MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407777207 · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2025.134970

Clustering-based EV suitability analysis for grid support services

2025· article· en· W4407777207 on OpenAlexafffund
Akhtar Hussain, Nazli Kazemi, Petr Musı́lek

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCluster analysisData miningGridComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literature extensively discusses the benefits of electric vehicles (EVs) for grid support services. However, not all EVs are suitable for these services due to variations in service requirements (duration and frequency) and EV driver behavior (available energy, parking duration, and battery degradation). This study proposes a three-step EV classification approach to assist aggregators in selecting appropriate EVs for specific services. First, using data from the National Household Travel Survey and a commercial EV database, various EV parameters are estimated, including available energy for grid support services, the duration of parking at home and at work, and the battery degradation factor. Second, the K-means clustering method is applied to categorize EVs based on each parameter, chosen for its superior performance and lower complexity compared to other clustering methods. Finally, suitability indices are proposed for each service, taking into account the service requirements and EV parameters of different clusters. Each EV is then ranked to help the aggregators select the best-suited EVs for each service. The performance of the proposed method is evaluated for two ancillary services (frequency regulation and ramping) and two operating reserve services (contingency spinning and supplemental reserves). Simulation results demonstrate that more EVs are suitable for home services due to longer parking hours, while those with low parking duration are unsuitable for workplace services, despite low degradation scores. Additionally, the proposed method consistently shows higher poolable energy compared to the random selection method, with differences reaching 56 kW (10.1%) for 10 EVs, 383 kW (26.8%) for 25 EVs, and 895 kW (31.2%) for 50 EVs. • A classification approach is proposed to help aggregators select suitable EVs. • EVs are clustered based on vehicle parameters and service needs. • Suitability indices are formulated for each EV for various services. • Evaluation of two ancillary and two operating reserve services is performed. • Achieving higher poolable energy is possible at homes compared to workplaces.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergySame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207