Cited by 407Battery Modeling and ManagementAdvancements in Battery MaterialsGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gaussian Process Regression for In Situ Capacity Estimation of Lithium-Ion Batteries

Open access
Richardson, Robert R., Birkl, Christoph R., Osborne, Michael A., Howey, David A.·2019·IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics

Abstract

Accurate on-board capacity estimation is of critical importance in lithium-ion battery applications. Battery charging/discharging often occurs under a constant current load, and hence voltage versus time measurements under this condition may be accessible in practice. This paper presents a data-driven diagnostic technique, Gaussian process regression for in situ capacity estimation (GP-ICE), which estimates battery capacity using voltage measurements over short periods of galvanostatic operation. Unlike previous works, GP-ICE does not rely on interpreting the voltage-time data as incremental capacity (IC) or differential voltage (DV) curves. This overcomes the need to differentiate the voltage-time data (a process that amplifies measurement noise), and the requirement that the range of voltage measurements encompasses the peaks in the IC/DV curves. GP-ICE is applied to two datasets, consisting of 8 and 20 cells, respectively. In each case, within certain voltage ranges, as little as 10 s of galvanostatic operation enables capacity estimates with approximately 2%-3% root-mean-squared error (RMSE).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tii.2018.2794997

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 45 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. grewal, 2011, Kalman Filtering
  2. bole, 2014, Randomized battery usage data set, NASA Ames Prognostics Data Repository
  3. moura, 0, PDE estimation techniques for advanced battery management systems, Proc Amer Control Conf, 566

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Richardson, R. R., Birkl, C. R., Osborne, M. A., & Howey, D. A.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics
Published
2019-01
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
127-138
ISSN
  • 1551-3203 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0050
OpenAlex
W2772728162
Cited by
407
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 18
FWCI
14.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/K002252/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Battery Modeling and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advancements in Battery Materials
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Gaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
lithium-ion batteries, battery capacity estimation, Gaussian process regression, galvanostatic operation, battery diagnostics

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