Fault detection of new and aged lithium-ion battery cells in electric vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a novel model-based fault detection in the battery management system of an electric vehicle is proposed. Two adaptive observers are designed to detect state-of-charge faults and voltage sensor faults, considering the impact of battery aging. Battery aging primarily affects capacity and resistance, becoming more pronounced in the later stages of a battery lifespan. By incorporating aging effects into our fault diagnosis scheme, our proposed approach prevents false or missed alarms for the aged battery cells. The aging effect of battery, capacity fading and resistance growth, are considered unknown parameters. An adaptive observer is employed to design a fault detector, considering unknown parameters in the battery model. The adaptive observers are designed for two different scenarios: In the first scenario, it is presumed that aging effects remain constant over time due to their slow rate of change. Then, it is assumed that aging effects are time-varying. Therefore, the fault detection scheme can detect faults of new battery cells as well as aged cells. Some simulations have been conducted on a Lithium-ion battery cell and extended to battery pack, to demonstrate the performance of the proposed approach in more real-world scenarios. The results showed that the designed observers can detect faults correctly in a seven years old battery as well as a new one.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".