MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406220085 · doi:10.3390/batteries11010021

Adaptive Transfer Learning Strategy for Predicting Battery Aging in Electric Vehicles

2025· article· en· W4406220085 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniela Galatro, Cristina H. Amon

Bibliographic record

VenueBatteries · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFord Motor Company
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Transfer of learningComputer scienceTransfer (computing)Automotive engineeringArtificial intelligencePower (physics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents an adaptive transfer learning approach for predicting the aging of lithium-ion batteries (LiBs) in electric vehicles using capacity fade as the metric for the battery state of health. The proposed approach includes a similarity-based and adaptive strategy in which selected data from an original dataset are transferred to a clean dataset based on the combined/weighted similarity contribution of feature and stress factor similarities and times series similarities. Transfer learning (TL) is then performed by pre-training a model with clean data, with frozen weights and biases to the hidden layer. At the same time, weights and biases toward the output node are recalculated with the target data. The error reduction lies between −0.4% and −8.3% for 20 computational experiments, attesting to the effectiveness and robustness of our adaptive TL approach. Considerations for data structure and representation learning are presented, as well as a workflow to enhance the application of transfer learning for predicting aging in LiBs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBatteriesSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207