Recombination and Technological Complexity in
Lead-Acid Batteries for Alternative Energy Vehicles
Jaimes Gutiérrez Guadalupe Lara Rivero Arturo
Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana - Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana -
Iztapalapa Xochimilco
Mexico City, Mexico Mexico City, Mexico
lupoxa@gmail.com alararivero35@gmail.com
Abstract—From Complex Adaptive Systems theory, this
paper examines the evolution of Lead-Acid Batteries for
Alternative Energy Vehicles. By taking advantage of the
methodology developed by Strumsky et al, we represent
quantitative: i) different degrees of novelty of the inventive
activity, and ii) evolution on their complexity. Results show that,
Lead-Acid Batteries have become a complementary technology,
for the design of all Alternative Energy Vehicles, rather than a
rival technology.
Keywords—Recombination, Complexity, Technological
classes, Lead Acid Batteries, Alternative Electric Vehicles
I. INTRODUCTION
Throughout XX century, lead-acid batteries (LAB)
became the dominant design in automotive industry due to
their low cost, safety, and level of performance [1-3].
However, with the emergence of AEVs, LAB faces new
requirements in terms of functionality, life cycle, design,
development and production cost [2,4,5].
From economics of innovation [6,7] and theory of
Complex Adaptive Systems [8-11] the present research has as
its central objective study the technological evolution of LAB,
based on their inventive activity, for the period 1980-2013.
We address the following research questions: 1) What is the
participation of LAB in the inventive activity of the total
number of batteries designed for AEVs?; 2) Within the
technological progress of AEV, has the technological
complexity of LAB increased?; 3) What are the main types of
novelty that characterize the technological evolution of the
LAB? and 4) In terms of exploration/exploitation activities, is
there a foreseeable concentration of exploitation in a mature
technology such as the LAB?
The discussion is organized as follows. The next section
explains the relationship between complexity, recombination,
and technology exploration and exploitation activities from
the perspective of Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS). Section
3 describes the use of patent classes to quantify technological
complexity and identify the various types of inventive novelty
- based on the taxonomy of Strumsky et al [12,13]. Section 4,
using the USPTO patents, for the period 1981-2013, presents
the proportion of LAB with respect to advanced batteries for
AEVs. In same section, presents the main findings about the
changes in the complexity of LAB and some explanations of
them, also the proportions of the different types of inventive
novelty and of exploration/exploitation activities, that together
account for the persistence of the technological activity in
LAB, and some reasons that explain the identified patterns are
described. Section 5 concludes.
XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X/XX/$XX.00 ©20XX IEEE
Chávez Meza Artemio
Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana -
Xochimilco
Mexico City, Mexico
artemio79@hotmail.com
II. RECOMBINATION AND TECHNOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY
The emergence of new technologies has been analyzed
from different perspectives. It is possible to distinguish, in
principle, the following three approaches:
i) Gradualism. Technologies emerge and evolve through
the variation of previous technologies and the selection of the
most suitable ones. The accumulation of gradual variations
and continuous improvements, resulting from deliberate
modifications or unplanned discoveries, varies the set of
elements and/or physical structures that make up a particular
technology [14-18]. Technological complexity comes from
the growing differentiation, specialization, and integration of
its physical parts [19]. In this perspective, the analysis of
patents is only presented as examples [20-22].
ii) Combination/Accumulation. Technologies emerge and
evolve as new combinations of existing ones. These represent
a cumulative synthesis [23] that is available, as building
blocks, for the development of others [24-31]. Technologies
are combinations of “mechanical” elements that accumulate
as part of the social heritage [32]. This approach does not
explain the emergence of unprecedented technologies;
likewise, it lacks a unit to quantify the inventive activity and,
in terms of the measurement of complexity, it is not possible
to precisely identify the original block from which the
cumulative synthesis begins to be generated.
iii) Recombination of natural phenomena. Origination of
new technologies is a process that, to fulfill a purpose, links a
phenomenon with a need [8]. Thus, a new principle is
generated. However, the principles can rarely be used crudely;
to use them it is necessary to program a family of phenomena
and encapsulate them in physical devices to create a physical
architecture. This architecture has a modular, hierarchical, and
nested structure; that is, it is made up of components or
modules linked to central and complementary functions;
where, a group of components exploit a family of phenomena
associated with the central function; while others use
phenomena and principles to perform complementary
functions (protect and regulate devices, supply power, or
perform other tasks). Any component or module is a
technological subsystem composed, in turn, of other
subsystems [8,9].
The technological components are interconnected,
interact, and communicate with each other (the output of one
is the input of the others) and work in a coordinated manner to
achieve a common purpose, each of them performing a
necessary task. This chain of interactions and interconnections
ends up affecting the entire architecture [10], in the sense that
changes at one level imply changes at the others, to
reconfigure and thus adapt the central and complementary
purposes.
 From this perspective, the recombination of natural same magnitude, it can be seen that from 1981 to 1991, an
phenomena is a process that links a purpose with a principle average of 18 patents per year are registered, in total 203, of
and encapsulates them in an architecture that, through multiple which 98.5% (200) are from LAB. From 1992 to 2002, the
components, performs functions. In this way, a technology is average is 100 patents, with a total of 1108, the percentage of
complex to the extent that it combines a greater diversity of LAB is reduced to 39.5%, meanwhile, LI, NMH and NC
components, which orchestrate different phenomena, to fulfill patents represent 29.6%, 25 % and 5.8% respectively. And
one or more functions. The complexity of technological from 2003 to 2013, the annual average of patents is 211,
systems thus depends on both the number of components and reaching a total of 2327 where 66.8% are LI, 14.4% NHM,
the resulting interactions. 11.3% LAB and 7.3% NC. (Table I).
CAS theory has contributed to represent in a new way the
underlying complexity in the nature and evolution of
technology. Also, it has taken advantage of patent information
to quantitatively describe inventive activity and technological
complexity [12,13,33,34]. Novelty methodology Strumsky et
al [12] makes it possible to distinguish different types of
technological recombination and identify exploitation and
exploration activities.
III. CLASSES, COMPLEXITY AND TYPES OF NOVELTY Fig. 1. Number of patents for advanced batteries for AEVs, by type of active
material
In the United States, patented technologies are identified
through a class number system, the United States Patent TABLE I. QUANTITY AND PERCENTAGE OF BATTERIES PATENTS FOR AEVS,
Classification (USPC) system is based on a scheme created in BY TYPE OF ACTIVE MATERIAL AND PERIODS
the early 20th century and is legally mandated to provide a Periods
Comprehensive reference to all patentable subjects. This Active
1981-2013
Material 1981-1991 1992-2002 2003-2013
classification is reviewed periodically. USPC technology (Total)
classes are made up of a pair of codes known as main class LA 200 (98.5%) 438 (39.5%) 264 (11.3%) 902 (24.7%)
NC - 65 (5.8%) 171 (7.3%) 236 (6.4%)
and subclass. Classes indicate specific features of knowledge NMH 2 (0.9%) 277 (25.0%) 336 (14.4%) 615 (16.9%)
and are combined by patent examiners to generate a complete LI 1 (0.6%) 328 (29.6%) 1556 (66.8%) 1885 (51.8%)
description. Classes indicate capabilities, boundaries, and Batteries
203 (5.6%) 1108 (30.5%) 2327 (63.9%) 3638 (100%)
(Total)
complexities of a technology and empirically establish the
degree of novelty of a technology [33].
Classes can be used to measure the complexity of A. Evolution of technological complexity of LAB for AEVs
inventions. The degree of complexity can be understood as the A first way to identify the complexity of patents is by
minimum necessary length of a sequence of symbols or words looking at the percentage frequency distribution of their
that describe a process or result [10,35,36,]. Thus, an number of classes. Fig. 2 shows this distribution for LAB. It
invention will be simple if the number of classes that describe stands out that of the 902 patents that make up the total, 16
its operation or process is small. And it will be complex intervals (classes) are formed. This number is in itself
insofar as it requires a large number of classes to describe its significant since, following Page [37], in the combinatorial
process or properties. process, diversity and complexity are concomitant
phenomena: “without diversity it is not possible to observe
On the other hand, Strumsky et al [12,13] have developed much complexity; but without complexity, diversity becomes
a taxonomy, based on the technological classes and their mere variation on the mean”. Likewise, it is observed that only
resulting binary combinations to characterize the a small fraction (5.6%) of the patents (50) have 1
technological novelty of a patent in four categories: 1) technological class, while 64.7% have 2 - 4 classes.
Origination: All the classes in the patent are new and,
therefore, their resulting binary combinations are also new. 2)
Novel combination: The patent contains at least one new
technological class and, consequently, there are new binary
combinations with that class. 3) Recombination: The patent
contains new binary combinations generated with classes
previously used in other patents. 4) Reuse: All classes of the
patent and their binary combinations have been previously
used in other patents.
IV. INVENTIVE ACTIVITY IN ADVANCED BATTERIES FOR Fig.2. LAB patent distribution for AEVs, by number of classes (1981-2013)
AEVS
It is now convenient to observe the evolution of the
Automotive companies have explored various materials – number of classes per period. Figure 3 depics annual average
nickel-cadmium (NC), nickel-metal hydride (NMH), and of classes has a slightly increasing tendency. During 1981-
lithium-ion (LI) – as alternatives to LAB. One way to capture 2013, the average is 3.86 classes. However, the average hides
the inventive efforts and the transition to new and more significant differences. The proportion of patents according to
sophisticated energy storage systems demanded by AEVs is the number of classes changes during the period. From the
to observe the evolution in the number of patents for each type point of view of their relative weight, the patents with the
of battery. Fig. 1 shows a general increase in inventive activity greatest growth are those with 5 or more classes. During 1981-
in batteries for AEVs. If it is analyzed in three periods of the
1991 these represent 22.5% (45 patents), while between 2003-
2013 they reached 33% (87 patents).
Fig.3. Annual Average LAB Patent Classes for VEAs (1981-2013)
Table II reveals that as the inventive activity progresses,
patents combine an increasingly greater number of classes,
mostly 4 or more classes in the last period. Patents with 4
classes or more, in the last period, contribute 53% of the
inventive activity, while the first and second periods represent
46% and 43.7%, respectively.
TABLE II. NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF LAB PATENTS FOR AEVS, BY
NUMBER OF CLASSES AND PERIODS
Periods
Classes
1981-1991 1992-2002 2003-2013
1981-2013
(Total)
1 10 (5.0%) 19 (4.3%) 21 (8.0%) 50 (5.5 %)
2 38 (19.0%) 96 (21.9%) 47 (17.8%) 181 (20.1%)
3 60 (30.0%) 131 (29.9%) 56 (21.2%) 247 (27.4%)
4 47 (23.5%) 81 (18.4%) 53 (20.1%) 181 (20.1%)
5 or more 45 (22.5%) 111 (25.3%) 87 (32.9%) 243 (26.9%)
LAB
200 (22.1%) 438 (48.6%) 264 (29.3%) 902 (100%)
(Total)
Why LAB are increasingly complex systems? From the
point of view of the nature of technology [8] the following
factors are identified: 1) the discovery of an increasingly
diverse and profound set of scientific phenomena and
principles applied to LAB (nanotechnology) [38]; 2) the
convergence and interaction of previously separate
technological domains (mechatronics, electrochemistry,
physical-biology, and nanotechnology [39]; 3) more complex
designs of the internal components and/or modules (the
electrical/electronic (E/E) modules to manage and monitor
battery health and energy [40]; and 4) the requirements of
different market niches that demand increasingly
differentiated performance and functions (greater capacity and
charging speed, high cycle longevity, etc. [5].
Three relevant trajectories emerge. For one thing, all
AEVs require an advanced auxiliary battery to power the low-
voltage E/E systems. In the case of hybrid vehicles for the
ignition, lighting and ignition of the combustion engine; for
electric vehicles, to power the infotainment system in
particular. Advanced LAB are safe, stable, cheap, and
sufficient to power these systems [41]. In accordance with the
requirements of AEVs, these advanced auxiliary batteries are
more complex than the relatively simple conventional LA
technology: the power, lighting and ignition (SLI) battery. In
addition to powering the E/E systems, they are used as reserve
power for traction, provide power to certain critical functions
in the vehicle, and power new cooling systems. These batteries
have developed new and more complex technologies: Valve
Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA); Enhanced Flooded Batteries
(EFB) or the Gel Battery (GB) and Absorption Glass Mat
(AGM), these last two derivatives of the VRLA itself [42].
Thus, a dual battery system is implemented, where the LAB
are a complementary system to the traction batteries [43,44].
Second trajectory, explains the increase in the complexity
of LAB is their application as traction batteries in single and
two-seater microvehicles weighing less than 1,000k (electric
bicycles, scooters, electric wheelchairs, light forklifts, golf,
passenger and/or cargo transport at airports, etc. systems [41].
Various technologies have been developed for these: VRLA;
GB; EFB; AGM; and advanced lead carbon (ALC).
Third trajectory, associated with the increasingly complex
interactions between batteries and the new systems of vehicles
with internal combustion engine-alternators with Start-Stop
(ICE+), microhybrid (MHVs) and mild hybrids (MHEVs)
systems [43]. These vehicles have a high energy variation and,
in these conditions, the advanced LAB are more complex and
provide an optimal technological solution for the Start-Stop or
energy absorption functions for the regenerative brakes typical
of these vehicles. The batteries used in these AEVs are ALC
technology because they are less expensive, safer, less
heavy/bulky and more sustainable [40,41].
Design and development of LAB shows an increase in
their complexity, in the sense that, in order to fulfill their new
central or complementary functions: 1) inside the batteries,
there are more components (in theoretical terms N increases )
that interact with each other in novel ways (again, in
theoretical terms, interdependence increases, k) [45,46]; and
2) these components interact with more and new external
elements that make up the new architectures of the AEVs.
B. Persistence of innovation, types of novelty and E/E
activities
1) Types of inventive novelty in LAB
Having analyzed the increasing complexity of LAB, it is
pertinent to determine if this is the result of a simple process
of recombining existing knowledge and skills or if it is an
original and novel development. In this way, it is possible to
understand why technological innovation has been
maintained in an apparently mature and replaceable good
such as the LA battery.
Based on the novelty taxonomy [12,13], the evolution of
the types of inventive novelty of LAB is described (Fig. 5).
Two opposing and significant trends are identified. The
proportion of origination patents is decreasing, going from
60.5% in the first period (1981-1991) to 32.2% in the last
period (2003-2013). This seems to be normal in a mature
technology since at the beginning a greater number of
origination patents is expected (the technology is new) and
over time a greater frequency of reuse patents is expected
(new developments take advantage of the knowledge and
skills acquired previously). However, it stands out that
origination remains the main source of novelty in the three
periods (Table III) despite the expected displacement of the
LA battery from VEAs by other types of batteries. For their
part, recombination and reuse patents gain importance, going
from 24% in the first period to 52.6% in the last period. Based
on these patterns, it can be affirmed that inventive activity is
being reconfigured, promoting less innovative forms of
invention and greater use of pre-existing building blocks.
Together, these results can be considered as an expression of
the evolution process from conventional LAB (SLI) to is associated with the effort to solve the functional deficiencies
advanced LAB. of these batteries (weight, load capacity, life cycles, voltage,
power and volume). The physical limits of SLI batteries are
being sought, with little success [5,48].
With the change in vehicle design (from ICEs to EVs),
battery goes from being a simple, mature and standardized
component, to a complex component, increasingly integrated.
Thus, between 1992-2002, the industry branches out its
strategies in the following areas. On the battery side: a) the
development of new traction batteries with different materials
(LI, NHM or NC) is being explored, and b) the aim is to
Fig.4. Percentage of LAB patents, by type of inventive novelty (1981-2013) improve LAB through the development of VRLA technology.
This analysis shows that the novelty has been maintained On the vehicle side, changes are proposed in its structure: a)
throughout the period. Origination is important because it in EVs, an external battery recharging system is added and the
makes it possible to open new opportunity niches that regenerative braking system is improved, to extend the
transcend into better and new combinations and, in turn, into autonomy and speed ranges of the vehicle and, b) hybrid
more complex combinations. vehicles are developed, which allow reducing the wasted
energy associated with the internal combustion engine and
TABLE III. NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF LAB PATENTS FOR AEVS, BY mechanical processes compared to electronic systems [49]. In
TYPE OF INVENTIVE NOVELTY AND PERIOD this way, a tree structure of the architectures in hybrid vehicles
Periods
(in series, in parallel, in series-parallel) was generated.
Type of
1981-2013
novelty 1981-1991 1992-2002 2003-2013
(Total)
These processes affect LAB, promoting greater inventive
Origination 121 (60.5%) 156 (35.6%) 85 (32.2%) 362 (40.1%) activity, an increase in their complexity and a balance between
Novel
31 (15.5%) 67 (15.3%) 40 (15.1%) 138 (15.3%)
exploration and exploitation, all compared to what was
combination recorded in the previous period. Despite the arduous efforts to
Recombination 31 (15.5%) 131 (29.9%) 64 (24.2%) 226 (25.1%)
Reuse 17 (8.5%) 84 (19.2%) 75 (28.4%) 176 (19.5%) improve the performance of LAB, it is identified that VRLA
LAB (Total) 200 (22.1%) 438 (48.6%) 264 (29.3%) 902 (100%) technology (both GB and AGM) is not suitable for use in any
of the vehicles that are explored in this period (EVs and
The types of novelty can also be used as indicators of HEVs). It is stated that compared to SLI technology, the AGM
exploration/exploitation activities, this is analysed in the concept provides a much longer service life and more constant
following section. dynamic load acceptance; Meanwhile, the GB concept has a
longer service life, but its power capacity is too low even to
2) Exploration / Exploitation in LAB perform the cold start function of the vehicle [40]. Likewise,
This taxonomy makes it possible to identify the it is identified that the weight of LAB increases, reducing their
exploration or exploitation activities [47] underlying the viability as a traction technology.
technological evolution of LAB. Exploration activities can be
During 2003-2013, vehicle designers seek to build cars
identified with origination and recombination patents, while that meet the emissions and fuel consumption challenges
exploitation activities can correspond to recombination and promoted by the regulatory institutions of the United States
reuse patents. and the European Union, and that are attractive to consumers
It is observed that during the analysis period there is a [42]. Automotive industry responds defining various
balance between exploration/exploitation activities –Fig. 4 complementary routes. Transition from analog mechanical
Textured areas (scan) versus solid color areas (scan). Contrary systems to digital electromechanical systems was
to what would be expected, the technological evolution consolidated and expanded, not only in VEAs, also in internal
characterized by the predominance of exploitation over combustion vehicles (ICE). Acceleration systems, electronic
exploration over time, LAB have adapted to the technological driving control, driver assistance (ADAS), infotainment,
progress of AEVs through a balance of both activities. Such comfort and the incorporation of autonomous driving systems,
levels of exploration draw attention to an apparently mature have increased the number and complexity of computers,
technology [41] and considered, in principle, incapable of harnesses, programming codes, cameras, systems of
meeting the various requirements of AEVs [44]. communication and actuators of the vehicles [50,51]. These
3) Persistence in innovation of LAB systems are delicate and traction batteries, subject to large
Once the permanence of the exploration activities in the voltage changes, pose a risk to vehicle performance and user
LAB in the last 3 decades has been determined, it is necessary safety. A viable and economical solution, due to the low
to describe the qualitative characteristics of their technological specific cost of raw materials, the mature and cost-optimized
evolution and for this, the main facts for each period will be manufacturing technology, the robustness of the battery, its
analyzed. low-temperature discharge power, heat tolerance, and low
self-discharge [40], for the provision of energy to these
During the period 1981-1991, little inventive activity, high systems is the development of a dual battery system, which
levels of exploration and relatively low complexity are consists of a passive parallel connection between an auxiliary
observed. It is explained because in the face of the emergence battery, low power (12V), and a main battery, high power
of new generation electric vehicles, the strategy of the (12V or more). The dual battery system guarantees the ability
automotive industry was to incorporate electric motors in the to start the combustion engine and maintain vehicle mobility
vehicles and provide them with energy through LAB with SLI even in the event of failure or loss of the main battery, which
technology. The inventive activity of LAB during this period is especially important when you have a high degree of
electronic vehicle automation (the electromechanical power
steering system (EPS) or the electrohydraulic breakaway
system (EHB)) [52-54].
V. CONCLUSIONS
Theoretical works of technological change agree that:
combination of new and existing technological capabilities is
the main source of inventive novelty. Under this
combinatorial view, 3 perspectives dominate the discussion:
Gradualism, Combination/Accumulation, and Recombination
of natural phenomena. For their part, empirical studies provide
general aspects of innovation using the number of patents and
the number of claims as indicators of inventive activity,
however, there is no methodological consensus for the
empirical analysis of the recombinatorial process. In
summary, there are controversies both in the theoretical and
empirical fields about the treatment of technological
recombination. Methodology of Strumsky et al [12,13,33]
uses patent classes to identify the degree of technological
complexity and four types of inventive novelty (origination,
new combination, recombination and reuse) for innovations
registered in the USPTO. However, his theoretical approach
is typical of gradualism. Their findings conclude that new
technologies are more likely to emerge from existing
technologies, and this implies that innovations emerge
through the reuse and recombination of previously generated
skills and knowledge, consequently, they are typical of
exploitation activities. It does not have an explanation of the
emergence of absolutely new knowledge, nor of the reasons
that explain the emergence and increase in complexity.
Methodology of Strumsky et al [12,13,33] contributes to
systematically measure technological complexity and to
classify novelty, but when assuming a theoretical perspective,
to understand the complexity and the recombination process,
care must be taken, as this can lead to misleading
interpretations, confused or incomplete.
This work aims to contribute to the study of technological
evolution by establishing a bridge between the "recombination
of natural phenomena" approach [8] and the "taxonomy of
novelty" [12,13,33] for the case specific to LAB. The results
of this analysis allow us to identify, for the study period (1981-
2013), the following: 1) changes in the amount and proportion
of inventive activity (patents) in advanced batteries for AEVs
by type of material active (LA, NC, NMH, LI) (Fig. 1); 2) an
increase in the complexity of LAB (Figs. 2 and 3); 3)
origination is the main type of novelty in LAB, although an
increase in recombination and reuse is observed (Fig. 4) and;
4) despite the fact that the analysis period covers more than 3
decades, a balance between exploration and exploitation
activities predominates in the innovation of LAB (Fig. 4). The
details of these technology patterns are as follows:
1) Regarding the inventive activity of batteries for AEVs.
Between 1981-1991, LAB were the dominant design due to
their economical characteristics, their technological progress
developed over more than a century, and the lack of
knowledge of the technical requirements of a traction battery.
During 1992-2002, although the participation of LAB
continues to be relevant (40% of patents), it is displaced by
LI, NMH and NC batteries (representing 29%, 25% and 6%,
respectively). In contrast, its inventive activity is growing
rapidly, going from 18 annual average patents in the first
period to 40 in this second. Between 2003-2013, LAB patents
represent only 11% of battery inventions for AEVs and, their
inventive activity slows down (from 438 to 264 patents).
However, these prevail as auxiliary batteries suitable for
supplying and managing energy for electrical/electronic and
digital applications in vehicles. Also as a central energy
device for light electric vehicles.
2) Technological complexity of LAB is slightly and
gradually increasing. During 1981-2013, annual average of
classes goes from 3 to 4 and, in the period 2003-2013, 53%
of the inventions have 4 or more classes. This increase is the
result of the discovery and convergence of phenomena
(nanotechnological applications; discoveries in new
materials) and technological domains (advances in
electrochemistry or computation) represented by the increase
in the number of classes (building blocks, N) and their
combinations (interdependence, k).
3) Novelty types configuration have changed between
periods. Origination is the main type of novelty. However, its
participation has been decreasing: in the first period it
represents 61%, in the second, 36% and in the last 32%.
Whereas recombination and reuse patents contribute in the
second period with 30% and 19% and in the third with 24%
and 28%, respectively. This indicates that, despite LAB being
a mature technology, a high rate of original invention
remains, followed by increasing refinement activity.
4) From the above, seen from the perspective of
exploration and exploitation activities. It can be affirmed that
the search for solutions has tended from exploration towards
a relative balance between exploration and exploitation
activities. Specifically, origination and new combination
patents, associated with exploration, go from 76% in the first
period to 50.9% and 47.3% in subsequent periods, and
recombination and reuse patents, associated with
exploitation, represent for each period 24%, 49.1% and
52.7%, respectively.
For more than 150 years, automotive industry has used
LAB and, despite the drastic change it has undergone, it
continues to innovate in this battery, with newer, more
complex and advanced technologies (VRLA, ALC, EFL)
that, as sources reliable, low-cost, long-lasting power have
been tailored to meet the requirements of AEVs (as an
auxiliary battery); of the ICE+, MHVs and MHEVs (as main
battery) and; of micro-vehicles and single-seaters (as a
traction battery).
REFERENCES
[1] J. Garche, E. Karden, P.T. Moseley and D.A.J. Rand.
(2017). Lead-Acid Batteries for Future Automobiles.
ELSEVIER.
[2] P.T. Moseley and D.A.J. Rand. (2004) Changes in the
demands on automotive Batteries require changes in
battery design. Journal of Power Sources, 133, 104–109.
[3] G. Pistoia. (2008). Battery operated devices and systems:
From portable electronics to industrial products.
ELSEVIER.
[4] M. Broussely and G. Pistoia. (2007). Industrial
Applications of Batteries From Cars to Aerospace and
Energy Storage. ELSEVIER.
[5] G. Pistoia. (2010). Electric and Hybrid Vehicles: Power
Sources, Models, Sustainability, Infrastructure and the
Market. ELSEVIER.
[6] A.B. Jaffe, M. Trajtenberg and R. Henderson. (1993).
Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as
 evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 108(3), 577- 598.
[7] N. Rosenberg. (1982). Inside the black box: Technology
and economics. Publisher: Cambridge University Press.
[8] W.B. Arthur. (2009). The nature of technology: what it is
and how it evolves. The Free Press.
[9] W.B. Arthur. (2015). Complexity and the economy.
Oxford.
[10] J.H. Holland. (1992). Adaptation in natural and artificial
systems: An introductory analysis with applications to
biology, control, and artificial intelligence. University
Michigan Press.
[11] S.A. Kauffman. (1993). The origins of order. Oxford
University Press.
[12] D. Strumsky, J. Lobo and S. van der Leeuw. (2011)
Measuring the relative importance of reusing
recombining, and creating technologies in the process of
invention. SFI Working Paper No. 11-02-003, Santa Fe
Institute.
[13] D. Strumsky and J. Lobo. (2015). Identifying the sources
of technological novelty in the process of invention.
Research Policy, 44, 1445-1461.
[14] G. Basalla. (1988). The evolution of technology. MIT
Press.
[15] E.W. Constant. (1980). The origins of the turbojet
revolution. Johns Hopkins University Press.
[16] S.C. Gilfillan. (1935). Inventing the ship. Follett
Publishing.
[17] R.N. Nelson and S.G. Winter (1982). An evolutionary
theory of economic change. Harvard University Press.
[18] A. Pacey. (1990). Technology in world civilization: A
thousand-year history. MIT Press.
[19] J.A. Tainter. (1988) The collapse of complex societies.
Cambridge University Press.
[20] B. Hall, A. Jaffe and M. Trajtenberg. (2000). Market
value and patent citations: A first look. NBER Working
Paper, No. 7741, National Bureau of Economic
Research.
[21] B. Hall, A. Jaffe and M. Trajtenberg. (2001). The NBER
patent citations data file: Lessons, insights and
methodological tools. NBER Working Paper, No. 8948,
National Bureau of Economic Research.
[22] J. Youtie, M. Iacopetta y S. Graham (2008). Assessing
the nature of nanotechnology: Can we uncover an
emerging general purpose technology? The Journal of
Technology Transfer, 33, 315-329.
[23] A.P. Usher (1929). A history of mechanical inventions.
Dover Publication.
[24] R. Boyd, P.J. Richerson and J. Henrich. (2011). The
cultural niche: Why social learning is essential for human
adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, 108(2),
10918–10925.
[25] L. Fleming and O. Sorenson. (2004). Science as a map
in technological search. Strategic Management Journal,
25(89), 909-928.
[26] W.F. Ogburn. (1922). Social change with respect to
culture and original nature. B.W. Huebsch.
[27] A. Hargadon and R. Sutton. (1997). Technology
brokering and innovation in a product development firm.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 716-749.
[28] J.A. Schumpeter. (1934). The theory of economic
development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit,
interest and the business cycle. Transaction Publishers.
[29] R.H. Thurston. (1883). A history of the growth of the
steam-engine. D. Appleton and company.
[30] E. Von Hippel. (1988). The sources of innovation.
Oxford University Press.
[31] M.L. Weitzman. (1998). Recombinant growth. The
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(2), 331-360.
[32] W. Kaempffert. (1930). Invention and society. American
Library Association.
[33] D. Strumsky, J. Lobo and S. van der Leeuw. (2010).
Using patent technology codes to study technological
change. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,
21(3), 267-286.
[34] H. Youn, D. Strumsky, L.M.A. Bettencourt and J. Lobo.
(2015). Invention as a combinatorial process: Evidence
from U.S. patents. Journal Royal Society Interface, 12
(20150272).
[35] M. Gell-Mann. (1994). The quark and the jaguar:
Adventures in the simple and the complex. Freeman.
[36] A.N. Kolmogorov. (1968). Three approaches to the
quantitative definition of information. International
Journal of Computer Mathematics, 2(1-4), 157-168.
[37] S.E. Page. (2011). Diversity and complexity. Princeton
University Press.
[38] Y.G. Guo. (2019) Nanostructures and Nanomaterials for
Batteries. Principles and Applications. Springer.
[39] S. Hockfield. (2020) The Age of Living Machines: How
Biology Will Build the Next Technology Revolution. W.
W. Norton & Company.
[40] B. Scrosati, J. Garche and W. Tillmetz. (2015).
Advances in Battery Technologies for Electric Vehicles.
ELSEVIER.
[41] D. Pavlov. (2011). Lead-Acid Batteries: Science and
Technology: A Handbook of Lead-Acid Battery
Technology and its Influence on the Product. Springer.
[42] G.J. May, D. Calasanzio and R. Aliberti. (2005) VRLA
automotive batteries for stop&go and dual battery
systems. Journal of Power Sources, 144(2), 411-417.
[43] EUROBAT (2016). A review of battery technologies for
automotive applications.
[44] M. Westbrook. (2001). The Electric Car: Development
and future of battery, hybrid and fuel-cell cars. The
Institution of Engineering and Technology.
[45] S.A. Kauffman. (1993). The origins of order. Oxford
University Press.
[46] K. Frenken. (2006). Innovation, evolution and
complexity theory. Edward Elgar Publishing.
[47] J. March. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in
organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-
87.
[48] P.T. Moseley, J. Garche, C.D. Parker and D.A.J. Rand.
(2004) Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid Batteries.
ELSEVIER.
[49] A. Raskin and S. Shah. (2006). The Emergence of
Hybrid Vehicles. Ending Oil’s Stranglehold on
Transportation and the Economy. AllianceBernstein.
[50] J-J. Chanaron and J. Teske. (2007). Hybrid vehicles: a
temporary step. International Journal of Automotive
Technology and Management, 7(4), pp.268–288.
[51] E. Juliussen and R. Robinson. (2010) Is Europe in the
Driver's Seat? The Competitiveness of the European
Automotive Embedded Systems Industry. Londres:
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies,
European Comission.
[52] E. Meissner and G. Richther. (2001) Vehicle electric
power systems are under change!: Implications for
design, monitoring and management of automotive
batteries. Journal of Power Sources, 95(1-2), 13-23.
[53] E. Meissner and G. Richther. (2003) Battery Monitoring
and Electrical Energy Management: Precondition for
future vehicle electric power systems. Journal of Power
Sources, 116(1-2), 79-98.
[54] E. Meissner and G. Richther. (2005) The challenge to the
automotive battery industry: the battery has to become an
increasingly integrated component within the vehicle
electric power system. Journal of Power Sources, 144(2),
438-460.