Comparative Study of Battery Aging on Battery Electric Vehicle and Battery-Ultracapacitor Hybrid Energy Storage Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hybrid energy storage system (HESS) consisting of battery and ultracapacitor is a promising solution for range anxiety of battery electric vehicle (BEV) and the life of batteries. In this paper, a comparative study is made on BEV and HESS, considering energy consumption and aging. HESS architecture is selected such that ultracapacitor is connected to the dc bus through a DC-DC converter, so the power flow between battery and the ultracapacitor can be controlled. Control is implemented using a low pass filter, ensuring high-frequency currents are handled by the ultracapacitor and the rest of the currents are handled by the battery, thereby reducing stress on the battery. Performance is evaluated for different drive cycles, and filter cut-off frequency is selected according to drive cycle requirement. The aging model is developed using the Arrhenius equation, and a comparison of the battery state of health (SOH) is done on BEV and HESS models for various drive cycles. It is found that battery in HESS ages slower than that of BEV.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".