Least Squares Approach to Improve Standardized Estimation of OCV and Internal Resistance in Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on standardized approaches for estimating battery open-circuit voltage (OCV) and internal resistance, which rely on low-fidelity models and simple estimation techniques, yet offer repeatable and widely used results in practical applications. In particular, we examine the common method of computing internal resistance as the ratio of the voltage response to an applied current excitation pulse. When applied to batteries, this method implicitly assumes that the OCV remains constant during the pulse, which can introduce significant estimation errors when this assumption is violated. To address this limitation, we propose a novel observation model that explicitly accounts for OCV variation during the excitation window. The model introduces a single parameter representing the OCV-SOC gradient, which is estimated using a linear least-squares approach from the current excitation and voltage response data. This leads to a closed-form solution that requires no prior knowledge of battery-specific parameters such as capacity or equivalent circuit elements. The proposed approach retains the simplicity and short excitation duration of standardized methods, yet yields significantly improved accuracy in estimating both OCV and resistance. Simulation and experimental results show that the method reduces voltage prediction error by up to 85% and estimates internal resistance within 0.04% of the true value under standardized pulsed conditions. Additional validation under dynamic load scenarios further demonstrates the robustness and accuracy of the approach, making it well-suited for embedded applications and standardized diagnostic protocols.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".