MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Accurate Impedance Spectroscopy of Rechargeable Li-ion Batteries

2025· article· W4416341612 on OpenAlexaff
Prarthana Pillai, Krishna R. Pattipati, Balakumar Balasingam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrical impedanceBattery (electricity)VoltageSIGNAL (programming language)Dielectric spectroscopyNonlinear systemOutput impedanceExcitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) is a commonly used method for evaluating battery health. It involves applying a high-frequency excitation signal to the battery and analyzing the resulting voltage response to generate its impedance spectrum. Traditional EIS techniques generally treat the battery as a linear time-invariant system, assuming that, under small signal perturbations and resting conditions, the impedance spectrum reliably represents the battery’s behavior. However, this paper demonstrates that the presence of the battery’s opencircuit voltage (OCV) invalidates the LTI assumption, even when a zero-mean excitation signal is used on a fully rested battery. Specifically, we show that OCV variations introduce nonlinearity in the voltage response, significantly affecting the impedance spectrum in the low-frequency range. To address this limitation, we utilize a novel approach that helps remove the OCV’s contribution from the measured voltage response. This correction allows for a more precise impedance analysis by directly addressing the nonlinearity caused by the OCV. The effectiveness of the proposed method is demonstrated using data from a battery simulator.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207