期刊
JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL AND APPLIED MATHEMATICS
卷 433, 期 -, 页码 -出版社
ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cam.2023.115305
关键词
Lithium-ion battery state of charge (SOC); Gradient boosting regression tree (GBRT); Multilayer Perceptron (MLP); Artificial Bee Colony (ABC); Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection; Operator (LASSO); Dynamic Stress Test (DST)
Due to efficiency and environmental reasons, electric vehicles (EVs) will dominate the automobile industry. Lithium-ion batteries are the leading energy supply for EVs and other electronic consumer devices. Predicting the state-of-charge (SOC) of the battery is crucial for EV users to avoid running out of power. This study utilizes machine learning techniques to predict the SOC of a storage cell, with the ABC/GBRT-based model showing the best performance.
Electric vehicles (EVs) will be the dominant technology for the automobile industry due to efficiency and environmental reasons. Lithium-ion batteries lead the energy supply business for the most recent group of EVs and many other electronic consumer devices. One of the most important pieces of information for EV users is the state -of-charge of the battery, also known as SOC. The SOC works like the fuel gauge for the battery. Information about remaining battery capacity is essential to avoid running out of battery power. Battery remaining charge is not easy to estimate, due to non-linear phenomenon inside the battery. This work is concerned with SOC prediction using machine learning techniques. Three machine learning tools, called Artificial Bee Colony-Multilayer Perceptron (ABC/MLP), Artificial Bee Colony gradient boosting regression tree (ABC/GBRT) and Least Absolute Selection and Shrinkage Operator (LASSO) have been used to build models that enable the prediction of the SOC of a storage cell. The predictive results confirm the enhanced performance of the ABC/GBRT-based model over the other methods for SOC prediction. SOC errors remain below 1%, 10% and 17% for ABC/GBRT, ABC/MLP and LASSO, respectively. The goodness of fit, calculated using R2, was 0.99, 0.95 and 0.81 for the three methods, respectively. A comparison of the results obtained using all the methods has also been carried out.(c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据