Deep Learning‐Based Surrogate Model for Lithium‐Ion Battery Behavior Prediction with Extreme Fast Charging Case Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid growth in lithium‐ion battery applications has increased the demand for efficient and accurate models capable of predicting battery behavior. Electrochemical models provide high fidelity but are typically too computationally intensive for real‐time control or large‐scale simulations. Herein, a deep learning‐based surrogate model (DL‐SBM) designed to forecast battery performance using historical data, significantly reducing computational costs while maintaining accuracy is introduced. The surrogate models are trained on synthetic datasets generated by an electrochemical simulator under diverse charging scenarios, and optimized through adaptive hyperparameter tuning. The resulting models accurately predict critical battery parameters such as voltage, temperature, and state of charge. Furthermore, a reinforcement learning case study focused on extreme fast charging demonstrates that the DL‐SBM achieves accuracy comparable to physics‐based simulators, while operating ≈225 times faster, requiring less memory, and ensuring robust performance under extreme conditions. These results underline the suitability of the DL‐SBM for real‐world battery management applications.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it