Cited by 423Advanced Battery Technologies ResearchControl Systems and IdentificationGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference

Data-driven state of charge estimation for lithium-ion battery packs based on Gaussian process regression

Deng, Zhongwei, Hu, Xiaosong, Lin, Xianke, Che, Yunhong, Xu, Le, Guo, Wenchao·2020·Energy

Abstract

Abstract Since a battery pack consists of hundreds of cells in series and parallel, inconsistencies between cells make it difficult to create an explicit model to simulate its behaviors effectively. Therefore, the widely used and sophisticated model-based methods (such as Kalman filters) are difficult to apply to SOC (state of charge) estimation of battery packs. In this paper, a data-driven method based on Gaussian process regression (GPR) is proposed to provide a feasible solution. Its superiority includes the ability to approximate nonlinearity accurately, nonparametric modeling, and probabilistic predictions. First, a feature extraction strategy, including data preprocessing, correlation analysis, and principal component analysis, is employed to obtain a compacted input set with a high correlation with SOC. Second, the squared exponential kernel function is used, and the automatic relevance determination is applied to optimize the weights of features. Third, besides the regular GPR model, an autoregressive GPR model is also constructed to further improve estimation accuracy and confidence. The experimental results verify that the autoregressive model has better SOC estimation performance than the regular model, and its estimation error under different dynamic cycles, temperatures, aging conditions, and even extreme conditions is lower than 3.9%, and the confidence interval is also much narrower.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.energy.2020.118000

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Deng, Z., Hu, X., Lin, X., Che, Y., Xu, L., & Guo, W.
Affiliations
  • Chongqing University (CN)
  • Ontario Tech University (CA)
  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Hu, Xiaosong
  • Lin, Xianke
Venue
Energy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-08
Volume
205
Pages
118000
ISSN
0360-5442 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3033613562
Cited by
423
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 79 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 12
FWCI
21.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Energy (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • Natural Science Foundation Project of Chongqing, Chongqing Science and Technology Commission
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Advanced Battery Technologies Research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Control Systems and Identification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Gaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
state of charge estimation, lithium-ion battery packs, Gaussian process regression, data-driven estimation, cell inconsistency, feature extraction, principal component analysis, automatic relevance determination, Gaussian kernel, autoregressive models, probabilistic forecasting, battery degradation, temperature effects

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review