MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391467359 · doi:10.1109/tte.2024.3361649

Online Systemic Energy Management Strategy of Fuel Cell System With Efficiency Enhancement

2024· article· en· W4391467359 on OpenAlexaff
Qiaohui He, Jiabin Shen, Zhen Dong, Chang Liu, Xiaowei Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsGeneral Motors (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuel cellsEnergy managementBusinessEfficient energy useEnergy (signal processing)EngineeringChemical engineeringElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temperature plays a crucial role in efficiency improvement and lifespan extension of the fuel cell system which encourages energy management strategy (EMS) taking thermal into consideration. However, sluggish thermal response prevents the fuel cell performance from tracking the optimal states during scenarios with significant power variations, which was disregarded in the previous works. To solve this issue, an online hydrogen consumption minimization guarantee strategy (HCMG) including thermal management is proposed which is divided into two parts: 1) primary power distribution strategy, where a model predictive control (MPC) based EMS is employed herein to distribute power between fuel cell and battery with the objectives of minimizing hydrogen consumption as well as maintaining the state of charge (SOC), and 2) HCMG, where a modified MPC based method is exploited herein to track the reference power and optimal temperature with minimum hydrogen consumption by adjusting both the duty cycle of fan and fuel cell current. The presented approach ascertains hydrogen consumption reduction for 3.448% even under relatively extensive power changes, during which the temperature cannot reach the optimal value in a brief time. The real-time simulation results show the effectiveness of the proposed technique compared with previous EMS methods under various driving cycles.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Transportation ElectrificationSame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207