MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386810006 · doi:10.18280/ria.370402

Deep Learning Based Optimization Model for Energy Consumption of New Electric Vehicles

2023· article· en· W4386810006 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ghamya Kotapati, Prem Kumar Deepak Selvamani, Kranthi Kumar Lella, Venkateswara Rao Katevarapu

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy consumptionComputer scienceDeep learningConsumption (sociology)Electric energy consumptionAutomotive engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringElectric energyElectrical engineeringPhysicsArtPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid proliferation and increasing adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) have rendered them a fundamental component of intelligent transportation networks, contributing significantly to the reduction of harmful greenhouse gas emissions.The surge in the number of EVs necessitates an equally expanding infrastructure to meet their charging requirements.Accurate prediction of EV charging demand, therefore, is critical to alleviate strain on power systems and associated costs.This study presents a novel hybrid deep learning model aimed at predicting the charging needs of electric vehicles.The Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), an integral part of this model, is employed for data collection.The CNN effectively extracts local features of the data, focuses on localized information, and reduces computational demands.The Bidirectional Gated Recurrent Unit (BGRU) contributes to superior performance with time-series data due to its inherent ability to analyze such data.The Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD) is used to decompose the input time series data while preserving their characteristics.The parameters of the BGRU prediction model are then fine-tuned using a hybrid Jarratt-Butterfly optimization algorithm (JBOA) model.The innovative EMD-CNN-BGRU predictor is evaluated using the EV charging dataset collected from the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Georgia, USA.The simulation results achieved an impressive 98% accuracy in prediction.A comparative analysis with existing methods in the literature reveals the superior predictive metrics of the proposed deep learning neural forecaster for the dataset under consideration.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207