Energy Management Strategies for Fuel Cell Vehicles: A Comprehensive Review of the Latest Progress in Modeling, Strategies, and Future Prospects
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
Fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) are considered a promising solution for reducing emissions caused by the transportation sector. An energy management strategy (EMS) is undeniably essential in increasing hydrogen economy, component lifetime, and driving range. While the existing EMSs provide a range of performance levels, they suffer from significant shortcomings in robustness, durability, and adaptability, which prohibit the FCV from reaching its full potential in the vehicle industry. After introducing the fundamental EMS problem, this review article provides a detailed description of the FCV powertrain system modeling, including typical modeling, degradation modeling, and thermal modeling, for designing an EMS. Subsequently, an in-depth analysis of various EMS evolutions, including rule-based and optimization-based, is carried out, along with a thorough review of the recent advances. Unlike similar studies, this paper mainly highlights the significance of the latest contributions, such as advanced control theories, optimization algorithms, artificial intelligence (AI), and multi-stack fuel cell systems (MFCSs). Afterward, the verification methods of EMSs are classified and summarized. Ultimately, this work illuminates future research directions and prospects from multi-disciplinary standpoints for the first time. The overarching goal of this work is to stimulate more innovative thoughts and solutions for improving the operational performance, efficiency, and safety of FCV powertrains.
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) | 0.001 | 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