Interpretable machine learning models for predicting Ebus battery consumption rates in cold climates with and without diesel auxiliary heating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global shift towards sustainable and environmentally friendly transportation options has led to the increasing adoption of electric buses (Ebuses). To optimize the deployment and operational strategies of Ebuses, it is imperative to accurately predict their energy consumption under varying conditions, particularly in cold climates where battery life is typically degraded. The exploration of this aspect within the Canadian context has been limited. In addition, we have found that existing models in the literature perform poorly in the Canadian environment, giving rise to the need for new models using Canadian data. This paper focuses on the development, comparison, and evaluation of various data-driven models designed to predict the energy consumption of different Ebuses with different heating technologies under a wide range of climate conditions. We specifically use Canadian data as a good representative of cold climates in general. The results show that the performance of the different bus types varies substantially under the exact same conditions. In addition, tree-based family of models proves to be the most suitable approach for predicting the Ebus consumption rate. The results indicate that the Random Forest method emerges as the superior choice for predicting the energy consumption rate, with a resulting mean absolute error of 0.09-0.1 kWh/km observed across the different models. Furthermore, SHAP analysis shows that the main variables influencing the energy consumption rate depend on the type of heating system (using the battery for heating or using an auxiliary system that utilizes diesel for heating) adopted. • Comparison of Ebuses’ performance with different heating systems is conducted • Variables known in the planning stage are used to build the prediction models • Interpretation of the developed ML models is conducted using the SHAP analysis • Variables affecting the energy consumption are identified for the different Ebuses
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".