MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409603137 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-087

Research and application of battery performance decline law based on real vehicle data

2025· article· en· W4409603137 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presented article develops the detailed analysis of battery performance degradation profiles for EVs, based on operational data collected in real-world use.Based on data points gathered for 150 vehicles over 24 months, we have developed and then validated an integrated degradation prediction model incorporating several degradation mechanisms.Our study applies a novel hybrid approach that will combine physics-based principles with data-driven methods for outlining the battery aging profile.The model proposed in this paper realizes a better prediction performance of 94.3% under different operational conditions and thus proves to be considerably superior to the existing techniques.Indeed, the change of temperature and charging behavior becomes the main influence factor with the correlation coefficient of 0.85 and 0.78, respectively.After applying the proposed model to a fleet management system, there are 32.4% maintenance cost reduction and 15.8% increasing of the cycle life for batteries.It represents in detail the continuous degradation assessment and predictive maintenance framework, validated on different vehicle platforms under varying operational conditions.These findings provide valuable inputs related to the improvement of battery management strategies and life extension of a battery in electric vehicle applications, hence benefiting theoretical understanding and practical application in electric vehicle battery management.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicPower Systems and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207