MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416415468 · doi:10.1016/j.nexus.2025.100595

Key issues in electric vehicle battery supply chains based on English-language news articles: a machine learning approach

2025· article· en· W4416415468 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abderahman Rejeb, Karim Rejeb, Edit Süle

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Nexus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainBattery (electricity)Key (lock)Circular economyElectric vehicleElectric-vehicle batteryEconomic shortageEnergy supply

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• EV battery supply chains face challenges in manufacturing, recycling, and capacity. • Policy and innovation drive EV battery supply chain growth in key global regions. • Raw material shortages strain EV battery supply chains, needing sustainable solutions. • Circular economy aids EV battery supply chains in tackling waste and material reuse. • Machine learning reveals trends reshaping EV battery supply chain operations. The global transition to clean energy has placed the electric vehicle (EV) battery supply chain at the center of sustainability, innovation, and economic development. This study presents the first systematic analysis of public discourse on the EV battery supply chain using web mining and natural language processing (NLP) techniques. Analyzing 667 news articles with machine learning algorithms such as PCA and t-SNE, the study identifies core issues shaping the sector, including manufacturing, capacity expansion, and recycling, all driven by surging EV demand and circular economy pressures. Key emerging themes include strategic growth, technological advancement, and policy support, with countries like Canada and those in Europe positioning themselves as leaders. The findings highlight critical dependencies on materials such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt, underscoring the need for coordinated strategies to ensure sustainable, resilient supply chains. This research offers foundational insights for policymakers and industry stakeholders advancing the global shift to electric mobility.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0250.029
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy NexusSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207