MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Learning-Based Battery Voltage Forecasting Using Current as Input: A Multi-Stage Approach for Time Series Prediction

2024· article· en· W4405754874 on OpenAlexaff
Masoumeh Rostam Niakan, Seyed Saeed Madani, Michael Fowler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSeries (stratigraphy)Time seriesCurrent (fluid)Battery (electricity)Stage (stratigraphy)Artificial intelligenceVoltageMachine learningEngineeringElectrical engineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a novel approach for forecasting the voltage of the battery by learning the deep neural networks, based on leveraging the concurrent battery current as an input variable. The methodology employs the Long Short-Term Memory model, named LSTM, which is known for its capability to handle long-range dependencies in sequential data. The approach begins with the data pre-processing, where an in-depth analysis of the battery's Equivalent Electric Circuit (EEC) parameters is performed. These parameters are crucial for accurately predicting the battery's voltage response under various conditions. Subsequently, the data undergoes normalization, feature importance determination, windowing, and is split into training and testing sets. The training subset is applied to develop the LSTM-based forecasting model. A key innovation of this approach is the use of a multi-stage forecasting technique, where the LSTM model is trained to predict one step at a time, and then feed the output back into the model for the next prediction. This approach allows the model to dynamically adjust its predictions based on the feedback received from previous steps, enabling more accurate and robust forecasting. The experimental framework evaluates the proposed multi-stage LSTM forecasting model against single-stage LSTM, and other neural networks including a dense layer model, as well as a dense layer model with activation function. The results demonstrate that the multi-stage LSTM approach outperforms other models in terms of Mean Absolute Error (MAE), indicating its superiority for forecasting the voltage of the battery.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207