LearningEMS: A Unified Framework and Open-Source Benchmark for Learning-Based Energy Management of Electric Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An effective energy management strategy (EMS) is essential to optimize the energy efficiency of electric vehicles (EVs). With the advent of advanced machine learning techniques, the focus on developing sophisticated EMS for EVs is increasing. Here, we introduce LearningEMS: a unified framework and open-source benchmark designed to facilitate rapid development and assessment of EMS. LearningEMS is distinguished by its ability to support a variety of EV configurations, including hybrid EVs, fuel cell EVs, and plug-in EVs, offering a general platform for the development of EMS. The framework enables detailed comparisons of several EMS algorithms, encompassing imitation learning, deep reinforcement learning (RL), offline RL, model predictive control, and dynamic programming. We rigorously evaluated these algorithms across multiple perspectives: energy efficiency, consistency, adaptability, and practicability. Furthermore, we discuss state, reward, and action settings for RL in EV energy management, introduce a policy extraction and reconstruction method for learning-based EMS deployment, and conduct hardware-in-the-loop experiments. In summary, we offer a unified and comprehensive framework that comes with three distinct EV platforms, over 10 000 km of EMS policy data set, ten state-of-the-art algorithms, and over 160 benchmark tasks, along with three learning libraries. Its flexible design allows easy expansion for additional tasks and applications. The open-source algorithms, models, data sets, and deployment processes foster additional research and innovation in EV and broader engineering domains.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".