This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification.
This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501
Joint estimation of state of charge and state of
energy of lithium-ion batteries based on optimized
bidirectional gated recurrent neural network
Liping Chen , Yingjie Song , António M. Lopes , Xinyuan Bao , Zhiqiang Zhang and Yong Lin
Abstract—State of charge (SOC) and state of energy (SOE) of
lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) are fundamental parameters in the
battery management system (BMS). However, the simultaneous
estimation of the two states is challenging since the SOC and
SOE are highly affected by the battery uncertain operating
conditions. In this paper, a joint SOC and SOE estimation method
is proposed based on a bidirectional gated recurrent neural
network (BiGRU) with an improved pigeon-inspired genetic (PG)
optimization algorithm. The BiGRU network is first used to
capture bidirectional information embedded in the battery data
and to make up for the loss of information in general recurrent
neural networks (RNNs) learning. Then, the hyper-parameters of
the BiGRU are optimized by the PG algorithm to make the data
features of LIBs match the network topology. In two dynamic
driven cycles, the average root mean square errors (RMSEs) of
SOC and SOE estimations with the proposed PG-BiGRU method
reach 1.3%. Furthermore, compared with the long short-term
memory (LSTM) network, GRU, BiGRU, and pigeon-inspired
optimized BiGRU (PIO-BiGRU), the PG-BiGRU algorithm yields
the best SOC and SOE joint prediction accuracy, with RMSE
values of 0.83% and 0.94%, respectively, which means that
the proposed method can effectively reduce the complexity of
parameters’ adjustment and improve the prediction accuracy.
Index Terms—State of charge; state of energy; Lithium-ion
batteries; bidirectional gated recurrent neural network
I. I NTRODUCTION
Traditional fuel-powered vehicles not only produce large
amounts of greenhouse gases, but also emit a variety of
fine pollutants, which bring great trouble to human beings
and the to environment. Electric vehicles (EVs) with zero
emissions and high energy efficiency are gradually favored
by people [1], [2], [3]. LIBs are widely used as power sources
of EVs, due to their long life and large capacity [4]. In
order to ensure the normal operation of LIBs, the BMS needs
to accurately monitor several parameters [5], [6], being the
SOC and SOE two of the most crucial to the reliability
of the BMS. However, LIBs have extremely non-linear and
time-varying characteristics, which translate into difficulties
in directly measuring the SOC and SOE [7].
SOC is defined as the ratio of the remaining available
capacity to the nominal capacity of the battery, while SOE
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Funds of China
(No. 61403115, No. 11571016).
Liping Chen, Yingjie Song, Xinyuan Bao, Zhiqiang Zhang and Yong Lin
are with School of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Hefei University
of Technology, Hefei 230009, China(Corresponding author: Zhiqiang Zhang,
zhiqiangzhang@hfut.edu.cn).
António M. Lopes is with LAETA/INEGI, Faculty of Engineering, Univer-
sity of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
is defined as the ratio of the remaining battery energy under
a specific operating condition [8], [9], [10], [11]:
Rt
i(ξ)dξ
SOCt = SOC0 − 0 , (1)
Cn
Rt
p(ξ)dξ
SOEt = SOE0 − 0
E
Rt n
i(ξ)u(ξ)dξ
= SOE0 − 0 , (2)
En
where SOCt denotes the SOC value at time t, SOC0 is the
initial SOC value, and Cn is the nominal capacity of the
battery. Similarly, SOEt denotes the SOE value at time t,
SOE0 is the initial SOE value, and En is the total available
energy of the battery. The variables p(ξ), i(ξ) and u(ξ) stand
for power, current and voltage at time ξ, respectively.
To date, research on SOC estimation relied on model-based
and data-driven methods. The model-based estimation requires
suitable battery models that describe accurately its behavior.
Lotfi et al. [12] established a reduced-order electrochemical
model and analyzed the chemical reactions inside the battery,
but solving the corresponding partial differential equations
involved bulky calculations. Battery voltage, charge and dis-
charge current, internal resistance and other parameters are the
most concerned by people. Therefore, some researches tried
to establish simplified equivalent circuit models satisfying the
above parameters and used filters, such as the Kalman filter
[13], extended Kalman filter [14] and sliding mode observer
algorithm [15], to achieve SOC prediction. The estimation
accuracy of model-based methods largely depends on the
quality of the battery model. Unfortunately, it is actually
difficult to construct an accurate battery model owing to the
variation of the internal resistance of the battery [16], [17].
Unlike the model-based approach, the data-driven method
does not consider the complex electrochemical reactions inside
the cells, nor does it involve identifying model parameters.
Instead, these methods learn the intrinsic relationship between
inputs (e.g., current, voltage, and temperature) and outputs
(e.g., SOC and SOE). Xuan et al. [18] applied principal
component analysis (PCA) to obtain the influence of various
external factors (voltage, current, temperature, and battery
arrangement) on SOC prediction. The simulation results with
the support vector regression (SVR) algorithm showed that
battery current, voltage and temperature could lead to good
SOC prediction accuracy. Yang et al. [19] proposed to apply a
RNN with gated recurrent unit to learn measurement informa-
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501

tion and estimate SOC at different temperatures. Indeed, by

making full use of historical discharge data a RMSE within
3.5% could be obtained. Chen et al. [20] proposed denoising
autocoding neural network to process input data, and then
combined it with a neural network to achieve SOC prediction
while considering the influence of measurement noise. Du et
al. [21] proposed a unified deep learning method that can be
implemented for simultaneous RUL (remaining useful life)
and SOC estimation. In addition, Feng et al. [22] combined
electrochemical models with neural networks to achieve joint Fig. 1: Structure of the RNN.
estimation of SOC and SOT (battery core temperature) at wide
temperatures and large currents.
As the SOC, the SOE is also crucial for the BMS, but proposed PG-BiGRU method has superior accuracy. Under the
relatively little research has been done on SOE estimation. The conditions of multiple dynamic driven cycles and variable tem-
power integration method, which is an open-loop estimation perature, the proposed method has preferable generalization
technique, is the basic method of SOE estimation. Its accuracy ability.
is influenced by the sensoring devices and suffers from error The structure of the paper is as follows. Section 2 introduces
accumulation [23]. Lai et al. [8] applied particle and extended the principle and structure of GRU and BiGRU networks.
Kalman filters to estimate the SOE, obtaining maximum error Section 3 describes the PIO and genetic algorithm (GA)
less than 3%. Li et al. [24] combined the electric battery and optimization, and the improved PG algorithm. In addition,
the analytical models to predict the battery terminals voltage the process of obtaining the BiGRU parameters by the PG is
characteristics and the SOE. However, the construction of a presented. Section 4 introduces the experiments and analyzes
precise model depends on the internal characteristics of the the results obtained with the PG-BiGRU method. Finally,
battery and appropriate model parameters. Section 5 outlines the main conclusions.
Recently, references [9], [10], [25] established a joint eval-
uation model of SOC and SOE. For example, Zhang et al.
reconstructed the open-circuit voltage (OCV) and SOC/SOE
relationship during the daily operation of the battery, and
estimated SOC and SOE using the extended Kalman filter
[10]. However, these joint estimation methods need to consider
numerous parameters related to SOC and SOE, resulting in
extremely complex implementation. Therefore, this provides
both possibilities and challenges for joint SOC and SOE
evaluation. Ma et al. [11] proposed a method based on LSTM
deep neural network to estimate SOC and SOE simultaneously,
without additional calculation of the intrinsic relationship
between SOC and SOE. However, the general RNN can
only analyze and learn the information in the battery data Fig. 2: Structure of the GRU.
from the forward transmission, and some useful information
is lost, which affects the prediction effect of the network.
Furthermore, after the network type is identified, appropriate II. T HE B I GRU NETWORK FOR SOC AND SOE
hyper-parameters determine the final prediction accuracy of ESTIMATION
the network. Note that the hyper-parameter setting of neural
networks requires repeated experiments, consumes time and A. Introduction to the GRU network
may result sub-optimal. Therefore, a simple method to seek Some neural networks, such as the back propagation (BP)
appropriate hyper-parameters to build the network and to neural network and the convolutional neural network (CNN),
achieve accurate estimation of SOC and SOE is needed. just consider the input at the previous time. Therefore, the
The main contributions of this paper are: performance of these networks may not always be satisfac-
1) The joint estimation of SOC and SOE of LIBs is carried tory, namely when the input information has an associated
out by using a BiGRU algorithm. The results show that the chronological order. In contrast, the RNN can remember the
bidirectional structure is beneficial to the neural network to input information at any historical moment [26], apply it to
learn the reverse information in battery data. the output at the current moment, and influence the output at
2) An improved optimization method, the PG algorithm, is a future time instant. The structure of a RNN is illustrated in
proposed to find the optimal hyper-parameters of the network. Fig. 1. However, the standard RNN has the problem of gradient
The results demonstrate that this method is simple and prac- disappearance and gradient explosion, which affect the ability
ticable, avoids the complicated parameter adjustment process, of the RNN to learn long-term sequences. For instance, if
and can effectively improve the network performance. an input sequence is too long, it is almost impossible for
3) The comparison of various algorithms reveals that the information from an earlier time step to affect the output at a

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501
subsequent time step. Some RNN variants, the GRU and the
LSTM can effectively solve the gradient problem [27].
The internal structure of the GRU is shown in Fig. 2, which
includes a reset gate and an update gate. The reset gate controls
how new input information is combined with previous mem-
ories, while the update gate determines the extent to which
historical information from the previous moment is brought
into the current state. Compared with the LSTM, the GRU
has one less gate function, a simpler model structure, fewer
parameters, faster training speed, and easier implementation.
The equations that rule the GRU are as follows:
zt = σ (Wz · [ht−1 , xt ] + bz ) ,
rt = σ (Wr · [ht−1 , xt ] + br ) ,
ĥt = µ (Ws · [rt ∗ ht−1 , xt ] + bs ) ,
ht = (1 − zt ) ∗ ht−1 + zt ∗ ĥt ,
1 of historical moments, in this paper we adopt the structure of
σ(x) = , (7)
1 + e−x
ex − e−x
µ(x) = , (8)
ex + e−x
where zt , rt , ĥt , and ht are the update gate, reset gate, candi-
date hidden state, and hidden state passed to the next moment,
respectively. The variable xt denotes the input information
at the current moment, ht−1 is the hidden state at the last
moment. The symbol W represents a weight, b denotes a
bias, σ(x) is the sigmoid function through which data can be
mapped, and µ(x) is the hyperbolic tangent function. Under
the control of the reset and update gates, the output at the
current moment is determined by the hidden state at the last
moment and the current input information. More details about
GRU networks can be found in [19].
B. Structure of the BiGRU
The GRU can effectively solve the problems of the RNN,
and be able to capture long-term dependencies. However,
with the forward propagation of historical information, part
of the available information is inevitably lost. Fortunately, the
BiGRU can tackle this issue [28]. The structure of the BiGRU
is depicted in Fig. 3. It is composed of a forward propagation
layer and a back propagation layer. The forward propagation
layer computes forward from time 1 to time t, while the back
propagation layer computes backward from time t to time 1.
Finally, the predicted outputs of the forward propagation layer
and the back propagation layer are jointly connected to the
dense layers. The BiGRU compensates for the shortcomings
of one-way GRU, allowing the GRU to learn the information
contained in the input time series faster, and achieving accurate
prediction results. With the growth of the input time series,
the effect becomes more and more obvious. Besides, since
the battery voltage, current and temperature at the input are
all time series, it is appropriate to use the BiGRU for joint
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
estimation of SOC and SOE. The equations involved are as
follows:
ht = GRU (xt , ht−1 ) , (9)
h0t = GRU xt , h0t−1 .


(10)
C. Structure of model based on BiGRU and dense layers
The model structures of the BiGRU and dense layers are
shown in Fig. 4. The BiGRU is responsible for processing
the input data, while the dense layer is used to deal with
(3) the hidden layer output of the BiGRU and output the pre-
dicted values of SOC and SOE. Like the ordinary GRU,
(4) the structure of the BiGRU is flexible, with a variety of
input-output possibilities, including single-input-single-output,
(5) multi-input-single-output, and others. The BiGRU with single-
input-single-output structure pays more attention to the input
information at the current time, but a sudden interference in
(6) the input data will cause great error to the output at the present
moment. Therefore, in order to make the best of the input data
multi-input-single-output, meaning that the input information
of multiple consecutive moments in the past is also used as the
input of the current moment. The mathematical description is
as follows:
 
In−m+1 Vn−m+1 Tn−m+1
 In−m+2 Vn−m+2 Tn−m+2 
xn =  , (11)
 ... ... ... 
In Vn Tn
 
yn = SOCn SOEn , (12)
where xn is the input matrix of the BiGRU at time n, with size
m × n. The variables In , Vn , and Tn are the battery current,
voltage and temperature measured at time n, respectively. The
symbol yn represents the SOC and SOE values produced by
the output layer at time n. According to equations (11)-(12),
the BiGRU uses the data input from time n − m + 1 to time
n to predict the SOC and SOE values at time n.
III. J OINT ESTIMATION OF SOC AND SOE BASED ON THE
PG-B I GRU ALGORITHM
A. The PIO and GA
The PIO is an intelligence optimization algorithm inspired
on the behavior of pigeons using magnetic field to identify
their direction of motion. Compared to other optimization
algorithms, the PIO is characterized by a relatively simple
principle, few parameters to be adjusted, relatively simple cal-
culations, strong robustness, strong local optimization ability
and easy implementation [29].Specifically, each individual has
two attributes, specifically the position and the velocity. The
iterative process of the PIO is divided into the compass and the
landmark operator parts. In the compass part, the PIO mainly
conducts a global search, with a number of iterations Nc1 . The
updating equations of position and velocity are given by:
Vi (t) = Vi (t − 1) ∗ e−Rt + rand ∗ (Xg − Xi (t − 1)) , (13)
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501

Fig. 3: Structure of BiGRU.

Xi (t) = Xi (t − 1) + Vi (t), (14)
where Xi (t) and Vi (t) represent the position and velocity of
the ith individual at iteration t, respectively, R denotes the map
factor, which is generally selected as 0.2, rand is a random
number in [0, 1], and Xg represents the optimal location of the
individual in the pigeon cluster.
In the landmark operator part, the PIO performs local
search, with poor individuals focusing on the core of superior
ones. The number of iterations in this phase is Nc2 . At this
time, pigeons are ranked according to the fitness value, and
then the population is divided into two groups. The group of
pigeons with better fitness provides the position and fitness
values to be used as reference direction for the next iteration
flight. The equations are as follows:
NC2 = Tmax − NC1 , (15)
N p(t − 1)
N p(t) = , (16)
2
P
Xi (t) ∗ f itness (Xi (t))
Xc (t) = P , (17)
N p ∗ f itness (Xi (t))
Xi (t) = Xi (t − 1) + rand ∗ (Xc (t) − Xi (t − 1)) , (18)
where Tmax is the maximum number of iterations, N p(t)
represents the quantity of pigeons at the t iteration, Xc (t)
denotes the central position of pigeons at the t iteration,
f itness is the fitness value of the ith individual, and Xi (t) is
the position of the i individual. The PIO has the advantages
of simple structure, few parameters, fast convergence speed
and relatively strong robustness, but it is easy to fall into local
optima.
The GA is an optimization algorithm inspired in the laws
of biological evolution in nature [30]. The core of GA is that
old individuals can generate new ones through crossover and
mutation, so GA have good global search ability and can easily
jump out of local optima. However, GA have poor local search
ability, slow solution speed, and convergence issues.

Fig. 4: Structure of model based on BiGRU and dense layers.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501
Fig. 5: Dynamic weights for different iterations.
B. The PG algorithm
The original PIO algorithm has some drawbacks. In the
compass operator part, the map factor R and the number of
iterations t jointly control the speed of the pigeon group.
When the dynamic weight value is large, it is conducive
to global search of the pigeons, while when the value is
small, it is favorable to local search. Unfortunately, with the
increase of t, the dynamic weight decreases rapidly, leading
to premature convergence of pigeons. As illustrated in Fig. 5,
when Nc1 = 50, t = 12, e−Rt = 0.038, pigeons lose the
global search ability in advance. Moreover, the effect of the
algorithm is affected by the maximum number of iterations.
To prevent the rapid decrease of population diversity in the
landmark operator part and leading to premature convergence,
in this paper, equation (13) changes to equations (19) and (20),
while equation (16) changes to equation (21):
t
w = Rmin + (Rmax − Rmin ) ∗ , (19)
Nc1
Vi (t) = Vi (t − 1) ∗ e−w + rand ∗ (Xg − Xi (t − 1)) , (20)
N the BiGRU, which is also the fitness function of the PG. The
N p(t) = , (21)
2 MSE is defined as follows:
where Rmax = 0.2 and Rmin = 2.2 are the maximum
and minimum values of R, respectively, and N denotes the
population size. According to Fig. 5, when t < 0.7Nc1 , pi-
geons maintain strong global search ability. When w gradually
decreases to 0.1, the local search ability of the pigeons is
enhanced.
Combining the advantages of the PIO and GA, the PG algo-
rithm introduces genetic and mutation links into the improved
pigeon swarm scheme, which makes it easy for the PG to jump
out of the local optima and ensures fast convergence speed.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
C. The PG optimization process of the BiGRU
The structure, data, loss function and hyper-parameters of
neural networks affect the prediction performance. Once the
network structure, data and loss function are determined, the
selection of hyper-parameters becomes the key to improve
the accuracy of neural networks estimation. In practice, how
to select appropriate hyper-parameters is a process based on
testing and experience, which often requires repeated trials.
In order to seek out the optimal hyper-parameters and obtain
high precision estimation, the PG-BiGRU model is established
herein. Among the hyper-parameters, the number of neurons
in the hidden layer (ls), the initial learning rate (lr), the
maximum epochs (ep), the learning rate decline factor (lrdf ),
and the number of neurons in dense layers (dls) are the ones
that have greater influence on the model behavior. These five
parameters are selected as the optimization objects of the PG
[31].
The flowchart of PG optimization of the BiGRU is shown
in Fig. 6, and the specific steps are shown below.
Step 1: Data normalization process. The three input vari-
ables, namely the battery V, I, T have various dimensions,
and their different data magnitudes would lead to slow iter-
ative convergence speed, low prediction accuracy and poor
generalization ability. To eliminate adverse effects, min-max
normalization is used to map the original data to the interval
[0, 1]. The normalization equation is as follows:
x − xmin
x∗ = , (22)
xmax − xmin
where x is the original data, xmax and xmin are the maximum
and minimum values of the original data, respectively, and x∗
is the normalized value.
Step 2: (1) Initialize the parameters. The number of itera-
tions (M ), population size (N ), particle dimension (D), coding
length of chromosome (L), crossover probability (p1), and
mutation probability (p2) are set. Moreover, in order to narrow
the range of the number of neurons, a test is carried out, as
described in subsection IV-C1, and the final parameter range
is determined as ls ∈ [32, 128], dls ∈ [4, 128], ep ∈ [20, 500],
lr ∈ [0.00001, 0.1] and lrdf ∈ [0, 1].
(2) Initialize the speed and position of the pigeon
swarm. Randomly generate population individuals x =
(ls, dls, ep, lr, lrdf ).
(3) Train the BiGRU and compute the fitness value. The
mean square error (MSE) is selected as the loss function of
T
1X
2
M SE = SOC0 (t) − SOC(t)
T t=1
T
1X
2
+ SOE0 (t) − SOE(t) , (23)
T t=1
where SOC0 (t) and SOE0 (t) denote the predicted values.
SOC(t) and SOE(t) denote the real values. T is the length of
the sequence.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501

TABLE I: Specifications of the used battery.

Specifications Quantity
Type Panasonic 18650 PF
Nominal capacity 2.9 Ah
Energy Storage 9.9 Wh
Charge cut-off voltage 4.2 V
Discharge cut-off voltage 2.5 V
Minimum charging temperature 10◦ C

(4) Update the speed and position of the pigeon swarm.

The velocity and position of the individuals are updated using
equations (14), (19) and (20). The fitness value is calculated
and the global optimum is updated.
(5) Crossover and mutation. The individuals are crossed and
mutated, the fitness value is calculated and the global optimal
is updated.
(6) Comparing the iterations. If the current iteration number
t > Nc1 , then go to the next operation. Otherwise, jump to
(4).
(7) According to the fitness value, the pigeons are sorted
to determine their center position. The center of the pigeon
cluster is found according to equation (17), and then the
position of the pigeon cluster is updated according to equation
(18), the fitness value is calculated and the global optimum is Fig. 6: The flow chart of PG.
updated.
TABLE II: Range of the current variation in different cycles.
(8) Checking whether the termination condition is met.
If t > Tmax , then the algorithm ends and outputs the Drive cycle Minimum current(A) Maximum current (A)
LA92 −10.455 9.733
optimization result x = (ls, dls, ep, lr, lrdf ). Otherwise jump US06 −20.822 7.575
to (7). UDDS −7.52923 4.125
Step 3: The BiGRU is built according to the optimal hyper- NN −14.665 7.935
parameters obtained by the PG algorithm. The test set is used
to evaluate the effect of the trained BiGRU. To assess the
performance of the optimized BiGRU in the joint estimation driving conditions with high vehicle speeds, high accelerations
of SOC and SOE, the root mean square error (RMSE) and as well as sharp fluctuations in vehicle speeds. The UDDS
maximum absolute error (MAE) are used: mainly considers typical conditions in urban driving, such as
congestion, frequent stopping, acceleration and braking [33].
v
u n
u1 X 2
RM SE = t (fi − yi ) , (24) The NN drive cycle consists of the LA92 and US06 drive
n i=1 cycles plus some additional dynamics. Furthermore, a total of
six datasets, with LA92 and US06 drive cycles at different
1X
n temperatures (0◦ C, 10◦ C and 25◦ C) are selected as training
M AE = |fi − yi | , (25) set. The UDDS and NN drive cycles under 0◦ C, 10◦ C and
n i=1
25◦ C and variable temperature conditions are employed as
where fi and yi denote the predicted and real values, respec- test set, so as to test the prediction ability of the model
tively. n is the length of the sequence. under unknown operating conditions. Fig. 7 shows the current,
voltage, SOC and SOE curves of LA92, US06, UDDS and
IV. DATASETS AND EXPERIMENTS NN at 25◦ C. The true values of SOC and SOE are calculated
by means of the ampere-hour counting and power integration
A. Description of the datasets
methods, respectively. The range of variation of the current
The method proposed in this paper is evaluated on a public in the four cycles is shown in Table II, with negative values
dataset provided by Dr. Philip Kollmeyer at the University indicating battery discharge and positive values corresponding
of Wisconsin-Madison [32]. The battery specifications are to vehicle braking energy recovery.
summarized in Table I.
In order to simulate the real driving conditions of EVs to the
greatest extent, four dynamic drive cycles are employed in this B. Test Methods
paper, namely LA92, US06, UDDS and neural network (NN). Pytorch is used to construct the adopted network model.
Specifically, the LA92 drive cycle is used to simulate the dis- All experimental procedures are run on a computer using an
charge of the battery when the EV is driving in the metropolis NVIDIA GeForce GTX 3080ti graphics card. Six experiments
with smooth traffic. The US06 drive cycle takes into account were designed with the following contents:

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501

Fig. 7: Different drive cycles at 25◦ C: (a), (b) ,(c) and (d) donate the current and voltage profiles for LA92, US06, UDDS,
and NN, respectively; (e), (f) , (g) and (h) are the SOC and SOE values for LA92, US06, UDDS, and NN, respectively.

1) To facilitate the study of the relationship between the

number of neurons and the prediction accuracy of the model,
and achieve the appropriate range of the number of neurons,
different numbers of BiGRU hidden layer neurons and dense
layer neurons are used to build the model and test the effect.
2) The PG algorithm is used to optimize the BiGRU network
to obtain the optimal hyper-parameters, and then build the
network. Concretely, the network employs LA92 and US06
drive cycle datasets under three temperatures as the training
set, and UDDS and NN drive cycle datasets as the test set.
Fig. 8: The prediction error of the model constructed with
3) The proposed method is compared with PIO-BiGRU, Bi-
different hidden neurons and dense layer neurons, where (a)
GRU, GRU, LSTM and other method in a one-time experiment
and (b) are the RMSE values of the SOC and SOE,
under the UDDS drive cycle to verify its superiority.
respectively.
4) On a high temperature dataset, the proposed method is
compared with a neural network combined with Kalman filter,
in order to show the effect of high temperature on prediction.
5) From the theory of neural network, the cross-influence of fully learn the characteristics of the data [34]. Besides, when
SOC and SOE is analyzed, in order to confirm the existence the optimization algorithm optimizes the model parameters, a
of cross-influence. small range of neurons is beneficial to reduce the optimization
6) The variable temperature data-set is used to evaluate
time. Therefore, choosing the appropriate number of neurons is
the prediction accuracy of the PG-BiGRU model in a varying
very important. In this section, the BiGRU is constructed with
temperature environment.
different hidden layer neurons, namely [16 32 64 128 160] and
various dense layer neurons, specifically [4 16 32 64 128 160].
C. Tests Moreover, the maximum number of iterations is set to 200, and
1) The SOC and SOE estimation under different neurons: the test set is the NN drive cycle dataset. The RMSE results
The number of neurons affects the effect of the model. On of the SOC and SOE are shown in Fig. 8, revealing that the
the one hand, excessive neurons will enhance the prediction estimation accuracy of the model is greatly affected by the
ability of the model, that is, the model fits the training set number of neurons, and that the RMSE value of the best model
well and the training error is reduced. However, this may lead is about 1.4%. Considering this single test set, the number of
to an over-fitting problem, where the model performs poorly neurons should be large, so we preliminary determine that the
on the test set and the generalization ability is weak. On the range of hidden neurons is in [32 128] and the range of dense
other hand, too few neurons can lead to a model that does not layer neurons is in [4 128].

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501

TABLE III: The RMSE and MAE of SOC and SOE

estimation.
Output Quantity Temperature (◦ C) RMSE (%) MAE (%)
SOC UDDS 0 1.827 1.699
10 1.309 1.023
25 0.937 0.793
NN 0 1.388 1.090
10 1.430 1.300
25 1.229 1.099
SOE UDDS 0 1.731 1.600
10 1.323 1.025
25 0.881 0.741
NN 0 1.428 1.135
10 1.510 1.393
25 1.225 1.110

Fig. 9: Training process of PG-BiGRU.
2) The SOC and SOE estimation at different temperatures
and drive cycles: In this subsection, the PG algorithm is used
to optimize the BiGRU, and we test the optimized prediction
effect. To be more specific, the proposed method uses the
LA92 and US06 drive cycles to train the optimized network,
while the UDDS and NN drive cycles are used to evaluate the
performance.
Before the optimization process starts, the number of itera-
tions (M ) needs to be set. Based on experience and test results,
and considering the balance between accuracy and speed, M
is generally set to 100. The evolution of the fitness function
during the optimizing of the BiGRU by the PG algorithm is
shown in Fig. 9. We verify that the proposed method has a fast
convergence speed and can achieve good training results only
after 80 iterations, meaning that the optimal hyperparameters
are found.
The optimized network is used for testing. The actual and
predicted values of SOC and SOE under the two drive cycles
at 25◦ C are shown in Fig. 10. In the UDDS drive cycle, the
RMSE of SOC and SOE are 0.937% and 0.881%, respectively.
For the NN drive cycle, the RMSE of SOC and SOE are
1.229% and 1.225%, respectively. With the decrease of SOC
and SOE values, the estimation error increases slightly, which
is due to the more complex internal dynamics of the battery
in the low SOC and SOE states [35]. The estimation results
of the two test sets under the three temperatures are shown in
Table III. The estimation accuracy of SOC and SOE decreases
at 0◦ C, mainly because low temperature affects the internal
reaction of LIBs and changes their discharge performance.
In general, the average RMSE of the two driven cycles is
1.3%. The proposed network can learn the battery discharge
characteristics at different drive cycles and temperatures, and
generalize to untrained drive cycles.
3) Comparison between different methods: In this subsec-
tion, the proposed PG-BiGRU is compared with the PIO-
BiGRU, BiGRU, GRU, LSTM [11] and other algorithm [10].
In the experiments, various algorithms mainly use the LA92
and US06 drive cycles as the training set, and the UDDS
as the test set. Moreover, the BiGRU and GRU adopt the
similar parameter settings as the LSTM [11]. In addition, the
algorithm in reference [10] uses the UDDS drive cycle under
the same data source as the verification set. Fig. 11 shows
the actual SOC and SOE, predicted values and errors by the
PG-BiGRU, PIO-BiGRU, BiGRU and GRU algorithms. It can
be seen that the estimation error of the PG-BiGRU algorithm
is the smallest in the whole cycle, which corresponds to best
fitting effect. Similarly, Table IV shows the results of SOC
and SOE estimated at once for the six algorithms. The PG-
BiGRU has the lowest RMSE and MAE. This indicates that
the proposed method can learn better the data features.
Parameters of the network (Params) and floating-point op-
erations (FLOPs) are used to evaluate the size and compu-
tational complexity of deep learning models, meaning their
cost. Params represents the total number of parameters in the
model and is used to measure the size of the model. FLOPs
represents the number of floating-point operations, is used
to measure the computational complexity of a model, and is
commonly adopted as an indirect measure of the speed of
a neural network model. The cost associated to the different
methods are shown in the Table V. We verify that the values
of Params and FLOPs of the optimized networks are one order
of magnitude lower than those of the non-optimized ones.
Although the values of Params and FLOPs of the proposed
PG-BiGRU are higher than those of the PIO-BiGRU, they are
of the same order of magnitude, and the accuracy of the former
is higher.
4) Comparison of different methods with new high tem-
perature data: The situation of the battery when exposed to
a high temperature environment is complicated. Considering
that the dataset provided by the University of Wisconsin-
Madison has been used up, a new experiment is implemented
on the University of Maryland publicly available dataset [37]
at 30◦ C, 40◦ C and 50◦ C. In addition, the proposed PG-BiGRU
is compared with a method that combines neural network and
Kalman filtering (NNKF) [36]. The dynamic stress testing
(DST) profile is used as training data, while US06 Driving
Schedule and Federal Urban Driving Schedule (FUDS) are
employed as test data. The results are shown in Table VI. It
can be seen that the average RMSE of the proposed method
is 1.274%, meaning that it is lower than the average RMSE
of the NNKF, which is 1.415%, and much lower than the

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501

Fig. 10: Actual and estimate values of SOC and SOE, and the estimation error with different drive cycles under 25◦ C: NN
(top); UDDS (bottom).

Fig. 11: Estimation errors of different methods.

TABLE IV: The SOC and SOE estimation results under different methods.
Method PG-BiGRU PIO-BiGRU BiGRU GRU Reference [10] Reference [11]
SOC RMSE (%) 0.838 1.099 1.747 2.003 1.35 3.24
MAE (%) 0.608 0.882 1.471 1.677 1.06 2.66
SOE RMSE (%) 0.943 1.013 1.602 1.811 1.01 2.88
MAE (%) 0.721 0.824 1.370 1.555 0.83 2.41

TABLE V: Cost comparison of different methods.

PG-BiGRU PIO-BiGRU BiGRU GRU Reference [11]
FLOPs 2.006M 1.185M 20.228M 10.114M 13.467M
Params 0.048M 0.034M 0.405M 0.2020M 0.269M

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501

10

Fig. 12: SOC and SOE estimation results at 50◦ C: FUDS (top); US06 (bottom).

TABLE VI: The RMSE of SOC and SOE for publicly available datasets at the University of Maryland.
Output Quantity Temperature (◦ C) PG-BiGRU (%) NNFH [36] (%) LSTM [36] (%)
SOC US06 30 1.903 0.9 2.9
40 1.273 1.2 3.0
50 0.965 1.2 3.5
FUDS 30 1.377 1.2 3.4
40 1.077 1.8 3.3
50 0.986 2.2 3.5
SOE US06 30 1.964 - -
40 1.323 - -
55 0.995 - -
FUDS 30 1.380 - -
40 1.068 - -
50 0.989 - -

average RMSE of the LSTM [36], which is 3.265%, under are shown in the Table VII. If, in the weights of the last fully
the two driving cycles and three temperatures. Fig. 12 shows connected layer, some values are 0 and others are not 0, then
the SOC and SOE estimation results at 50◦ C. We verify that there is no cross influence between SOC and SOE. Otherwise,
the proposed method also performs well at high temperature. it indicates that both SOC and SOE prediction results take into
In addition, the method uses different drive cycles than those account features that contain SOC and SOE information.
adopted in subsection IV-C2, and can also achieve good
results, which indicates that the method is not limited by the TABLE VII: Weights of the last fully connected layer.
drive cycle. weight −0.2990 0.5698 0.1924 0.1279 0.1112
−0.3387 −0.1810 0.1783 0.3072 −0.2205
5) Discussion on the cross-influence of SOC and SOE: −0.2563 −0.2563 0.2016 0.1347 0.1210
−0.3210 −0.1425 0.1714 0.3118 −0.2019
The inherent relationship between SOC and SOE is complex, bias 0.2974 0.2580 - - -
and references [9], [10], [25] tried to adopt a variety of
methods to realize the joint estimation of SOC and SOE.
In contrast, neural networks have the advantage of implicitly 6) The SOC and SOE prediction in variable temperature en-
establishing the relationship between input current, voltage, vironment: The previous tests were carried out under different,
temperature and SOC or SOE, without explicitly computing but constant temperature environments. In actual conditions,
the relationship between SOC and SOE [11]. In the training the ambient and the battery surface temperatures change,
process, the real values of SOC and SOE both affect the final having an important impact on the SOC and SOE. Therefore, it
weight of the network, and indirectly affect each other’s final is very significant to achieve accurate estimation under variable
prediction results. This embodies the cross influence between temperature data. Considering that the BMS can ensure the
SOC and SOE. In more detail, the neural network extracts operating temperature of the battery above 0◦ C [38], in this
multiple features, which carry information about the SOC and subsection we use the LA92 and US06 drive cycles at 10◦ C
SOE. In the neural network pass, the features’ information is and 25◦ C as the training set, while the variable temperature
mixed together and finally extracted by the fully connected dataset (temperature varies between 10◦ C and 30◦ C) under
layer to output SOC and SOE values. In order to observe the UDDS drive cycle as the test set. Fig. 13 illustrates the
the fully connected layer, the number of neurons in the fully estimation results. The RMSE and MAE of the SOC are
connected layer is set to 10, and the weights of the neurons 1.470% and 1.255%, and the RMSE and MAE of the SOE are

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501
Fig. 13: The SOC and SOE prediction in variable temperature environment.
1.356% and 1.150%, respectively. In the variable temperature
environment, the proposed algorithm can also better predict
the SOC and SOE of the battery than the alternative methods.
V. C ONCLUSION
This paper proposed a new method to simultaneously esti-
mate the SOC and SOE of LIBs based on BiGRU networks
optimized with PG algorithm. The feasibility of the method
was evaluated using dynamic drive cycles under different
temperatures, including LA92, US06, UDDS, NN, DST and
FUDS. The experimental results showed that, by capturing
the forward and reverse information in the LIB dataset, the
neural network can learn the mapping relationship between
the battery voltage, current and temperature and battery SOC
and SOE more quickly. In addition, the use of the PG algo-
rithm to optimize the hyper-parameters of the neural network
was not only simple and practical, but also improved the
prediction accuracy of the PG-BiGRU method. In the case
of SOC and SOE estimation under the UDDS drive cycles,
the average RMSE of the PG-BiGRU was 0.89%, which is
15.7%, 46.8%, 53.3%, 24.5% and 70.9% lower than those ob-
tained with the PIO-BiGRU, BiGRU, GRU, EKF and LSTM,
respectively. Further experiments showed that the PG-BiGRU
model has good fitting and generalization ability, and the
average RMSE in high temperature and variable temperature
environments was 1.27% and 1.41%, respectively. However,
as the state of health (SOH) of the battery decreases during
life-cycle, the actual values of SOC and SOE are inevitably
affected. Therefore, in future work, the joint estimation of
SOC, SOE and SOH will be considered. In addition, it is a
promising research direction to consider the effect of humidity
on SOE during the discharge of LIBs.
R EFERENCES
[1] F. Meng and X. Jin, “Evaluation of the development capability of
the new energy vehicle industry: An empirical study from China,”
Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 9, p. 2635, 2019.
[2] X. Shu, G. Li, Y. Zhang, S. Shen, Z. Chen, and Y. Liu, “Stage of charge
estimation of lithium-ion battery packs based on improved cubature
Kalman filter with long short-term memory model,” IEEE Transactions
on Transportation Electrification, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1271–1284, 2020.
[3] Y. Balali and S. Stegen, “Review of energy storage systems for vehicles
based on technology, environmental impacts, and costs,” Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 135, p. 110185, 2021.
[4] C. Bian, S. Yang, and Q. Miao, “Cross-domain state-of-charge esti-
mation of Li-ion batteries based on deep transfer neural network with
multiscale distribution adaptation,” IEEE Transactions on Transportation
Electrification, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1260–1270, 2020.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
11
[5] H. Dai, B. Jiang, X. Hu, X. Lin, X. Wei, and M. Pecht, “Advanced
battery management strategies for a sustainable energy future: Multilayer
design concepts and research trends,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol. 138, p. 110480, 2021.
[6] P. R. Tete, M. M. Gupta, and S. S. Joshi, “Developments in battery
thermal management systems for electric vehicles: A technical review,”
Journal of Energy Storage, vol. 35, p. 102255, 2021.
[7] T. Fan, S. Liu, Ming, X. Tang, and B. Qu, “Simultaneously estimating
two battery states by combining a long short-term memory network with
an adaptive unscented Kalman filter,” Journal of Energy Storage, vol. 50,
p. 104553, 2022.
[8] X. Lai, Y. Huang, X. Han, H. Gu, and Y. Zheng, “A novel method for
state of energy estimation of lithium-ion batteries using particle filter and
extended Kalman filter,” Journal of Energy Storage, vol. 43, p. 103269,
2021.
[9] L. Zheng, J. Zhu, G. Wang, T. He, and Y. Wei, “Novel methods for
estimating lithium-ion battery state of energy and maximum available
energy,” Applied Energy, vol. 178, pp. 1–8, 2016.
[10] S. Zhang and X. Zhang, “A novel non-experiment-based reconstruction
method for the relationship between open-circuit-voltage and state-of-
charge/state-of-energy of lithium-ion battery,” Electrochimica Acta, vol.
403, p. 139637, 2022.
[11] L. Ma, C. Hu, and F. Cheng, “State of charge and state of energy
estimation for lithium-ion batteries based on a long short-term memory
neural network,” Journal of Energy Storage, vol. 37, p. 102440, 2021.
[12] N. Lotfi, R. G. Landers, J. Li, and J. Park, “Reduced-order electro-
chemical model-based SOC observer with output model uncertainty
estimation,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 25,
no. 4, pp. 1217–1230, 2016.
[13] P. Shrivastava, T. K. Soon, M. Y. I. B. Idris, and S. Mekhilef, “Overview
of model-based online state-of-charge estimation using Kalman filter
family for lithium-ion batteries,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol. 113, p. 109233, 2019.
[14] X. Bian, Z. Wei, J. He, F. Yan, and L. Liu, “A two-step parameter opti-
mization method for low-order model-based state-of-charge estimation,”
IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification, vol. 7, no. 2, pp.
399–409, 2020.
[15] Y. Feng, C. Xue, Q. Han, F. Han, and J. Du, “Robust estimation for
state-of-charge and state-of-health of lithium-ion batteries using integral-
type terminal sliding-mode observers,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 4013–4023, 2019.
[16] Q. Wang, J. Wang, P. Zhao, J. Kang, F. Yan, and C. Du, “Correlation
between the model accuracy and model-based SOC estimation,” Elec-
trochimica Acta, vol. 228, pp. 146–159, 2017.
[17] M. Adaikkappan and N. Sathiyamoorthy, “Modeling, state of charge
estimation, and charging of lithium-ion battery in electric vehicle: A
review,” International Journal of Energy Research, vol. 46, no. 3, pp.
2141–2165, 2022.
[18] L. Xuan, L. Qian, J. Chen, X. Bai, and B. Wu, “State-of-charge
prediction of battery management system based on principal component
analysis and improved support vector machine for regression,” IEEE
Access, vol. 8, pp. 164 693–164 704, 2020.
[19] F. Yang, W. Li, C. Li, and Q. Miao, “State-of-charge estimation of
lithium-ion batteries based on gated recurrent neural network,” Energy,
vol. 175, pp. 66–75, 2019.
[20] J. Chen, X. Feng, L. Jiang, and Q. Zhu, “State of charge estimation of
lithium-ion battery using denoising autoencoder and gated recurrent unit
recurrent neural network,” Energy, vol. 227, p. 120451, 2021.
[21] Z. Du, L. Zuo, J. Li, Y. Liu, and H. T. Shen, “Data-driven estimation of
remaining useful lifetime and state of charge for Lithium-ion battery,”
IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification, vol. 8, no. 1, pp.
356–367, 2021.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TTE.2023.3291501

12

[22] F. Feng, S. Teng, K. Liu, J. Xie, Y. Xie, B. Liu, and K. Li, “Co-estimation Yingjie Song received his B.S. degree in automation
of lithium-ion battery state of charge and state of temperature based from Anhui University of Technology in 2021. He
on a hybrid electrochemical-thermal-neural-network model,” Journal of is currently pursuing a master’s degree at Hefei
Power Sources, vol. 455, p. 227935, 2020. University of Technology, Hefei, China. His research
[23] S. Lin, W. Song, J. Lv, Z. Feng, Y. Zhang, and Y. Li, “An SOE estimation interests include data-driven modeling, states estima-
model considering electrothermal effect for LiFePO4/C battery,” Inter- tion of lithium-ion batteries.
national Journal of Energy Research, vol. 41, no. 14, pp. 2413–2420,
2017.
[24] K. Li, F. Wei, K. J. Tseng, and B. Soong, “A practical lithium-ion
battery model for state of energy and voltage responses prediction
incorporating temperature and ageing effects,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, vol. 65, no. 8, pp. 6696–6708, 2017.
[25] P. Shrivastava, T. K. Soon, M. Y. I. B. Idris, S. Mekhilef, and S. B. R. S.
Adnan, “Combined state of charge and state of energy estimation of
lithium-ion battery using dual forgetting factor-based adaptive extended
Kalman filter for electric vehicle applications,” IEEE Transactions on
Vehicular Technology, vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 1200–1215, 2021. António M. Lopes was born in 1968, and graduated
[26] M. Catelani, L. Ciani, R. Fantacci, G. Patrizi, and B. Picano, “Remaining with a Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering at
useful life estimation for prognostics of lithium-ion batteries based on the University of Porto in 2000. Presently he is an
recurrent neural network,” IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Associate Professor with the Faculty of Engineering,
Measurement, vol. 70, pp. 1–11, 2021. the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Univer-
[27] F. Yang, S. Zhang, W. Li, and Q. Miao, “State-of-charge estimation sity of Porto, Portugal. His research interests include
of lithium-ion batteries using LSTM and UKF,” Energy, vol. 201, p. complex systems, nonlinear dynamics, fractional cal-
117664, 2020. culus, control, robotics, and simulation.
[28] D. Liu, Y. Bao, Y. He, and L. Zhang, “A data loss recovery technique
using EMD-BiGRU algorithm for structural health monitoring,” Applied
Sciences, vol. 11, no. 21, p. 10072, 2021.
[29] H. Duan and P. Qiao, “Pigeon-inspired optimization: A new swarm
intelligence optimizer for air robot path planning,” International Journal
of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 24–37, 2014.
[30] C. Chang, Q. Wang, J. Jiang, and T. Wu, “Lithium-ion battery state
of health estimation using the incremental capacity and wavelet neural
networks with genetic algorithm,” Journal of Energy Storage, vol. 38, Xinyuan Bao received her B.S. degree in automa-
p. 102570, 2021. tion from Anhui University in 2016 and a M.S.
[31] X. Ren, S. Liu, X. Yu, and X. Dong, “A method for state-of-charge degree in pattern recognition and intelligent systems
estimation of lithium-ion batteries based on PSO-LSTM,” Energy, vol. from Anhui University in 2019. She is currently
234, p. 121236, 2021. pursuing a Ph.D. degree at Hefei University of Tech-
[32] P. Kollmeyer, “Panasonic 18650PF Li-ion battery data,” 1 (2018). nology, Hefei, China. Her research interests include
[33] US Environmental Protection Agency, “Urban dynamometer driving data-driven modeling, states estimation, and health
schedule,” 1972. diagnosis of lithium-ion batteries.
[34] C. Bian, H. He, and S. Yang, “Stacked bidirectional long short-term
memory networks for state-of-charge estimation of lithium-ion batter-
ies,” Energy, vol. 191, p. 116538, 2020.
[35] F. Zheng, Y. Xing, J. Jiang, B. Sun, J. Kim, and M. Pecht, “Influence of
different open circuit voltage tests on state of charge online estimation
for lithium-ion batteries,” Applied Energy, vol. 183, pp. 513–525, 2016.
[36] Y. Tian, R. Lai, X. Li, L. Xiang, and J. Tian, “A combined method for
state-of-charge estimation for lithium-ion batteries using a long short-
term memory network and an adaptive cubature Kalman filter,” Applied Zhiqiang Zhang received the B.S. degree in au-
Energy, vol. 265, p. 114789, 2020. tomation from Hefei University of Technology,
[37] P. M., “Battery Data Set. CALCE, CALCE Battery Research Group, Hefei, China, in 2016. He received the Ph.D. de-
Maryland, MD;,” 2017. gree in control science and engineering from Xi’an
[38] Z. Deng, X. Hu, X. Lin, Y. Che, L. Xu, and W. Guo, “Data-driven state Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China, in 2022. He is
of charge estimation for lithium-ion battery packs based on Gaussian currently a Lecturer with the School of Electrical
process regression,” Energy, vol. 205, p. 118000, 2020. Engineering and Automation, Hefei University of
Technology. His research interests include machin-
ery condition monitoring and health management,
intelligent fault diagnosis, and battery life prediction.

Liping Chen received his B.S. degree in applied

mathematics from Anhui Normal University, Wuhu,
China, a M.S. degree in basic mathematics from Yong Lin received his B.S. degree in electrical
Anhui University, Hefei, China, and a Ph.D. degree automation from Hefei University of Technology
from the School of Automation, Chongqing Univer- in 1995 and a master’s degree in control theory
sity, Chongqing, China, in 2007, 2010, and 2013, and control engineering from Hefei University of
respectively. He is now a professor at Hefei Uni- Technology in 2002. His current research interests
versity of Technology. His current research interests include automatic control, computer control.
include the states estimation and health diagnosis of
lithium-ion batteries, fractional-order systems, and
nonlinear dynamical systems.

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. Downloaded on January 05,2024 at 12:43:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.