MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Battery safety: Fault diagnosis from laboratory to real world

2024· article· en· W4391871086 on OpenAlexaff
Jingyuan Zhao, Xuning Feng, Manh‐Kien Tran, Michael Fowler, Minggao Ouyang, Andrew Burke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Power Sources · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Fault (geology)Forensic engineeringEngineeringAutomotive engineeringReliability engineeringComputer securityComputer scienceEnvironmental sciencePower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Battery failures, although rare, can significantly impact applications such as electric vehicles. Minor faults at cell level might lead to catastrophic failures and thermal runaway over time, underscoring the importance of early detection and real-time diagnosis. This article offers a concise yet comprehensive review and analysis of the mechanisms that cause battery faults and failures. It emphasizes the distinctions between controlled laboratory tests and practical scenarios, where safety hazards can occur during manufacturing and operational failures. Addressing the urgent need to transition technology from academic laboratories to practical applications is a key objective of this review. The cloud-based, AI-enhanced hierarchical framework leverages emerging technologies to predict battery behavior, enabling qualitative and quantitative diagnostics throughout the entire cycle. The goal is to address safety concerns in large-scale real-world applications by applying observational, empirical, physical, and mathematical understanding of the battery system. This framework provides holistic tools for the early detection of defective cells at the multiphysics level (mechanical, electrical, thermal behaviors) during manufacturing, offers digital diagnostic solutions at multiple scales (cell, pack, and system), and facilitates safety assessments for second-life cells. Finally, we discuss emerging trends, significant challenges, and opportunities for improving battery safety diagnostics using big data and machine learning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations169
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Power SourcesSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207