A multi-stage optimization of battery electric bus transit with battery degradation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Battery electric buses (BEBs) are appealing to transit operators for their elevated comfort, low noise, and zero tailpipe emissions. However, the degradation of BEB batteries over time challenges their performance and necessitates infrastructure adjustments. This study develops a generic multi-stage optimization model for BEB systems. The model addresses the dynamic influence of BEB battery degradation rates on the optimal BEB system configuration and operation, including component sizing, charging infrastructure allocation, BEB charging schedule, and battery replacement throughout the BEB usage lifecycle. A surrogate model-based space mapping (SMSM) algorithm is employed to address the inherent nonlinearity of incorporating battery degradation rates within the developed model. The model is tested on a real-world, multi-hub transit network, and the results highlight significant implications of battery degradation on the optimal spatiotemporal allocation of charging infrastructure, charging schedules, and battery replacement decisions throughout the 12-year BEB usage lifecycle. Sensitivity analysis highlights the influence of operational conditions on total system cost, indicating a 16.3 % increase in cost with a 50 % rise in both energy consumption rates and time-of-use (ToU) tariffs. Overall, the proposed model is a valuable decision-making tool for transit operators navigating BEB transit system planning.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".