MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948185695 · doi:10.48620/86589

Firm level optimisation strategies for sustainable and cost effective electric vehicle workplace charging.

2025· article· en· W6948185695 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access CRIS of the University of Bern · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricityElectric vehicleEnergy consumptionConsumption (sociology)Energy managementEfficient energy useSustainable transportPower consumption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expanding electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure is essential for transitioning to an electrified mobility system. With rising EV adoption rates, firms face increasing regulatory pressure to build up workplace charging facilities for their employees. However, the impact of EV charging loads on businesses' specific electricity consumption profiles remains largely unknown. Our study addresses this challenge by presenting a mathematical optimisation model, available via an open-source web application, that empowers business executives to manage energy consumption effectively, enabling them to assess peak loads, charging costs and carbon emissions specific to their power profiles and employee needs. Using real-world data from a global car manufacturer in South East England, UK, we demonstrate that smart charging strategies can reduce peak loads by 28% and decrease charging costs and emissions by 9% compared to convenience charging. Our methodology is widely applicable across industries and geographies, offering data-driven insights for planning EV workplace charging infrastructure.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.284
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueOpen Access CRIS of the University of BernSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207