (DP) is utilized to optimize a deceleration profile. The study utilizes real data of inverter efficiency, transmission efficiency, and motor-to-battery efficiency map. The outcome of this study shows that the proposed regeneration braking strategy is adaptive, improving regeneration efficiency by 39,6% for driver 1, 16% for driver 2, and 26% for driver 3, and forecasting the optimality of some deceleration behaviors.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207