MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386902794 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2023.3317804

Control Design for Effective Usage of Electric Vehicles in V2G-Enabled DC Charging Stations

2023· article· en· W4386902794 on OpenAlexaff
Asal Zabetian‐Hosseini, G. Joós, Benoît Boulet

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState of chargeController (irrigation)Charging stationConvertersElectrical engineeringBattery (electricity)Electric vehicleEnergy storageEngineeringGridVoltageTrickle chargingVehicle-to-gridComputer sciencePower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the usage of electric vehicles (EVs) to enable vehicle-to-grid (V2G) in DC charging stations. The V2G-enabled DC charging station is equipped with bidirectional DC/DC converters for both DC chargers and the energy storage system (ESS) and a three-phase two-level AC/DC voltage source converter for connecting to the low-voltage grid. A proposed controller with a state-of-charge (SoC) balancing algorithm for a bidirectional DC charging station is designed to offer the capability to limit the injected power from the grid using both EVs in V2G mode (V2G-EV) and the ESS. It ensures the safety of each V2G-EV battery by communicating with the EV battery management system (BMS) and receiving its SoCs, charge/discharge current limits, and energy capacity. Finally, it aggregates EV batteries and the optional ESS using the proposed SoC balancing algorithm. Several cases are developed to evaluate the performance of the proposed control design in the studied DC charging station model. The results validate the performance of the control design in both offline simulation and controller-hardware-in-loop (C-HIL) implementation via a digital signal controller (DSC) and a real-time simulator.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207