MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6922080626 · doi:10.11575/prism/38285

Feasibility Study of Smart Charging in Electric Vehicles

2020· other· en· W6922080626 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricityElectric vehicleEnergy (signal processing)Power (physics)Smart powerSet (abstract data type)Smart gridDemand responseEnergy storage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric vehicles (EVs) are a rapidly emerging technology than can provide the opportunity to reduce emissions from the transportation sector. As EVs penetrate the transport market, electricity will become the fuel of the future and present new challenges and opportunities to Canadian utilities. This study aims to investigate the role of smart charging to address the challenges caused by EV adoption. Specifically, it seeks to examine the energy implications caused by EV charging and provide potential smart charging solutions along with policy recommendations. Most of the identified challenges are related to distribution grid, charging infrastructure and peak demand issue. Results suggest that workplace charging, time-of-use rates, and shifting load behaviour can effectively minimize the energy costs and avoid peak loads. These identified smart charging solutions can ultimately save millions of dollars to the utilities and set an example for managing energy efficiently even during the times of increased power demand.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, ChristianityFrench-language works237,207