Two‐layer dynamic economic nonlinear model predictive control for a lithium‐ion battery charge process with random disturbances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The charging process of lithium‐ion batteries is necessary for normal operation, and improper lithium‐ion battery charging strategy can cause side reactions, significant temperature rise, performance degradation, and safety concerns. This paper proposes a two‐layer dynamic economic nonlinear model predictive control economic model predictive control (EMPC) method for lithium‐ion battery charge management in which the non‐Gaussian random noise of voltage and current signal are taken into account. In the two‐layer EMPC, the upper layer finds the optimal reference trajectory, and the power in the future prediction horizon is chosen as an economic indicator to optimize the upper layer. The lower layer tracks the optimal trajectory, and model predictive control based on generalized correntropy is used. The economic cost of the system and the dynamic changes of the process are considered to greatly reduce the computational complexity and realize rapid battery charge management. Finally, the simulation results show that the tracking error of the two‐layer EMPC method based on generalized correntropy is stable around 0, while the tracking error of the two‐layer EMPC method based on MSE is stable around 0.003. The average control action times of the proposed two‐layer EMPC and single‐layer EMPC are 0.0052 and 0.0267 s, respectively. It is verified that the proposed method performs better for the lithium‐ion battery charging process with random disturbances.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".