MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389352631 · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3340131

EV Charging Profiles and Waveforms Dataset (EV-CPW) and Associated Power Quality Analysis

2023· article· en· W4389352631 on OpenAlexafffund
Isla Ziyat, A. Gola, Patrick Palmer, Stephen Makonin, Fred Popowich

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectrical engineeringComputer scienceVoltagePower electronicsPower (physics)WaveformReliability (semiconductor)Electric vehicleRenewable energyHarmonicsElectronicsElectronic engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid growth of electric vehicle (EV) charging will present challenges to electrical distribution networks and will affect grid operation and reliability. In order to improve the understanding of EV charging behaviour, we present the open-access <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">EV Charging Profiles and Waveforms</i> (EV-CPW) dataset for AC charging. The dataset comprises of charging profiles and high-resolution current/voltage AC waveforms for 12 different EV’s, including popular battery EV’s and plug-in hybrid EV’s. A power quality analysis is carried out to compare the EV charging behaviours to new standards recommendations proposed by standards agencies. This includes evaluating power factor, current and voltage distortion, harmonic content and load behaviour in relation to grid voltage and frequency. The preliminary data analysis presented reveals that each EV has distinctive charging characteristics and the power quality analysis indicates variation in the on-board charger circuits employed by the EV’s. The EV-CPW dataset can be used for many more applications and studies, including EV charging infrastructure planning, demand management, EV charging coupled with renewable energy studies, power quality analysis, equipment lifetime studies and power electronics design. The dataset can be accessed at https://IEEE (will be added post review).

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations31
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207