Temporal Sensitivity Analysis of Internal Temperature Informed Charging Algorithms and Rapid Thermal Management System for E-mobility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experimental studies presented in this paper reveal that existing thermal management systems (TMS) and temperature-informed charging algorithms exhibit a response time lag of at least 5.3 minutes due to their reliance on surface temperature measurements. The results indicate that changes in the internal thermal state of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), induced by variations in charging currents, take an average of 2 minutes to manifest on the battery surface, particularly evident in cylindrical cells. Current thermal management systems for automotive battery packs solely rely on surface temperature measurements, neglecting the approximately 5.8°C temperature difference between the core and surface in TMS control. Consequently, changes in the battery's thermal state due to internal heat losses are not promptly detected by surface-mounted temperature sensors. This delayed response time accelerates battery degradation and increases the risk of thermal runaway events. In this study, temperature-informed fast charging algorithms, tested under various ambient conditions for LIBs, along with a comparative analysis, demonstrate that response time can be reduced by at least 2 minutes by considering internal temperature rather than relying solely on surface temperature measurements. Moreover, accounting for the temperature difference between the core and surface facilitates rapid TMS control and health-conscious fast charging, thereby mitigating the risk of thermal runaway events.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".