Data‐driven battery capacity estimation using support vector regression and model bagging under fast‐charging conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lithium‐ion batteries offer significant advantages in terms of their high energy and power density and efficiency, but capacity degradation remains a major issue during their usage. Accurately estimating the remaining capacity is crucial for ensuring safe operations, leading to the development of precise capacity estimation models. Data‐driven models have emerged as a promising approach for capacity estimation. However, existing models predominantly focus on constant current charging conditions, limiting their applicability in real‐world scenarios where fast‐charging conditions are commonly employed. The primary objective of this work is to develop a more versatile machine learning model (i.e., support vector regression [SVR]) capable of estimating battery capacity under fast‐charging conditions, with broader applicability across various work conditions. Genetic algorithm and cross‐validation techniques are employed to simultaneously optimize feature extraction hyperparameters and SVR hyperparameters. A model bagging method is further implemented to address prediction challenges under unknown fast‐charging conditions. The effectiveness of the developed model is validated on a cycling dataset of lithium‐ion batteries under different two‐stage fast‐charging conditions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".