MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stranded Energy Management in Li-Ion Batteries During Transportation

2025· article· W7130680858 on OpenAlexaff
Banuselvasaraswathy Balasubramanian, Prarthana Pillai, Balakumar Balasingam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Work (physics)Energy (signal processing)Energy managementThermal energyHazardResidualChemical energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stranded Energy (SE), i.e., residual electrical charge retained in lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) following a crash, poses significant risks during the post-incident handling and transportation of electric vehicles (EVs). Unlike typical high-voltage hazards, SE persists even when the vehicle is powered down, creating electrocution, thermal runaway, and toxic chemical exposure risks for first responders and technicians. This paper provides a structured assessment of SE hazards, classifying them into electrical, thermal, and chemical categories and analyzing the mechanisms by which each manifests. We examine real-time quantification methods, including smoke color observation, acoustic emission band analysis, gas venting signatures, and thermal imaging, to enable early detection and hazard grading. To guide risk mitigation, we propose a four-tier SE Management Framework: (i) no stranded energy removal; (ii) non-destructive stranded energy removal (level 1); (iii) non-destructive stranded energy removal (level 2); and (iv) destructive stranded energy removal. Each level corresponds to specific response actions based on battery condition and severity. Our framework consolidates current practices with emerging tools, offering a consistent decision-making model for safe SE removal. The approach supports improved responder safety, regulatory compliance, and battery transport protocols. Future work may extend this framework through automated battery management system (BMS) integration, chemistry-specific thresholds, and tool standardization.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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