MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Monte Carlo Simulation for Electric Vehicle Charging: The Case Study of Milan - Italy

2025· article· en· W4414648198 on OpenAlexaff
Rachele Lazzorotto, Cristian Giovanni Colombo, Fabio Borghetti, Seydmahdi Miraftabzadeh, Wahiba Yaïci, Michela Longo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectric vehicleMonte Carlo methodEuropean unionOccupancyBattery (electricity)Battery capacityReduction (mathematics)Battery electric vehicle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The European Union has set ambitious$\text{C O}_{2}$reduction targets, aiming for a 90 % reduction in transport emissions by 2050. The Fit for 55 package reinforces these efforts, especially in road transport, with the goal of zero$\text{CO}_{2}$emissions for new vehicles by 2035. Italy aims to increase the number of Electric Vehicles (EVs) to 6.6 million by 2030, raising potential challenges to the existing charging infrastructure. In this work, a simulation tool for Electric Vehicle Charging in an urban environment was created and implemented, using Monte Carlo methodology useful for estimating results under uncertainty; in particular, the following uncertain factors are considered: i) user behavior, ii) charging infrastructure availability, iii) battery capacity, and iv) driving patterns. The simulation analyzes hourly variations in charging probability to estimate the charging demand of EVs over a 24 -hour period, projecting the occupancy of charging stations and the resulting energy demand for different areas of the city of Milan (Italy). The obtained results, which can also be replicated in other contexts, show important insights into EVs charging dynamics, serving as a basis for optimization and efficient infrastructure 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207