Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Power Sources

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jpowsour

Deep neural network battery charging curve prediction incorporating

external information
Yupeng Lin a , Qiuyang Liu b , Yuanlong Chen a , Chunyu Wang a , Junjie Wang c ,∗, Lingling Zhao a
a
Faculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, HeiLongJiang, China
b
Automotive Engineering Research, BYD Co. Ltd, Shenzhen, 518118, Guangdong, China
c
Department of Medical Informatics, School of Biomedical Engineering and Informatics, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 211166, JiangSu, China

HIGHLIGHTS

• Model forecasts full charging curve from a segment efficiently.

• Merges external info with curve data, enriching predictions.
• Novel structure and mechanisms enhance accuracy and efficiency.

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The utilization of the complete Li-ion battery charge curve provides access to a multitude of critical battery
Charging curve states, which are indispensable for evaluating the safety and dependability of battery-powered devices.
Deep neural network Nonetheless, the diminishing health of batteries, coupled with the challenges associated with data collection
Depthwise separable convolution
from battery management systems, presents a substantial hurdle in obtaining complete charging curves. In this
Channel attention mechanism
study, we introduce an innovative neural network architecture, demands only a segment of the charging curve
Battery aging
as input in order to prognosticate the complete constant-current charging curve. Further, this model can be
enhanced by optional external data, (e.g., ambient temperature, total battery charge), along with composite
inputs, (e.g., battery temperature–voltage–capacity sequence), thereby augmenting its operational performance.
This method undergoes rigorous validation across three diverse battery datasets encompassing various data
inputs, charging profiles, and temperatures. These assessments reveal an exceptional level of accuracy, with
an average error rate falling below 9.35 mAh for 1.1 Ah batteries in the absence of external information,
and dipping below 7.37 mAh for 1.1 Ah batteries when incorporating external data. The promising outcomes
derived from these validations unequivocally affirm the effectiveness of our proposed model in accurately
estimating battery charge curve predictions.

1. Introduction through methods like degradation pattern recognition using trans-

Lithium-ion batteries have gained widespread adoption in diverse
applications, including smartphones, large-scale energy storage sys-
tems, and electric vehicles. Their popularity stems from exceptional fea-
tures, including high energy density, extended lifespan, eco-friendliness,
and low self-discharge rate. To ensure efficient and secure usage,
Battery Management Systems (BMS) are crucial, performing tasks such
as battery monitoring, balancing, fault diagnosis, thermal manage-
ment, charge/discharge control, health management, and condition
estimation [1]. The field of battery health assessment has seen re-
markable progress, with recent innovations offering profound insights
fer learning [2], domain-adapted prediction of battery health under
limited labeling conditions [3], and health estimations grounded in
electrochemical impedance spectroscopy [4].
Handling battery health degradation, primarily manifested by ca-
pacity loss, is a significant challenge in lithium-ion battery manage-
ment. As charge/discharge cycles increase, the battery’s maximum
capacity continually declines. Accurately evaluating maximum bat-
tery capacity is crucial for formulating effective battery management
strategies and planning maintenance activities.
To tackle this challenge, prior research has explored various
methods for estimating the maximum capacity of batteries, encom-
passing direct measurement techniques, electrochemical model-based

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: 23s003072@stu.hit.edu.cn (Y. Lin), liu.qiuyang1@byd.com (Q. Liu), cyuanlong@hit.edu.cn (Y. Chen), chunyu@hit.edu.cn (C. Wang),
junjie2021@njmu.edu.cn (J. Wang), zhaoll@hit.edu.cn (L. Zhao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2024.234189
Received 17 December 2023; Received in revised form 29 January 2024; Accepted 5 February 2024
Available online 26 February 2024
0378-7753/© 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Y. Lin et al.
approaches, and data-driven methods. Direct measurement entails ac-
quiring standard aging characteristic parameters (e.g., capacity 𝑄,
internal resistance 𝑅, number of cycles 𝑇 , etc.) through tests such as
internal resistance measurements [5], impedance measurements [6],
and ampere-time integration of a fully charged battery [7]. By obtain-
ing these characteristic parameter values, a quantifiable state of health
(SOH) can be calculated as per the SOH definition, facilitating the
assessment of battery degradation. However, many of these techniques
are conducted offline and are not suitable for instantaneous online
estimation.
Alternatively, Electrochemical modeling-based approaches have be-
en delved into for predicting battery health, encompassing Bayesian
hierarchical modeling (BHM) [8], particle filtering-based prognos-
tic frameworks [9–11], and second-order RC equivalent circuit mod-
els [12]. These methods hold promise for battery health prediction
but require extensive experimentation for model development, and
their applicability is often confined to specific battery materials and
operational conditions, constraining their generalizability. Moreover,
the precision of these estimations is questionable due to uncertainties
inherent in model-based estimations, often limited by the scope of input
data, such as voltage and temperature measurements.
The advent of extensive laboratory and real-world data has cat-
alyzed the development of data-driven methodologies for estimating
the state of batteries. These approaches are broadly categorized into
machine learning-based and deep neural network-based methods. Ma-
chine learning techniques leverage extracted features from battery
data, employing algorithms like Support Vector Machines (SVM) [13–
16], Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) [17–19], among others, to
construct an implicit function linking inputs to the output. Deep neural
network methods, conversely, utilize time-series battery data, enabling
the automatic extraction of features and nonlinear modeling through
network learning, with techniques including Long Short-Term Memory
(LSTM) [20,21], Gated Recurrent Units (GRU) [22], Convolutional
Neural Networks (CNN) [23,24], and hybrid models [25]. Data-driven
strategies are applicable not just to assessing battery health but also
to related areas, including battery status sensors [26], nanogenera-
tors [27], and supercapacitors [28].
Data-driven approaches offer the advantage of greater convenience
and generalizability over model-based methods, as they bypass the
need for an intricate understanding of the electrochemical mechanisms
of Li-ion batteries for accurate model formulation. However, a preva-
lent limitation among these methods is their dependence on complete
charge/discharge curves for feature extraction, crucial for estimating
the state of Li-ion batteries. .
A complete charge/discharge curve, encapsulating the full range
from the lower to the upper voltage limits, harbors extensive infor-
mation reflective of the battery’s current condition, not limited to
maximum capacity but also including key metrics like maximum en-
ergy, available capacity, and available energy. Accessing a full charge
curve facilitates a holistic assessment of a lithium-ion battery’s state.
Nonetheless, practical challenges often impede the acquisition of a com-
plete charge curve, with charging processes starting at various voltage
levels and not always achieving a fully charged state. Particularly in
battery pack systems, the BMS might halt the charging once a single
cell reaches full charge, potentially leaving other cells undercharged,
making the attainment of a comprehensive charging curve a rarity
in practical settings. Moreover, in EV battery management systems,
recorded charge/discharge curves typically span only certain segments,
further restricting the availability of detailed information.
In the realm of battery capacity estimation, various studies have
explored the utilization of charging curves. For example, Feng et al.
introduced an algorithm based on Support Vector Machines (SVM) that
uses segments of charging curves (specifically, 15 min of charge data)
to predict SOH of batteries with a notably low error rate of less than 2%
at the 80% charge level [29]. Zheng et al. proposed a method for online
capacity estimation that relies on partial charging profiles to predict the
2
Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189
lifespan of batteries [30]. Duan et al. created a Convolutional Neural
Network (CNN) capable of predicting the battery’s impedance spectrum
using limited constant current charging data, within a specific voltage
range [31]. Su et al. employed an unsupervised learning algorithm to
extract features from the charging curve for the prediction of the entire
charging curve [32]. More recently, Tian et al. leveraged a deep neural
network to predict the complete charging profile of a battery from a
small portion of the curve, enabling the estimation of both the SOC
and SOH [33].
It is crucial to recognize that these methods, which utilize charging
curves, rely primarily on the voltage–capacity relationship. However,
external factors such as ambient temperature, total battery charge, and
number of charge/discharge cycles can also impact the battery’s actual
capacity. Additionally, the data recorded can vary between different
BMSs, with some monitoring real-time data like battery temperature
and voltage, and others tracking external data, which could affect the
battery’s aging process. This variability presents a challenge: develop-
ing a methodology that can adapt to different types of input data and
effectively use the external information provided by BMSs to improve
estimation accuracy.
In response to these challenges, we developed a novel neural net-
work model. This model takes a segment of the complete charging
curve data and external information as its inputs, with the latter being
optional, and produces the predicted full charging curve as its output.
The input data for the charging curve is not limited to the traditional
voltage-battery capacity sequence but can also encompass composite
data such as the voltage-cell temperature-battery capacity sequence.
To incorporate external information, our model employs a Wide &
Deep [34] architecture, while an encoder–regressor framework en-
hances its performance. Furthermore, we leverage depthwise separable
convolution [35] and channel attention [36] mechanisms to mitigate
computational demands and augment model efficacy, ensuring both
efficiency and academic rigor in our approach.
The principal contributions of this investigation are summarized as
follows:
(a) Conceptual Model Development: This study introduces a theoret-
ical framework that underscores the potential of utilizing exter-
nal data and predictions based on partial charging curves. This
model lays the groundwork for integrating auxiliary information
into the charging curve prediction task, thereby broadening the
scope of data-driven battery state analysis.
(b) Integration External Information: By adopting the Wide & Deep
architecture, the model is endowed with the capability to amal-
gamate external information with partial charging curve data.
This integration is pivotal, as it allows for the consideration
of external factors that significantly affect battery behavior,
thereby enriching the prediction of complete charging curves.
(c) Predictive Model Accuracy Enhancement: The accuracy of the
prediction model is considerably elevated through the introduc-
tion of an innovative network structure and mechanism. The
structure of the model combines encoder–regressor architecture
to obtain better intermediate feature representation, thereby im-
proving model performance. By implementing depthwise sepa-
rable convolution and channel attention mechanisms, the model
strikes a balance between reducing computational load and en-
hancing performance.
2. Experimental
2.1. Battery dataset preparation
In our battery degradation study, three distinct datasets were em-
ployed: the Oxford battery degradation dataset [37], the Sandia Na-
tional Laboratories battery dataset [38], referred to as the SNL dataset,
and a battery dataset that we acquired in our laboratory. Specific details
of datasets are provided in Table 1.
Y. Lin et al. Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189

Table 1
Battery dataset under different cycling conditions.
Dataset Battery Start–Stop Temperature Battery Discharge Number of cells Number of cells Charge
capacity voltage number rate in test set in training set rate
1, 6, 10, 12 1 C
35 ◦ C 1 4
16 2 C

SNL_NMC 3 Ah 3.3 V–4.2 V 7, 17 0.5 C

2, 13, 14, 15 1 C
25 ◦ C 4 9
5, 9 2 C
0.5 C
3, 4, 8, 11 3 C
2, 7, 9, 12 1 C
35 ◦ C 2 4
10, 11 2 C
SNL_LFP 1.1 Ah 3.0 V–3.6 V
1, 5, 8 1 C
25 ◦ C 2 3
3, 4 2 C
15 ◦ C 6, 13 1 C 1 1
Oxford 0.74 Ah 2.8 V–4.2 V 40 ◦ C 1–8 0.05 C 2 6 1 C
lab collect dataset 86 Ah 3.24 V–3.66 V N/A 1 120 A N/A N/A 120 A

The Oxford Battery Degradation Dataset comprises aging data for
eight Kokam small lithium-ion soft pack batteries. These batteries
possess a rated capacity of 0.74 Ah and feature a cathode composition
blending lithium–cobalt oxide and lithium–nickel–cobalt oxide, while
the anode consists of graphite. To investigate degradation, continuous
cycles of constant current–constant voltage charging were performed
at a charge rate of 1 C, and discharging was executed under urban
Artemis conditions within a controlled temperature chamber main-
tained at 40 ◦ C. Characterization data, including time, current, voltage,
and temperature, were collected at 100-cycle intervals. Both charg-
ing and discharging were conducted at rates of 1 C and 1/20 C,
respectively, where 1 C signifies the quantity of electricity required to
charge/discharge the battery to its rated capacity within one hour.
The Sandia National Laboratories Battery Dataset underwent cyclic
aging experiments involving distinct discharge rates, discharge depths,
and ambient temperatures across three battery types: NiCoAL ternary
Li-ion batteries, Ni-CoMn ternary Li-ion batteries, and Li-FePO4 batter-
ies. All batteries shared a common 18650 form factor (18 mm diameter,
65 mm length) and were subjected to constant current–voltage charging
and constant current discharging until reaching an aging threshold of
80% of rated capacity. Recorded parameters included time, ambient
temperature, cell temperature, current, voltage, and charge amount.
In addition to training and testing on the aforementioned publicly
accessible datasets, we validated the model using lab collected data.
Specifically, a lithium iron phosphate battery produced by Ganfeng
Lithium was employed. This battery had a rated capacity of 86 Ah and
underwent charging and discharging at a constant current–voltage of
120 A. A total of 13 cycles were collected for analysis; however, the
data from the first cycle was excluded due to its abnormal behavior. The
battery charging process ranged from a starting voltage of 3.24 V to an
ending voltage of 3.66 V. Given the small window size of the complete
charging curve, the voltage sampling method was adjusted slightly,
with 100 points sampled uniformly within the 3.24 V to 3.66 V interval.
Similarly, voltage–temperature series were sampled at intervals ranging
from 10 mV to 100 mV. The resulting voltage–temperature curve was
then visualized in Fig. 1.
For the Oxford battery dataset, all eight batteries were utilized,
while for the SNL dataset, specific battery models were selected: the
lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery model #APR18650M1A (1.1 Ah
capacity) and the lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide (NMC) battery
model #18650HG2 (3 Ah capacity). As this study aims to predict
complete charging curves, batteries with 100% depth of discharge were
chosen. Charging and discharging cycles were conducted under varying
temperatures and discharge rates, including a 0.5 C constant-current
charge rate.
During preprocessing, voltage interpolation based on time series
was executed for the original dataset. To ensure uniformity in the
output sequence length of the model, standardization of charging start
and cutoff voltages was performed under identical battery conditions.
Additionally, cycles with abrupt charging amount changes and incon-
sistent start/cutoff voltages were excluded from the SNL dataset to
prevent disruption in subsequent model training.
Post-preprocessing, charging amount and voltage curves for each
battery cycle were obtained. For the SNL_LFP battery data, 13 batteries
and 40,497 cycles resulted, while the SNL_NMC battery data yielded 17
batteries and 11,158 cycles. In the Oxford battery dataset, 8 batteries
and 519 cycles were obtained. For the lab collected battery datasets, 1
battery and 12 cycles were obtained.
Test set selection followed specific criteria: in the Oxford dataset,
6 batteries are allocated as training data ramdomly, and 2 as test
data. For the SNL dataset, the selection of test batteries was guided by
matching charging and discharging conditions with batteries from the
training set, including room temperature and discharge/charge rates.
Consequently, for SNL_LFP battery data, 5 batteries were earmarked
for the test set, while for SNL_NMC battery data, data from 5 batteries
constituted the test set. For the lab collected data, cycles 4, 7, and 11
were reserved as the test set, while the remaining nine cycles were
designated for training.
The resulting charging curves of the test batteries are visualized in
the accompanying Fig. 2. Each subplot corresponds to a battery, with
colors transitioning from red to black denoting increasing cycle counts.
Notably, as aging progresses, the charging curves exhibit a downward
shift, indicating a decreasing trend in charging amount at equivalent
voltages.
2.2. Propositions for complete charge curve prediction using partial charge
curves and external information
In the context of constant current charging, the battery manage-
ment system (BMS) captures voltage readings denoted as 𝑉 . A specific
correlation exists between the battery capacity 𝑄, and the voltage 𝑉 ,
expressed through the Eq. (1):
𝑉𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟
𝑄(𝑉 ) = 𝐹 (𝑉 )d𝑉 (1)
∫𝑉𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
where 𝑉𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 signifies the lower voltage limit, 𝑉𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟 signifies the upper
voltage limit, and the function 𝐹 encapsulates the connection between
the capacity 𝑄 and voltage 𝑉 . Through the voltage sampling interval
𝛥𝑉 , discretization of 𝑄(𝑉 ) is performed to outline a charging curve.
Specifically, when
𝑉 = [𝑉lower , 𝑉1 , … , 𝑉𝑖 , … , 𝑉upper ], 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒
𝑉𝑖 = 𝑉lower + 𝑖𝛥𝑉 , 𝑖 ∈ [1, 𝑁], 𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝑁 = (𝑉upper − 𝑉lower )∕𝛥𝑉
𝑄(𝑉 ) is sampled. Thus, a comprehensive charging curve is articulated
as a two-dimensional matrix [𝑉 ; 𝑄(𝑉 )]. Notably, the function 𝐹 usually

3
Y. Lin et al. Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189

Fig. 1. Correlation curves of lab collected battery data. In Fig. (b)(c), the darker the color of the curve, the more backward the cycle is represented.

Fig. 2. Charging data of batteries in the test dataset. The color ranges from red to black as the battery degrades. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend,
the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

4
Y. Lin et al.
remains elusive, motivating the pursuit of diverse methodologies to
ascertain the charging curve. Given that the charging curve is often
incomplete, this study endeavors to employ a neural network design to
forecast the entire charging curve by implicitly modeling the function
𝐹 within the network, leveraging the partial charging curve.
As 𝑉 is determined, the value of 𝑄 experiences fluctuations correlat-
ing with the battery’s aging state. Thus, 𝐹 encapsulates insights into the
battery’s aging state, influenced by both intrinsic factors (e.g., cell tem-
perature) and extrinsic factors (e.g., ambient temperature, total charge
cycles). Certain BMS systems not only capture the voltage sequence
𝑉 but also gather extra internal data such as the cell temperature
sequence. Here, we define Composite Sequence Data, which consists
of voltage–capacity sequences along with extra internal sequence data.
In alternative BMS systems, alongside internal data, external variables
like ambient temperature are recorded. These diverse information can
contribute to estimating 𝐹 . Consequently, our aim is to devise a neural
network capable of accommodating distinct forms of internal sequence
data while harnessing external information.
With the aforementioned goals in mind, our objective is to architect
a neural network capable of predicting the complete charging curve
based on the partial composite sequence data of the battery and ex-
ternal variables. In this scenario, given inputs 𝑃 = [𝑉 ′ ; 𝑄(𝑉 )′ ; 𝐻] and
𝑇 , we seek to estimate [𝑉 ; 𝑄(𝑉 )], where 𝑇 signifies external scalar
information, 𝑉 ′ constitutes the array of sampled voltage points ex-
tracted from the partial charging curve, 𝑄(𝑉 )′ encapsulates the battery
capacity change corresponding to these voltage sampling points, the
extra internal sequences are represented as 𝐻. Concretely, we define
𝑉 ′ = [𝑉𝑖 , 𝑉𝑖+1 , … , 𝑉𝑗 ],
𝑄(𝑉 )′ = [𝛥𝑄𝑖 , 𝛥𝑄𝑖+1 , … , 𝛥𝑄𝑗 ], 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒
𝛥𝑄𝑡 = 𝑄(𝑉𝑡 ) − 𝑄(𝑉𝑖−1 ), 𝑎𝑛𝑑
0<𝑖≤𝑡≤𝑗<𝑁
Both 𝐻 and 𝑇 are optional inputs, allowing the network to either
estimate the complete charging profile from the voltage–capacity se-
quence alone or incorporate various input configurations, such as the
voltage-cell-temperature-capacity composite sequence along with the
ambient temperature scalar. This adaptability significantly augments
the network’s real-world applicability. To elucidate, the adoption of the
[𝛥𝑄𝑡 ] sequence, as opposed to the [𝑄(𝑉𝑡 )] sequence, is underpinned by
the need for input power sampling to remain unlinked to the entire
charging curve, thereby ensuring independence from the state 𝑄(𝑉𝑖−1 )
preceding this sampling sequence. In practical scenarios, the battery
capacity 𝑄(𝑉𝑖−1 ) at 𝑉𝑖−1 typically remains unknown. Opting to employ
the battery capacity change as input effectively permits us to set 𝑄(𝑉𝑖−1 )
to 0. This strategic decision greatly simplifies input extraction from the
incomplete charging process, thereby rendering the input data more
flexible and attuned to real-world battery management dynamics.
2.3. Modeling for charging curve prediction
The distinct architectural framework of our model is visually elu-
cidated in Fig. 3. Drawing inspiration from the Wide & Deep architec-
ture [34], the Deep module functions as an encoder, intricately woven
with elements such as depthwise separable convolution [35], channel
attention [36], max-pooling, and a fully connected layer. This intricate
assembly serves the pivotal role of extracting latent features nestled
within the sequential information encapsulated by the charging win-
dow. The outcome of this process is heightened generalization prowess
for the model. In contrast, the Wide component is an amalgamation of
external information directly incorporated into the architecture. This
strategic infusion is engineered to amplify the predictive precision
pertaining to the comprehensive charging profile. The regressor, an-
other integral component, orchestrates the fusion of sequence features
discerned by the encoder with the input external data, thereby meticu-
lously forecasting the capacity sequence throughout the entirety of the
charging process.
5
Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189
The model’s input encompasses two main components: sequence in-
formation and external information. Sequence information constitutes
charging data culled within a fixed-length voltage window during the
battery’s charging carve. This encompassing dataset include at least
the following data: the sequence of voltage sampling points 𝑉 =
[𝑉1 , 𝑉2 , … , 𝑉𝑙 ] and the accompanying battery capacity shifts 𝑄(𝑉 ) =
[𝛥𝑄1 , 𝛥𝑄2 , … , 𝛥𝑄𝑙 ]. It is worth noting that certain BMSs might gather
supplementary internal battery information sequences, such as the cell
temperature sequence 𝐻 = [𝐻1 , 𝐻2 , … , 𝐻𝑙 ]. Consequently, the di-
mensional configuration of our sequence data’s feature vector remains
contingent on these variables. In the context of our study, the voltage
window is meticulously set at 0.3 V, a window size that effectively
balances estimation accuracy and sampling duration [33], while the
sampling interval calibrated at 10 mV. Consequently, this corresponds
to a total of 30 sampling points within the voltage sequence, i.e., 𝑙 = 30.
Let the number of supplementary internal information sequences be
represented as 𝑘. This renders the shape of the sequence information
matrix as 𝑙 × (𝑘 + 2). Conversely, external information pertains to
data that exists beyond the charging sequence, yet bears the potential
to influence battery aging conditions or respond to said conditions.
Given its static nature throughout the charging process, it can be suc-
cinctly represented as a scalar, denoted as 𝑇 . The external information
scalars encompass the following variables: the ambient temperature
during battery charging (𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑣 ), and the total charge amount of the
battery before the commencement of the current charge/discharge
cycle (𝑄𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 ).
The calculation for 𝑄𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 is shown in Eq. (2):
∑
𝐶𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒
𝑄𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑖 (2)
𝑖=1
Here, i represents the cycle number and 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑖 indicates the
charge amount in the 𝑖th cycle.
The model predominantly comprises two integral constituents: the
encoder and the regressor. Assuming that the input sequence informa-
tion is denoted as 𝑥 ∈ 𝑅(𝑘+2)×𝑙 , the input external information as 𝑢 ∈
𝑅𝑑×1 , and the output sequence information as 𝑦 ∈ 𝑅𝐿 (where 𝐿 corre-
sponds to the number of sampling points comprising the comprehensive
charging curve), the entire process can be elegantly encapsulated by
Eqs. (3) and (4):
̃ = 𝐸𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑑𝑒𝑟(𝑥)
𝑥 (3)
𝑦 = 𝑅𝑒𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑜𝑟(̃
𝑥, 𝑢) (4)
The output of the model is the battery capacity sequence data. For
the charging curve, the horizontal axis is voltage, and the vertical axis is
battery capacity. Since the voltage sampling points are uniform, and the
start point, end point, and sampling interval are all known, the model
only needs to output the capacity sequence data to form a complete
charging curve.
2.3.1. Encoder
The encoder mainly consists of depthwise separable convolution
and channel attention mechanism, and its specific structure and pa-
rameters are shown in Table 2. Significantly, SepConv_ReLU signifies
depthwise separable convolution post-connected to the Rectified Linear
Unit (ReLU) activation function, while SE_Connect denotes the channel
attention mechanism. MaxPool represents the operation of maximum
pooling, Flatten signifies the transformation of a two-dimensional vec-
tor into a one-dimensional variant, and Linear corresponds to a fully
connected layer.
Depthwise separable convolution. Depthwise separable convolution is
employed to alleviate operational complexity, especially considering
the constrained computational resources inherent to Battery Manage-
ment System (BMS) hardware. Depthwise separable convolution [35] is
a convolutional technique that decomposes the conventional convolu-
tion process into two operations: Depthwise Convolution and Pointwise
Y. Lin et al. Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189

Fig. 3. The model structure, based on Deep & Wide architecture, consists of an encoder and a regressor. The Deep part mainly consists of an encoder, while the Wide part is
responsible for adding external information to the encoded feature vector, which is finally fed into the regressor to predict the final result.

Table 2 applied to each channel of an input feature map. Each channel is con-
Structure of encoder, where 𝑘 represents the number of supplementary internal
volved with its corresponding convolution kernel, thereby maintaining
information sequences.
data channel integrity. This operation is mathematically characterized
Encoder Input shape Output shape
by Eq. (5):
SepConv_ReLU1 (𝑘 + 2) × 30 64 × 30 ∑
SE_Connect1 64 × 30 64 × 30 𝑂𝑐,𝑖,𝑗 = 𝐼𝑐,𝑖+𝑚,𝑗+𝑛 × 𝐾𝑐,𝑚,𝑛 (5)
SepConv_ReLU2 64 × 30 32 × 30 𝑚,𝑛
SE_Connect2 32 × 30 32 × 30
MaxPool 32 × 30 32 × 10 where 𝐼 represents the input feature map, 𝑂 signifies the output feature
SepConv_ReLU3 32 × 10 16 × 10 map, 𝐾 denotes the convolution kernel, 𝑐 is the channel index, 𝑖 and 𝑗
SE_Connect3 16 × 10 16 × 10 denote spatial indices for 𝐼 and 𝑂, and 𝑚 and 𝑛 represent spatial indices
SepConv_ReLU4 16 × 10 8 × 10 for 𝐾.
SE_Connect4 8 × 10 8 × 10
Flatten 8 × 10 80
Pointwise Convolution effectively equates to a 1× 1 convolution. It
Linear_ReLU 80 512 amalgamates the output feature maps stemming from depth convolu-
Linear 512 128 tion and is expressed as Eq. (6):
∑
𝑂𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑡 ,𝑖,𝑗 = 𝐼𝑐𝑖𝑛 ,𝑖,𝑗 × 𝐾𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑡 ,𝑐𝑖𝑛 (6)
𝑐𝑖𝑛

where 𝐼 corresponds to the output feature map from deep convolution,

Fig. 4. Schematic representation of the depthwise separable convolution mechanism,
consisting of two main operations: depthwise convolution and pointwise convolution.
Convolution. The fundamental objective is to reduce computational
intricacy and parameter count while maintaining model efficacy, re-
sulting in notable enhancements in computational efficiency. The pro-
cedural intricacies of depthwise separable convolution are graphically
demonstrated in Fig. 4:
Depthwise Convolution is often referred to as channel-by-channel
convolution. In this operation, a convolution kernel is individually
𝑂 represents the output feature map post pointwise convolution, 𝐾
signifies the convolution kernel, 𝑐𝑖𝑛 is the input channel index, 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑡
indicates the output channel index, and 𝑖 and 𝑗 denote spatial indices
for 𝐼 and 𝑂.
Separable convolution elegantly dissects the conventional convo-
lution into two discrete steps: first performing depth convolution,
then conducting pointwise convolution. This partitioning results in a
substantial reduction in computational demand and parameter count.
Theoretically, this approach might entail a performance reduction,
yet in practice, it frequently garners substantial computational effi-
ciency enhancements without sacrificing performance. Depthwise sep-
arable convolution has found widespread implementation in numerous
lightweight neural network architectures, including Xception [35] and
MobileNet [39].
Channel attention mechanisms. The Channel Attention Mechanism
(CAM) stands as a pivotal strategy employed to augment the efficacy of
neural networks. This technique operates by assigning varying weights
to distinct channels within an input feature map, thereby capturing
the interdependencies existing among these channels. The core premise
of the Channel Attention Mechanism revolves around the insight that
diverse channels within an input feature map hold differing degrees

6
Y. Lin et al. Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189

3. Result and discussion

3.1. Evaluation metrics

In this study, the assessment of curve prediction performance is

Fig. 5. Schematic representation of the channel attention mechanism [36], consisting based on two commonly used metrics: Root Mean Square Error (RMSE)
of two main operations: squeezing and excitation. and Mean Absolute Error (MAE). Both metrics are widely employed
in regression models to quantify the disparity between actual obser-
Table 3 vations and model predictions, albeit with slightly distinct calculation
Structure of regressor, where 𝑑 represents the length of external information, and methodologies. Given the focus on charging curves of Li-ion batteries,
𝐿 represents the length of output sequence. these metrics serve to gauge the precision of State of Charge (SOC)
Regressor Input shape Output shape estimation. Additionally, the battery’s State of Health (SOH) signifies
Linear_ReLU1 128 + 𝑑 128 its aging condition, and its maximum energy reflects the device’s
Linear_ReLU2 128 64
endurance. Both SOH and maximum energy are pivotal battery states,
Linear 64 𝐿
thus prompting the introduction of capacity prediction error and energy
prediction error as evaluation criteria for these indicators.
Root Mean Square Error (RMSE): RMSE entails computing the av-
of importance. By dynamically learning channel weights, the neural erage sum of squared differences between actual and predicted values,
network is empowered to allocate heightened attention to pivotal followed by extracting the square root. Its formulation is as Eq. (10):
channels, thereby ushering in performance enhancements. √
√
A paradigmatic instantiation of the channel attention mechanism √ 1 𝑁+1 ∑( )
can be observed in the SENet [36]. Within SENet, the mechanism is em- 𝑅𝑀𝑆𝐸 = √ ̂ 𝑖) 2
𝑄(𝑉𝑖 ) − 𝑄(𝑉 (10)
𝑁 + 1 𝑖=1
bodied in the SE module, characterized by two key steps: ‘‘squeezing’’
and ‘‘excitation’’, as illustrated in Fig. 5. ̂ 𝑖)
where 𝑄(𝑉𝑖 ) signifies the actual charging quantity at voltage 𝑉𝑖 , 𝑄(𝑉
In the squeezing operation, the input feature map is subjected to signifies the model’s estimated charging quantity at voltage 𝑉𝑖 .
global average pooling across spatial dimensions, yielding a feature A smaller RMSE value corresponds to heightened prediction ac-
vector 𝑧𝑐 of dimensions 1 × 1 × 𝐶𝑖𝑛 . This operation is mathematically curacy. RMSE, by squaring the error term, exerts a more substantial
formulated as Eq. (7): penalty for larger errors, thus prioritizing larger discrepancies.
1 ∑𝐻 ∑ 𝑊 Mean Absolute Error (MAE): MAE involves computing the average
𝑧𝑐 = 𝐹𝑠𝑞 (𝑢𝑐 ) = 𝑢 (𝑖, 𝑗) (7) sum of absolute differences between actual and predicted values. The
𝐻 × 𝑊 𝑖=1 𝑗=1 𝑐
calculation is depicted by Eq. (11):
Effectively captures holistic inter-channel information within the input
∑|
𝑁+1
feature map. 𝑀𝐴𝐸 =
1 ̂ 𝑖 )||
|𝑄(𝑉𝑖 ) − 𝑄(𝑉 (11)
The excitation operation delves into channel weight acquisition 𝑁 + 1 𝑖=1 | |
through a two-layer Fully Connected network. The process commences
Where the symbols carry the same significance as in the RMSE equa-
with the feature vector derived from the squeezing operation, progress-
tion. Smaller MAE values indicate enhanced model prediction accuracy.
ing through a Fully Connected layer and a ReLU activation function
to procure an intermediate feature vector. Subsequently, the ultimate Unlike RMSE, MAE refrains from introducing additional penalties for
channel weight vector 𝑠 is ascertained by subjecting it to a Fully significant errors, focusing instead on average error magnitude.
Connected layer, followed by a sigmoid activation function. Mathemat- Capacity Prediction Error: This metric assesses the model’s ability
ically, this operation is expressed as Eq. (8): to predict the battery’s maximum capacity. It entails calculating the
( ) absolute difference between the actual charging quantity at the final
𝑠 = 𝐹𝑒𝑥 (𝑧, 𝑊 ) = 𝜎 (𝑔(𝑧, 𝑤)) = 𝜎 𝑊2 𝛿(𝑊1 𝑧) (8) point of the curve and the predicted charging quantity at the same
The channel weights encapsulated within the input feature map point. It is expressed as Eq. (12):
undergo recalibration via element-wise multiplication with the channel | ̂ 𝑒𝑛𝑑 )||
𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑄 = |𝑄(𝑉𝑒𝑛𝑑 ) − 𝑄(𝑉 (12)
weight vector obtained through the ‘‘excitation’’ operation. This recali- | |
bration empowers the model to focus on salient channels, culminating where 𝑄(𝑉𝑒𝑛𝑑 ) denotes the actual charging amount at the charging
in heightened model performance. Through the integration of the chan- ̂ 𝑒𝑛𝑑 ) denotes the
cut-off voltage (i.e., the battery’s true capacity), 𝑄(𝑉
nel attention module across diverse layers of the neural network, the model’s estimated charging amount at the charging cut-off voltage
model adeptly acquires the ability to adaptively glean inter-channel (i.e., the predicted capacity).
dependencies, thus fostering a more nuanced representation of input Energy Prediction Error: The energy prediction error evaluates the
features. model’s precision in predicting the battery’s maximum energy. Concep-
tually, it signifies the absolute difference between the integration of the
2.3.2. Regressor
actual power curve over the charge and the integration of the predicted
The structure of the regressor and parameters of each layer are
power curve over the charge. The practical calculation is defined as
displayed in the Table 3. In Fig. 3 the regressor consists of three fully
connected layers. Initially, the encoder’s 128-dimensional features are Eq. (13):
merged with the 𝑑-dimensional external information and fed into two | 𝑉∑ 𝑉𝑒𝑛𝑑
∑ |
| 𝑒𝑛𝑑
|
fully-connected layers with ReLU activation functions. Lastly, one more 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝐸 = || 𝑉𝑖 × 𝛥𝑄(𝑉𝑖 ) − ̂ 𝑖 )|
𝑉𝑖 × 𝛥𝑄(𝑉 | (13)
|𝑉𝑖 =𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡+1 |
layer is added to acquire the predicted charging curve sequence 𝐿. | 𝑉𝑖 =𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡+1 |
where 𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡 refers to the charging start voltage, 𝑉𝑒𝑛𝑑 refers to the
2.3.3. Loss function ̂ 𝑖 ) = 𝑄(𝑉
charging cut-off voltage, 𝛥𝑄(𝑉𝑖 ) = 𝑄(𝑉𝑖 ) − 𝑄(𝑉𝑖−1 ), 𝛥𝑄(𝑉 ̂ 𝑖) −
The mean squared error (MSE) loss function, commonly used for ̂
𝑄(𝑉𝑖−1 ).
regression tasks, was used for model training.
These evaluation metrics collectively provide a comprehensive as-
1 ∑(
𝑛
)2 sessment of the model’s predictive capabilities, encompassing accuracy
𝑀𝑆𝐸 = 𝑌 − 𝑌̂𝑖 (9)
𝑛 𝑖=1 𝑖 in SOC, battery health, and endurance predictions.

7
Y. Lin et al.
Fig. 6. Performance of models in estimating the entire crave using voltage–capacity sequences as inputs.
3.2. Performance using internal data
In this section, we conducted two experiments to verify the efficacy
of the proposed method. In Experiment 1, we utilized two publicly
accessible datasets, namely the Oxford dataset and the SNL dataset.
The model’s inputs were sequences of voltage and battery capacity
data. The performance of the proposed method was compared against
two other models: a self-constructed LSTM model and a convolutional
network-based model proposed by Tian J et al. [33]. This comparison
aimed to highlight the effectiveness of the newly proposed approach.
Experiment 2 focused on the SNL dataset and lab collected dataset,
which included real battery aging data. In this experiment, the model
input was constructed as a composite sequence comprising voltage,
temperature, and battery capacity. The aim was to demonstrate the
versatility of the proposed method in handling different types of input
data.
Both Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 employed a sliding window
strategy for training and testing. This strategy involved sliding a win-
dow of size 30 along the entire charging curve, with a step size of 1. The
output label for the model was the complete charging curve. During the
training phase, a batch size of 512 was used, and the training process
was conducted over 1000 epochs. The Adam optimizer, with a learning
rate of 5e−3, was employed.
3.2.1. Using voltage–capacity sequences as inputs
In order to address the differences among the batteries in terms of
their charging characteristics, We trained each of the three batteries
independently. This was necessitated by variations in starting and stop-
ping voltages as well as other battery-specific properties that influence
the distribution of charging curves.
8
Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189
For the training process, 35% of the cycle data were randomly
selected for validation purposes, while the remaining 65% were allo-
cated for training. During the training phase, an early stopping strategy
was implemented. The patience parameter for this early stopping was
set to 40. This meant that, after each training epoch, the valida-
tion set was utilized for validation. If the loss of the model on the
validation set ceased to decrease for 40 consecutive epochs, the train-
ing process would be terminated. The model’s weights at this point,
which corresponded to the minimized loss on the validation set, were
preserved.
Our method was trained alongside a self-constructed LSTM model
and the convolutional network-based model introduced by Tian J
et al. [33]. These three models were trained using identical settings.
Subsequently, they were evaluated on the test set using four evaluation
metrics detailed in Section 3.1. The results are shown in the Table 4 and
Fig. 6.
The analysis of the results tabulated reveals that the methodology
advocated in this study consistently surpassed the other two model
architectures across all evaluation metrics. This finding accentuates
the efficacy of our proposed model, which capitalizes on the syner-
gistic effect of depthwise separable convolution and channel attention
mechanisms to extract pivotal features from the charging curve data.
The superior performance of our model underscores its proficiency in
navigating the complexities and subtleties associated with predicting
battery charging curves, thereby offering a more refined solution in
contrast to the models it was compared against.
3.2.2. Using composite sequences as inputs
In Experiment 2, the SNL dataset was employed along with actual
measured battery data. The SNL dataset was augmented by inter-
polating battery temperature data based on voltage, much like the
Y. Lin et al. Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189

Table 4
Performance of models in estimating the entire crave using Voltage–Capacity sequences as inputs, where blue is the
best performance.
Dataset Model 𝑅𝑀𝑆𝐸 𝑀𝐴𝐸 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑄 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝐸
Tian J el. 7.99 4.07 12.36 1.74%
Oxford LSTM 8.36 4.29 12.06 1.67%
Ours 5.40 2.73 8.58 1.20%
Tian J el. 16.94 8.58 17.82 1.74%
SNL_LFP LSTM 11.00 5.06 12.65 1.29%
Ours 9.35 4.18 11.11 1.13%
Tian J el. 30.12 18.91 30.90 1.19%
SNL_NMC LSTM 23.41 14.31 25.51 1.03%
Ours 22.82 14.11 24.63 0.96%

Fig. 7. Performance of models in estimating the entire crave using composite sequences as inputs.

interpolation process used for battery capacity data. Consequently, the

Table 5
model inputs now encompass three types of data: voltage sequence 𝑉 , Performance of models in estimating the entire crave using Composite Sequences as
charging capacity sequence 𝛥𝑄, and temperature sequence 𝑇 . inputs, where blue is the best performance. N indicates that no temperature sequences
The training setup for the SNL dataset remained consistent with data is used and Y vice versa.
the one used in previous experiments. The early stopping strategy was Dataset Condition 𝑅𝑀𝑆𝐸 𝑀𝐴𝐸 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑄 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝐸
(Whether to add
applied again. All the final results obtained was shown in the Table 5
battery temperature)
and Fig. 7.
N 9.35 4.18 11.11 1.13%
The experimental outcomes underscore the significant role of bat- SNL_LFP
Y 9.68 4.51 10.89 1.10%
tery temperature in enhancing the performance metrics for both the
N 22.80 14.10 24.60 0.96%
SNL_NMC dataset and the laboratory measurement data. In a similar SNL_NMC
Y 18.60 10.80 19.80 0.79%
vein, the introduction of the proposed method heralds improvements
N 47.30 25.80 20.64 0.26%
across various metrics for the SNL_LFP dataset, albeit accompanied by a Lab_collect data
Y 44.72 23.22 18.06 0.23%
slight increase in RMSE and MAE values, thereby affirming the validity
of the proposed technique.
To delve into the reasons behind the elevated RMSE and MAE values
observed in the SNL_LFP dataset, a comprehensive visualization of all

9
Y. Lin et al.
Fig. 8. The battery temperature of the LFP battery at different room temperature. Each curve depicted in the figure illustrates the interpolation curve of temperature versus voltage
for one cycle. The intensity of color shading corresponds to the frequency of cycles; darker colors indicate higher cycle counts.
temperature–voltage curves was undertaken, as depicted in Fig. 8. The
observed decrement in performance may be attributed to inaccuracies
within the dataset measurements, evidenced by the temperature data
for certain cycles in the training set being markedly lower than am-
bient temperature, as shown in Figs. 8(b) and 8(d). Intriguingly, the
test set data, subjected to identical experimental conditions including
consistent charge/discharge rates and ambient temperature, did not
manifest any discrepancies, as illustrated in Figs. 8(a) and 8(c). This
inconsistency leads to divergent distributions between the training and
test datasets.
Furthermore, Table 1 elucidates a pronounced deficiency in data
pertaining to the quantity of batteries in the SNL_LFP dataset in com-
parison to their temperature conditions. This paucity of data impedes
adequate training and obstructs the effective learning of the correla-
tion between temperature and battery capacity, thereby impacting the
model’s performance.
3.3. Performance with external information
In this section, we introduce the incorporation of external informa-
tion into the model in the hopes of achieving performance enhance-
ments. The model’s input is comprised of two components: sequence
data and scalar external information.
To ensure diversity and avoid overfitting, this experiment focuses on
utilizing the SNL dataset, which encompasses a wide range of batteries,
charging, and discharging conditions. The goal is to examine the impact
of each external information element on the model’s predictive perfor-
mance. The experimental setup remains consistent with the previous
section.
10
Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189
The outcomes of the predictions are summarized in the Table 6 and
Fig. 9.
The comparative analysis underscores a notable enhancement in the
model’s predictive accuracy when factors such as ambient tempera-
ture and the total previous charge are integrated. The incorporation
of both ambient temperature and total previous charge as external
variables yielded the most favorable outcomes, indicating their syn-
ergistic impact on the model’s performance. These parameters, which
are readily accessible in practical settings, offer valuable insights into
the battery’s aging state, thereby enriching the model’s contextual
understanding and enabling more accurate predictions of battery health
and performance.
3.4. Discussion
This research has devised a theoretical framework for the pre-
diction of entire charging curves by leveraging external data along-
side sequences of partial charging curves. To translate this theoretical
model into an effective predictive tool, the study has utilized advanced
deep learning techniques, specifically employing the Wide & Deep
architecture. This allows for the seamless integration of both external
information and partial charging curve sequences. To optimize perfor-
mance and minimize computational demands, the model incorporates
depthwise separable convolution and channel attention mechanisms.
The evaluation outcomes underscore the model’s ability to deliver ac-
curate charging curve predictions across a variety of battery types and
operational conditions. Distinctively, our model excels in predicting the
full charging curve from merely a segment of the curve, and it adeptly
Y. Lin et al. Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189

Fig. 9. Performance of models in estimating the entire crave with external information.

Table 6
Performance of models in estimating the entire crave with external information, where blue color indicates optimal
performance.
Dataset Information type 𝑅𝑀𝑆𝐸 𝑀𝐴𝐸 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑄 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝐸
𝑁𝑜𝑛𝑒 9.35 4.18 11.11 1.13%
SNL_LFP
𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑣 8.80 3.85 9.68 0.99%
𝑄𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 7.48 3.63 9.57 0.97%
𝑄𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 + 𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑣 7.37 3.74 8.58 0.87%
𝑁𝑜𝑛𝑒 22.80 14.10 24.60 0.96%
SNL_NMC
𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑣 21.60 12.90 22.50 0.87%
𝑄𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 17.40 10.80 18.30 0.70%
𝑄𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 + 𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑣 17.10 10.50 18.00 0.69%

utilizes additional internal and external data to refine its predictive
accuracy, setting it apart from previous research.
Nevertheless, the approach delineated in this study is not without its
limitations. Initially, the model assumes the independence of external
variables when integrating them for prediction purposes. However,
the interdependence of various external factors in real-world scenar-
ios may complicate this assumption, and the mere incorporation of
additional external data might not invariably lead to improved model
performance. Moreover, while the model shows adaptability to data
from different battery types, it necessitates individual training for
each unique battery type, demanding extensive data. This requirement,
especially for complete charging curves, poses challenges to the model’s
quick generalization and broader application. Addressing these chal-
lenges, future research will delve into enhancing the model’s transfer
learning capabilities, aiming to overcome these hurdles and amplify its
applicability in practical contexts.
4. Conclusion
This paper is centered on the objective of discerning the state of
lithium-ion batteries through a data-driven methodology. The research
entails the development of a deep neural network model aimed at
predicting the entire charging curve of lithium-ion batteries, thus facil-
itating a thorough understanding of their condition. The effectiveness
of the proposed approach is corroborated using both publicly available
datasets and lab collected data. Additionally, the inclusion of external
factors, such as ambient temperature, which bears on and mirrors
battery aging, serves to augment the model’s predictive precision.
In summation, this research unveils a potent predictive model and
substantiates its efficacy across multiple datasets, inclusive of lab col-
lected data pertaining to battery aging. This contribution propels the
domain of lithium-ion battery complete charge curve prediction for-
ward, offering significant insights and viable applications for battery
state assessment.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Yupeng Lin: Writing – original draft, Methodology. Qiuyang Liu:
Software, Methodology. Yuanlong Chen: Validation, Data curation.
Chunyu Wang: Writing – review & editing. Junjie Wang: Supervi-
sion, Conceptualization. Lingling Zhao: Writing – review & editing,
Supervision.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgment
This work is supported by National Key Research and Development
Program of China (Grant no. 2023YFC3305000,2023YFC3305003).
References
[1] Y. Wang, J. Tian, Z. Sun, L. Wang, R. Xu, M. Li, Z. Chen, A comprehensive
review of battery modeling and state estimation approaches for advanced battery
management systems, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 131 (2020) 110015.
[2] Z. Deng, X. Lin, J. Cai, X. Hu, Battery health estimation with degradation pattern
recognition and transfer learning, J. Power Sources 525 (2022) 231027.
[3] Z. Deng, L. Xu, H. Liu, X. Hu, B. Wang, J. Zhou, Rapid health estimation of in-
service battery packs based on limited labels and domain adaptation, J. Energy
Chem. 89 (2024) 345–354.
[4] B. Zhang, Y. Zhang, J. Shen, Z. Zhou, G. Zhu, Research on Differential Pulse
Voltammetry detection method for low concentration glucose based on machine
learning model, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. (2024) 100479.

11
Y. Lin et al.
[5] T.R. Grandjean, J. Groenewald, A. McGordon, W.D. Widanage, J. Marco, Accel-
erated internal resistance measurements of lithium-ion cells to support future
end-of-life strategies for electric vehicles, Batteries 4 (4) (2018) 49.
[6] X. Wang, X. Wei, H. Dai, Estimation of state of health of lithium-ion batteries
based on charge transfer resistance considering different temperature and state
of charge, J. Energy Storage 21 (2019) 618–631.
[7] X. Lai, S. Wang, L. He, L. Zhou, Y. Zheng, A hybrid state-of-charge estimation
method based on credible increment for electric vehicle applications with large
sensor and model errors, J. Energy Storage 27 (2020) 101106.
[8] M. Mishra, J. Martinsson, M. Rantatalo, K. Goebel, Bayesian hierarchical model-
based prognostics for lithium-ion batteries, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 172 (2018)
25–35.
[9] D.A. Pola, H.F. Navarrete, M.E. Orchard, R.S. Rabié, M.A. Cerda, B.E. Olivares,
J.F. Silva, P.A. Espinoza, A. Pérez, Particle-filtering-based discharge time prog-
nosis for lithium-ion batteries with a statistical characterization of use profiles,
IEEE Trans. Reliab. 64 (2) (2015) 710–720.
[10] B. Mo, J. Yu, D. Tang, H. Liu, A remaining useful life prediction approach for
lithium-ion batteries using Kalman filter and an improved particle filter, in: 2016
IEEE International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management, ICPHM,
IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–5.
[11] M. Zhang, K. Wang, Y.-t. Zhou, et al., Online state of charge estimation of
lithium-ion cells using particle filter-based hybrid filtering approach, Complexity
2020 (2020).
[12] K. Wang, C. Liu, J. Sun, K. Zhao, L. Wang, J. Song, C. Duan, L. Li, State of
charge estimation of composite energy storage systems with supercapacitors and
lithium batteries, Complexity 2021 (2021) 1–15.
[13] Z. Liu, J. Zhao, H. Wang, C. Yang, A new lithium-ion battery SOH estimation
method based on an indirect enhanced health indicator and support vector
regression in PHMs, Energies 13 (4) (2020) 830.
[14] Q. Li, D. Li, K. Zhao, L. Wang, K. Wang, State of health estimation of lithium-ion
battery based on improved ant lion optimization and support vector regression,
J. Energy Storage 50 (2022) 104215.
[15] X. Li, C. Yuan, Z. Wang, State of health estimation for Li-ion battery via partial
incremental capacity analysis based on support vector regression, Energy 203
(2020) 117852.
[16] C. Ma, X. Zhai, Z. Wang, M. Tian, Q. Yu, L. Liu, H. Liu, H. Wang, X. Yang, State
of health prediction for lithium-ion batteries using multiple-view feature fusion
and support vector regression ensemble, Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern. 10 (2019)
2269–2282.
[17] Z. Lyu, R. Gao, Li-ion battery state of health estimation through Gaussian
process regression with Thevenin model, Int. J. Energy Res. 44 (13) (2020)
10262–10281.
[18] X. Li, C. Yuan, X. Li, Z. Wang, State of health estimation for Li-Ion battery
using incremental capacity analysis and Gaussian process regression, Energy 190
(2020) 116467.
[19] J. Jia, J. Liang, Y. Shi, J. Wen, X. Pang, J. Zeng, SOH and RUL prediction of
lithium-ion batteries based on Gaussian process regression with indirect health
indicators, Energies 13 (2) (2020) 375.
[20] H. Sun, J. Sun, K. Zhao, L. Wang, K. Wang, Data-driven ICA-Bi-LSTM-combined
lithium battery SOH estimation, Math. Probl. Eng. 2022 (2022) 1–8.
[21] Y. Guo, P. Yu, C. Zhu, K. Zhao, L. Wang, K. Wang, A state-of-health estimation
method considering capacity recovery of lithium batteries, Int. J. Energy Res. 46
(15) (2022) 23730–23745.
12
Journal of Power Sources 600 (2024) 234189
[22] H. Sun, D. Yang, L. Wang, K. Wang, A method for estimating the aging state
of lithium-ion batteries based on a multi-linear integrated model, Int. J. Energy
Res. 46 (15) (2022) 24091–24104.
[23] S. Shen, M. Sadoughi, X. Chen, M. Hong, C. Hu, A deep learning method for
online capacity estimation of lithium-ion batteries, J. Energy Storage 25 (2019)
100817.
[24] Y. Yang, A machine-learning prediction method of lithium-ion battery life based
on charge process for different applications, Appl. Energy 292 (2021) 116897.
[25] P. Li, Z. Zhang, R. Grosu, Z. Deng, J. Hou, Y. Rong, R. Wu, An end-to-end
neural network framework for state-of-health estimation and remaining useful
life prediction of electric vehicle lithium batteries, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
156 (2022) 111843.
[26] Z. Yi, Z. Chen, K. Yin, L. Wang, K. Wang, Sensing as the key to the safety and
sustainability of new energy storage devices, Protect. Control Mod. Power Syst.
8 (1) (2023) 1–22.
[27] X. Yu, Y. Shang, L. Zheng, K. Wang, Application of nanogenerators in the field
of acoustics, ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. 5 (9) (2023) 5240–5248.
[28] N. Ma, H. Yin, K. Wang, Prediction of the remaining useful life of supercapacitors
at different temperatures based on improved long short-term memory, Energies
16 (14) (2023).
[29] X. Feng, C. Weng, X. He, X. Han, L. Lu, D. Ren, M. Ouyang, Online state-of-health
estimation for li-ion battery using partial charging segment based on support
vector machine, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 68 (9) (2019) 8583–8592.
[30] Y. Zheng, C. Qin, X. Lai, X. Han, Y. Xie, A novel capacity estimation method
for lithium-ion batteries using fusion estimation of charging curve sections and
discrete Arrhenius aging model, Appl. Energy 251 (2019) 113327.
[31] Y. Duan, J. Tian, J. Lu, C. Wang, W. Shen, R. Xiong, Deep neural network
battery impedance spectra prediction by only using constant-current curve,
Energy Storage Mater. 41 (2021) 24–31.
[32] L. Su, S. Zhang, A.J.H. McGaughey, B. Reeja-Jayan, A. Manthiram, Battery charge
curve prediction via feature extraction and supervised machine learning, Adv.
Sci. n/a (n/a) (2023) 2301737.
[33] J. Tian, R. Xiong, W. Shen, J. Lu, X.-G. Yang, Deep neural network battery
charging curve prediction using 30 points collected in 10 min, Joule 5 (6) (2021)
1521–1534.
[34] H.-T. Cheng, L. Koc, J. Harmsen, T. Shaked, T. Chandra, H. Aradhye, G.
Anderson, G. Corrado, W. Chai, M. Ispir, et al., Wide & deep learning for
recommender systems, in: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Deep Learning
for Recommender Systems, 2016, pp. 7–10.
[35] C. Fran, et al., Deep learning with depth wise separable convolutions, in: IEEE
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR, 2017.
[36] J. Hu, L. Shen, G. Sun, Squeeze-and-excitation networks, in: Proceedings of
the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018, pp.
7132–7141.
[37] C. Birkl, Oxford battery degradation dataset 1, 2017.
[38] Y. Preger, H.M. Barkholtz, A. Fresquez, D.L. Campbell, B.W. Juba, J. Romàn-
Kustas, S.R. Ferreira, B. Chalamala, Degradation of commercial lithium-ion cells
as a function of chemistry and cycling conditions, J. Electrochem. Soc. 167 (12)
(2020) 120532.
[39] A.G. Howard, M. Zhu, B. Chen, D. Kalenichenko, W. Wang, T. Weyand, M.
Andreetto, H. Adam, Mobilenets: Efficient convolutional neural networks for
mobile vision applications, 2017, arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.04861.