Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Reference measurements can affect battery state-of-health (SOH) estimates across operating conditions. We compare reference protocols using fixed local discharge features, regression settings, training records, and evaluation rules. XJTU Batch-3 provides 4487 training records and Batch-4 provides 4639 test records from eight batteries per batch at five discharge rates. Across 40 battery–rate groups, the reference-free macro-group mean absolute error (MAE) was 0.015887. Original single-1C (B3:r3/B4:r7), early single-1C (B3:r3/B4:r3), and same-rate normalization yielded MAEs of 0.014058, 0.014584, and 0.014643, respectively. Battery-cluster bootstrap intervals for improvement over reference-free had positive lower bounds for original single-1C and fixed 0.5C; intervals for early single-1C and same-rate included zero. The lowest average error did not coincide with the lowest worst-group error. At 3C, same-rate normalization improved on the original single-1C for all eight batteries, with a mean MAE reduction of 0.006663. Separate NASA leave-one-cell-out and XJTU Batch-5 holdout analyses examined local-feature applicability under random load. Reference protocols should specify both operating condition and measurement selection, with conclusions limited by the eight target batteries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: