In-context learning for nano-PCM thermal behavior prediction in battery thermal management via Lattice Boltzmann simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective thermal management is crucial for ensuring the safety and performance of lithium ion batteries in electric vehicles. While nano-enhanced phase change materials (nano-PCMs) offer excellent thermal regulation, their effectiveness is often limited by localized heat accu mulation from natural convection. Existing ML-based studies mostly focus on temperature metrics alone, neglecting thermal uniformity and relying on black-box models with limited interpretability. This study proposed a zonal nanoparticle distribution strategy and uti lized high-fidelity Lattice Boltzmann Method (LBM) simulations to investigate underlying heat transfer mechanisms in nano-enhanced PCM systems. The state-of-the-art Tabular Prior-data Fitted Network (TabPFN) was then employed to accurately predict key thermal indicators and was benchmarked against widely used models such as BPNNs, XGBoost, and CatBoost. Furthermore, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was applied to in terpret TabPFN outputs, revealing key regional features and providing physical insights into system performance. The results demonstrated that with optimal non-uniform nanoparticle distribution pattern, the Nusselt number increased by 12.04% and melting time was reduced by 13.05%. TabPFN exhibited superior prediction accuracy compared to other popular ma chine learning models, with error bins generally lower in magnitude and reductions in MAE and RMSE by 8-92% and 7-90%. SHAP analysis further visualized quantitative correlation between training inputs and target variables and their influence on convective behavior and heat retention. The proposed explainable in-context learning framework based on TabPFN and SHAP is expected to provide valuable insights for guiding the design and optimization of advanced nano-PCM battery thermal management systems. • LBM analysis of convection-driven PCM behavior in BTMS motivates a zonal nanoparticle strategy • Batch LBM simulations on nano-PCM cases show 12.04% increase in Nusselt number with stratified nanoparticle design • An explainable surrogate framework combining ML models and SHAP is developed for multi-output prediction • TabPFN outperforms BPNN, XGBoost, and CatBoost with up to 92% reduction in MAE • SHAP analysis identifies as the dominant factor influencing BTMS performance
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".