Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

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

Review Article

Applications of artificial neural network based battery management systems:

A literature review
Mehmet Kurucan a ,1 ,∗, Mete Özbaltan b ,1 , Zeki Yetgin c ,1 , Alkan Alkaya d ,1
a Ardahan University, Department of Computer Engineering, Ardahan, Türkiye
b Erzurum Technical University, Department of Computer Engineering, Erzurum, Türkiye
c
Mersin University, Department of Computer Engineering, Mersin, Türkiye
d
Mersin University, Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Mersin, Türkiye

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Lithium-ion batteries have gained significant prominence in various industries due to their high energy density
Battery management system compared to other battery technologies. This has led to their widespread use in energy storage systems, electric
Artificial neural network vehicles, and portable electronic devices. However, lithium-ion batteries still face limitations, particularly
SOH
concerning safety issues such as overheating and aging. BMS play a crucial role in ensuring safe and effective
SOC
operation by providing control and monitoring functions. Among the key challenges in BMS is the accurate
RUL
Battery fault detection
prediction of SOH, SOC, and RUL of the battery. Additionally, fault detection of lithium-ion batteries is an
Lithium-ion battery states essential function of BMS. Given the complex electrochemical characteristics of lithium-ion batteries, there is
a growing interest in developing advanced BMS that can accurately estimate the battery state. This review
article focuses on the increasing popularity of ANN based methods for predicting the state of lithium-ion
batteries. The literature review encompasses a wide range of studies on ANN-based battery management
systems. The BMS applications and prediction methods for SOH, SOC, and RUL are thoroughly classified.
The review covers state-of-the-art ANN methods, including feedforward neural network, deep neural network,
convolutional neural network, and recurrent neural network, and provides a comparative analysis. The article
also highlights current trends and identifies gaps in BMS applications. Furthermore, it offers insights and
directions for future research and development, aiming to upgrade existing BMS or create advanced BMS
systems. The comprehensive analysis presented in this review article serves as a valuable resource for research
and studies seeking to enhance BMS capabilities and improve battery management strategies in the context of
lithium-ion batteries.

1. Introduction aims to increase the utilization of sustainable and renewable energy

The increasing energy demand in rapidly globalizing and expanding
world has posed significant challenges for conventional petroleum-
based energy sources, which are being rapidly depleted. Furthermore,
the detrimental effects of these fossil fuels on environmental pollution
and public health have become increasingly concerning. Notably, the
combustion of fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases into the atmo-
sphere, exacerbating global climate change and its associated conse-
quences [1]. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the
transportation sector accounted for %24 of global greenhouse gas emis-
sions in 2015, with the road sector being responsible for the majority of
these emissions [2]. In response, there is a global shift towards reducing
greenhouse gas emissions, mitigating global warming, and adapting to
both environmental changes and energy shortages [3]. This transition
sources.
In pursuit of the global objective, the initial phase of transitioning
to EVs has witnessed the adoption of HEVs as an intermediate step.
Despite the anticipated reduction in emissions associated with HEVs,
their efficacy in fully mitigating the negative impacts remains lim-
ited. Consequently, the subsequent stage has marked the emergence
of EVs, characterized by their superior ecological and environmental
attributes [4]. The pivotal technology enabling EVs to harness renew-
able energy sources is battery technology. EVs rely on rechargeable
batteries to store electricity, which can be generated from renew-
able sources. Battery systems assume a critical role in optimizing the
performance and ensuring the safety of EVs. Among various battery
technologies, LIBs have gained widespread prominence due to their

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mehmetkurucan@ardahan.edu.tr (M. Kurucan).
1
All authors contributed equally to this work.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.114262
Received 26 September 2022; Received in revised form 16 May 2023; Accepted 20 December 2023
Available online 28 December 2023
1364-0321/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Kurucan et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262

such as SOC values. A data collection framework is used to record

Nomenclature this information, and additional data can be generated based on the
battery or battery system model. Conversely, obtaining battery fault
Abbreviations information relies more on empirical tests, which are often performed
𝐴𝑁𝑁 Artificial Neural Network in laboratory settings as part of battery-related experiments [6].
Model-based methods, however, rely on battery models that in-
𝐵𝑀𝑆 Battery Management System
ternally capture the electrochemical dynamics of the battery. These
𝐶𝑁𝑁 Convolutional Neural Network
methods make assumptions based on the battery model to estimate the
𝐷𝐿 Deep Learning desired BMS parameters. In contrast, ML-based methods do not rely
𝐷𝑁𝑁 Deep Neural Network on any specific assumptions regarding the battery model. Instead, they
𝐸𝑉 Electric Vehicle establish a relationship between input and output data through training
𝐹 𝐹 𝑁𝑁 Feed Forward Neural Network without explicitly considering the battery model.
𝐻𝐸𝑉 Hybrid Electric Vehicle Model-based approaches require a relatively longer development
𝐼 Current time than data-driven approaches. This is because model-based meth-
𝐿𝐼𝐵 Lithium-ion Battery ods require a comprehensive understanding of the underlying physics
𝐿𝑆𝑇 𝑀 Long Short Term Memory and chemistry of the battery system, which can be difficult and time-
consuming to achieve. Conversely, data-driven approaches use ma-
𝑀𝐴𝐸 Mean Absolute Errors
chine learning algorithms to learn from large datasets, which can be
𝑀𝐿 Machine Learning
more efficient in terms of development time. However, obtaining high-
𝑁𝑁 Neural Network
quality data for data-driven methods can also be a challenging and
𝑅𝑀𝑆𝐸 Root Mean Square Errors time-consuming task. Therefore, the choice of method depends on
𝑅𝑁𝑁 Recurrent Neural Network various factors, including resource availability, required accuracy, and
𝑅𝑈 𝐿 Remaining Useful Life specific application context. While developing model-based methods
𝑆𝑜𝐶 State of Charge involves tasks such as modeling battery dynamics and designing con-
𝑆𝑜𝐻 State of Health trollers, data-driven methods require large amounts of representative
𝑇 Temperature data that must be collected, cleaned, and preprocessed before being
𝑡 Time used for training and validation. Thus, both approaches have their own
challenges and time requirements during the development process.
𝑉 Voltage
The current advantages and disadvantages of both approaches are
shown in Table 1. The popularity of ML-based studies in recent years,
and particularly the fact that ML-based algorithms offer more usability
than Model-based algorithms, causes them to be favored more by
exceptional characteristics, including high energy density, high energy
studies, even if both approaches have advantages and disadvantages
efficiency, and relatively long cycle life [5]. Consequently, LIBs find
extensive utilization in diverse applications such as energy storage sys- over one another [7]. Fig. 1 illustrates the taxonomy for the BMS-
tems, electric vehicles (e.g., cars, buses, aircraft, ships), and a plethora related studies in the literature, which shows the popular methods used
of contemporary electronic devices. for BMS estimations from the ML-based and Model-based perspectives.
The complexity of battery systems can increase with the growing The majority of these methods are employed to obtain high-accuracy
number of batteries employed. In the case of EVs, for instance, the BMS estimations incorporating LIBs. However, as Fig. 2 illustrates,
number of battery cells directly impacts both the vehicle’s weight ANN-based methods are the most prominent among them.
and the overall capacity of the battery system. However, an excessive Numerous reviews concentrate on studies for BMS state predictions
quantity of batteries can have adverse effects on battery health during that use ML-based, Model-based, or both. For instance, a compilation
charge/discharge cycles. This, in turn, indirectly influences the capacity of research on just SOH estimation has been carried out in [7], as
of the battery system. Additionally, critical errors can lead to sudden shown in Table 2, wherein 5 various ML-based methods are contrasted
drops in battery charging conditions. Consequently, there is a need for in this context. A general evaluation of the techniques used for SOC
battery systems that are compact, efficient, lightweight, safe, reliable, prediction was undertaken by [8] in reviews that look at works on
and long-lasting. This presents numerous research challenges, including SOC estimation, classifying them into four groups: explanation, metrics,
the estimation of SOH, SOC, RUL, and the detection of faults, which fall limits, and errors. By contrast, [9] contrasted model-based and ML-
under the purview of BMS. BMS plays a crucial role in managing battery based research for only SOC estimate based on the method, advantages,
systems to ensure their safety, reliability, and ability to deliver power disadvantages, and errors. Accurate estimation of RUL for LIBs is cru-
as required. Accurate estimation by the BMS is of utmost importance as cial for timely maintenance. In [10], ML-based models were studied
it helps prevent battery and system damage, such as premature aging, and the compilation was divided into two categories. One of these
by mitigating risks such as overcharging or overdischarging. categories focused on the fact that the methods studied were recent,
A well-designed BMS should provide valuable information on pa- while the other category made comparisons based on accuracy and
rameters such as charge/discharge cycles, voltage, current, tempera- complexity. Comparatively, the study in [11] focuses on the benefits
ture, and faulty states, which can serve as inputs for estimating the and drawbacks of model-based and ML-based SOH estimates and RUL
current state of a LIB. As depicted in Fig. 1, the literature employs predictions. The study underlines how data-based battery health pre-
various techniques to estimate the BMS parameters, including SOC, diction is becoming increasingly popular. Conversely, [12] created a
SOH, RUL, and fault detection. These techniques can be categorized study employing deep learning algorithms as part of ML-based models
into two main groups: model-based and ML-based approaches. in the field of prognostics and health management (PHM) of LIBs.
ML-based approaches utilize diverse models trained on datasets Three primary steps that the deep learning-based PHM for LIBs includes
containing BMS input–output data. These models can predict the output are detailed in this work: data gathering, deep learning techniques,
state given specific input conditions. Different laboratory conditions and performance assessment. [13] provides an extensive review of
are considered, leading to variations in the input and output data both health estimation and end-of-life prediction using model-based
employed for specific BMS estimation tasks. Typical data utilized in and ML-based studies for ensuring the safe and optimal use of battery
these approaches include voltage, current, temperature, time, the num- systems. The review intends to highlight the increasing interest in
ber of charge/discharge cycles, and measurements related to outputs data-driven approaches for battery health management. The use of

2
M. Kurucan et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262

Fig. 1. ANN: Artificial Neural Network, FFNN: Feed Forward Neural Network, DNN: Deep Neural Network, CNN: Convolutional Neural Network, RNN: Recurrent Neural Network,
SVM: Support Vector Machine, EL: Ensemble learning, LR: Linear Regression, k-NN: k-Nearest Neighbors ; KF: Kalman Filter, EKF: Extended Kalman Filter, UKF: Uncented Kalman
Filter, PF: Partical Filter, LO: Luenberger Observer, PIO: Proportional Integral Observer, SMO: Sliding Mode Observer.

Fig. 2. The trend of publications regarding the use of ML-based methods in BMS estimations over the last ten years according to the Web of Science database.

3
M. Kurucan et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262

Table 1
Model-based vs machine learning-based.
Method Advantages Disadvantages
Model-based ∙ Reliable and accurate ∙ Extensive domain knowledge
∙ Universal validity ∙ Since it requires extensive domain knowledge,
which can be time-consuming and challenging to
achieve
Data-driven ∙ Not require extensive domain knowledge ∙ Unpredictable black box model
∙ Since it does not require extensive domain ∙ Large amount of data; therefore, obtaining
knowledge, it is possible to rapidly learn from a large high-quality data by means of huge datasets
dataset, which can be more efficient in terms of requires time-consuming
development time

Table 2
An overview of the published review articles related to different BMS estimations.
References Topic Main content
1 [7] SOH estimation Review of a comparison of ML-based models for SOH estimation. The five most concentrated ML-based algorithms
for SOH estimation have been comprehensively reviewed in three aspects. These factors include performance, training
modes (feature extraction and selection methods), and publication trends over the last decade.
2 [8] SOC estimation General review of methods for SOC. Depending on their nature, these SOC estimating approaches have been divided
into four categories: (i) explanation, (ii) merits, (iii) limits, iv) errors.
3 [9] SOC estimation Review of a comparison of Model-based and Data-driven based models for SOH estimation. The classification of these
two based models are explained in terms of estimation model/algorithm, benefits, drawbacks, and estimation error.
4 [10] RUL estimation This review classify and compare different ML-based models for RUL estimation of Li-ion batteries. The review
categorized into two part. The first part summarizes RUL estimation methods that has been proposed in recent years,
then in the second part the comparison is done in terms of accuracy and complexity.
5 [6] Fault This review addresses workable and simple ML-based models aimed at enhancing diagnostics in LIB systems instead
detection/Diagnosis of the states that have been often examined in the BMS of LIBs in recent years.
6 [11] SOH This review article has compiled data-driven studies on SOH and the lifetime prediction of Li-ion batteries. The
methods used were categorized based on the underlying algorithms, and their advantages and limitations were
discussed.
7 [12] PHM This study presents a summary of deep learning-based PHM studies for Li-ion batteries. Recently conducted PHM
studies are discussed in three steps, namely data acquisition, deep learning methods, and performance evaluation.
8 [13] SOH/EOL This review article presents a comprehensive examination of battery health estimation and end-of-life prediction. It
summarizes the fundamental challenges and research expectations for prognostics of battery health.
9 [14] State estimations The first comprehensive analysis of transfer learning-based battery management methods is presented in this
research. The review focuses on current issues and potential future developments in this field.

Fig. 3. The schematic diagram of the review.

transfer learning in battery management has been extensively discussed prediction of BMS conditions. [14] presents a collection of research that
in the literature, with an emphasis on the prognostics for aging and the use transfer learning in this setting and emphasizes how this strategy

4
M. Kurucan et al.
may enhance the effectiveness of data-based tactics. The authors stress
that the development of a strong and healthy BMS may result from
the proper application of transfer learning. Another ML-based topic
is related to the studies conducted on fault detection and diagnosis
instead of state estimation in LIB systems. [6] compiled these studies,
categorized solely based on simple and recent years.
This study follows the structure observed in recent review articles,
encompassing key areas such as BMS condition estimations, battery
useful life prediction, and fault detection in batteries using ML-based
methods. Analysis of the studies conducted in this field over the past
decade yields a comparable outcome to that presented in Fig. 2. Con-
sequently, this work focuses on reviewing studies that employ ANN
algorithms. The ANN-based algorithms utilized in the reviewed studies
were categorized into FFNNs, CNNs, DNNs, and RNNs.
The review commences by examining studies that employ each ANN
method in the context of BMS states. Subsequently, the BMS states are
further classified according to the specific applications in which they
are employed. Within each BMS condition, the ANN methods used are
then categorized separately based on proportional values determined
by the utilized database, battery chemistry, parameter selection, test
methods, and error metrics, with a focus on the minimum error values.
This comprehensive categorization facilitates quick access to essential
information such as data availability, parameter specifications, battery
chemistry, and more, enabling studies or organizations intending to
work in this field to efficiently navigate the various BMS conditions.
Furthermore, this review addresses the challenges encountered with
ANN methods, specifically examining five key areas: overfitting, ac-
curacy, implementation, dataset availability, and complexity. By com-
paring these challenges across fields, a comprehensive analysis of the
strengths and limitations of ANN methods in the context of BMS
conditions is provided.
When compared with the studies presented in Table 2 [6–10],
those studies focused only on a single BMS condition and thus have
shortcomings in addressing other states. Although [11–14] dealt with
multiple BMS states, they either had a lack of BMS states [11,13], either
a lack of both input parameter ratios and the density of using battery
chemistry [12] or a lack of consideration of error metrics and minimum
error ratios [14].
In Fig. 3, the outlined procedures taken in writing this review are
presented. The survey of the subject was conducted by utilizing the
Web of Science database and recent literature. By applying specific
keywords, the number of references was reduced from 800 to 144.
It is noteworthy that the majority of the articles used in this review
are recent publications, reflecting the use of contemporary methods.
Moreover, the perspective classifications provided in this review serve
as a guideline for popular BMS applications currently observed in the
literature, along with the identification of notable areas in ANN-based
BMSs.
The rest sections of this work are structured as follows. Section 2
provides concise definitions of sub-classes of ANN and presents meth-
ods for estimating a BMS state using these sub-classes. In Section 3, the
application areas of ML-based algorithms are explored, accompanied by
their classification. The sub-classes of ANN are compared and discussed
for the research in Section 4.
2. Principle of battery management systems and methodologies
2.1. A machine learning application: Artificial neural network
ANNs were originally conceived as a constituent of computer sys-
tems designed to emulate the information processing capabilities of the
human brain. Today, ANNs have emerged as a ubiquitous algorithmic
framework for a wide range of applications, including but not limited
to pattern recognition, optimization, and prediction. ANNs are widely
used owing to their ability to learn from data and to generalize this
5
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
learning to novel situations. ANNs have thus become an important tool
for solving complex problems in various domains.
An ANN typically comprises three layers: an input layer, multiple
hidden layers, and an output layer [15]. The functioning of an ANN can
be summarized as follows: (i) the data is received by the input layer,
which then passes it on to the first hidden layer; (ii) each neuron in
the hidden layer performs a computation involving a weighted linear
combination of the input data, followed by the activation function, and
the resulting output is propagated to the next hidden layer; (iii) this
process is iteratively repeated until the output layer is reached, which
generates the final prediction or output of the ANN. The utilization of
this architecture in ANNs has enabled them to achieve state-of-the-art
performance in various applications, making them an important tool
for solving complex problems.
In light of the structure of the network, ANN computations can gen-
erally be divided into neural networks and deep learning algorithms.
The traditional neural network, also known as the FFNN, contains only
one hidden layer. Conversely, DL algorithms include the RNN, the DNN,
and the CNN. These DL algorithms are capable of handling a wide range
of input data and can be used for tasks such as speech recognition,
natural language processing, and image analysis.
Several technological problems in the area of battery management
can be challenging to solve using traditional methods, but they can be
resolved with the contribution of NNs. One of these problems is the
precise measurement of the SOC of a battery, a vital factor in effi-
cient battery management. Conventional methods for SOC estimation,
such as coulomb counting, can be altered by measurement mistakes,
aging effects, and temperature variations, which can lead to inaccurate
results [16,17]. Conversely, NNs may be taught to discover intricate
connections between different battery metrics and SOC, and they can
deliver a more reliable and accurate SOC calculation even in the face
of noise and uncertainty [18].
Estimation of battery lifetime, which is crucial for ensuring the safe
and reliable functioning of battery systems, is another topic that might
be difficult for conventional methodologies. Traditional approaches to
predicting battery lifetime frequently rely on empirical models that are
unable to fully account for the intricate and nonlinear interactions be-
tween the battery’s internal variables and its degrading processes [19].
Large datasets of battery performance and degradation data can be
used to train neural networks, which can then learn to model these
relationships more precisely and produce lifespan forecasts that are
more accurate [20].
The optimization of battery charging and discharging techniques is
a different technical issue that can be challenging to solve using tradi-
tional methods. Conventional optimization techniques frequently rely
on straightforward heuristics and neglect the intricate relationships be-
tween different battery characteristics and the charging and discharging
conditions. The development of more efficient and effective BMSs that
can enhance battery performance and longevity can be accomplished
by training neural networks to learn these relationships [21].
The ‘‘knee point’’ problem, which is unrelated to any particular sort
of NN architecture, is connected to the challenge of determining the
ideal number of hidden units in a NN. In order to address the knee
point problem, the neural network architecture chosen is not the most
important consideration. The determination of the optimal number of
hidden units in a NN, as well as the choice of regularization methods
required to prevent overfitting, may vary depending on the topology of
the network architecture [22]. For instance, CNNs are widely utilized
in image processing tasks and tend to have a large number of hidden
units in the convolutional layers, whereas fewer hidden units are
commonly used in the fully connected layers. Conversely, the length
and complexity of the input sequence may necessitate varying numbers
of hidden units in RNNs that are employed for sequence prediction
tasks [13]. Therefore, the choice of NN topology should be guided by
the specific demands of the task at hand, and the optimal number of
M. Kurucan et al.
hidden units should be determined by means of careful experimentation
and validation.
In recent years, transfer learning becomes a popular approach to
machine learning that has been shown to be quite successful in a
variety of applications. In this method, a pre-trained model is used as
a jumping-off point to train a new model for a distinct but connected
job [23]. By utilizing the knowledge and patterns that the pre-trained
model had already learned, the new model is able to use less training
data and spend less time getting accurate results [24]. Transfer learning
may also reduce the problem of overfitting, which can happen when
a model is trained on little data. This can enhance the generalization
performance of the new model [25]. While maintaining the overall
information that the pre-trained model has learned, the model can
be fine-tuned to learn task-specific attributes that are pertinent to the
current task [26]. Transfer learning has been used in several fields,
such as speech recognition, computer vision, and natural language
processing, and has produced outstanding results in numerous research.
2.2. Feed-forward NN
FFNN is the fundamental and simplest artificial neural network
design, where information flows in only one direction, from the input
nodes to the output nodes, passing through any hidden nodes that
may exist. This type of network architecture is extensively discussed
in [7], including the various important parameters involved in its
design. Notably, there is no cycle in the connections between the nodes
in this network, as highlighted in the literature [27]. The FFNN has
been widely used for various applications, including but not limited to
classification, prediction, and feature extraction, owing to its ability to
model complex relationships between input and output variables.
It is evident that the learning rate of feed-forward neural networks
is often slower than necessary. This issue can be attributed to two
major factors: (i) the prevalent use of slow gradient-based learning
techniques for neural network training, and (ii) the iterative tuning of
all network parameters using such learning methods [28]. To address
this problem, [29] introduced Random Vector Functional Link Neural
Networks, while [28] proposed an extreme learning machine (ELM) as a
more concise alternative. The ELM approach has shown significant im-
provements over traditional learning techniques, particularly in terms
of computational efficiency and learning speed. These advantages have
made ELM a promising alternative for various applications, ranging
from image recognition to financial forecasting.
The ANN technique has been widely applied to estimate the SOH of
batteries. For instance, in [30], real-time data from a BMS was collected
for a duration of one year to estimate the SOH. Similarly, in [31], data
was collected at different C-rates over a period of ten months, with
one-month intervals. However, due to the unavailability of complete
charging and discharging curves, SOH features were extracted from
partial curves [32]. Notably, one of the significant SOH features is
the IC peak, which was integrated into FFNN training in [33], using
partially smoothed IC curves obtained through Gaussian smoothing.
The process of voltage differentiation was also crucial in generating
the IC curve after selecting the characteristic. The use of ANN in SOH
estimation has shown promising results, enabling accurate and efficient
battery health monitoring. Wu et al. [34] developed a FFNN model
to analyze the behavior of battery voltage during charging. This was
motivated by the clear voltage shifts observed towards the end of
the charging process. To address the issues of using multiple voltage
samples, reducing input feature vectors, and simplifying the network
structure. The work presented in [35] employs the important sampling
construction, which selects appropriate input values for FFNN. This
approach not only helps in reducing the margin of error, but also
decreases the computational load. Building on this, [36] proposes a
method for determining the local range of voltage fluctuations. The
method utilizes the entropy of the discharge voltage as input for FFNN
and outputs lower and upper estimates for State of Health (SOH). The
6
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
proposed technique accurately estimates the local fluctuations of the
battery and its overall degradation trend. To improve the generalization
ability of FFNN models, constraints can be derived from the monotonic-
ity of the input features. In some specific tasks, advanced FFNNs have
been found to outperform classical approaches [37]. Moreover, joint
estimation of SOC and SOH can be achieved by combining FFNN with
a battery model. Various approaches have been proposed to train FFNN
using voltage variation [38–40], SOC variation [38,41], and battery
model parameters [42–45]. The FFNN can then be used to extract SOH
features, which in turn can be used for SOC estimation.
In order to accurately estimate the SOH of batteries, it is necessary
to measure the data for model training and estimation under the same
operating conditions due to the significant impact of the feature on
the SOH estimation results. A study by [46] utilized the Thevenin
model and extreme learning machine (ELM) to estimate battery SOH,
successfully identifying the internal resistance online using recursive
least squares, which effectively identifies the model parameters without
being affected by various loading profiles. Another study by [47]
proposed an energy-based feature that incorporates both voltage se-
quence and discharge rates to enable online SOH estimates at different
discharge rates. In real applications, collecting the necessary sample
data online can be time-consuming. Therefore, [48] suggested an online
sequential ELM as a useful way to use both old and new data. This
approach utilizes a small part of the samples to determine the ELM’s
output weight before updating the weight with a new sample, providing
fast learning, strong generalization capabilities, and high accuracy. In
order to further improve the ELM’s accuracy, some coupled strategies
were suggested. [49] proposed a broad ELM technique with recon-
structed nodes that employs broad learning to handle the input data,
and improved the mapping attributes by using an activation function.
The gradual reconstruction of the system using the proposed method, in
which the nodes were widened laterally, was deemed an improvement
over the deep learning (DL) method. Transfer learning was employed
in [50] to apply the information learned from the source data to the
target data. The suggested approach demonstrated good estimation
accuracy even with limited data.
The SOC is a crucial parameter in BMS monitoring, as it provides
an estimation of the remaining range of electric vehicles and helps
to determine a safe control method to prevent overcharging and dis-
charging conditions of the battery. To this end, recent studies have
been conducted to develop models for SOC estimation. The proposed
FFNN model is suitable for determining the charging profiles of battery
systems. In [51], the authors proposed the addition of a chaotic neuron
in the hidden layers to reduce training time and facilitate the identifi-
cation of local minima. This approach was found to be advantageous
in low-power conditions. In [52], different neural network models,
including FFNN, radial basis function (RBF), and nonlinear autoregres-
sive with exogenous (external) input (NARX), were utilized for SOC
estimation. The comparison of these models was based on curve fitting
and predicting feature values. In [53], a new approach was proposed
to overcome the limitations of using one-dimensional feature data. This
method was implemented in two different models, namely FFNN and
time-series neural network, and it was observed that the proposed
approach resulted in more effective SOC estimation than using one-
dimensional data with neural networks. In [54], an advanced battery
model was constructed using an FFNN based on newly described in-
puts. An FFNN model was created using the Extended Kalman filter
algorithm and the FFNN model, and the robustness of the model was
demonstrated using experimental data.
Several studies have explored the application of FFNN for SOC esti-
mation in batteries. For instance, [55] proposed a low-cost embedded
system that utilizes FFNN for predicting SOC of Li-Ion battery cells in
electric vehicles. Meanwhile, [56] presented a three-layer FFNN with
inputs including battery terminal voltage, voltage derivative, voltage
second derivative, discharge current, and battery temperature for SOC
estimation of Ni-MH batteries. In another study, two separate FFNN
M. Kurucan et al.
models were employed to estimate SOC of calendar-aged lithium-ion
pouch cells for charge and discharge data to efficiently account for
the aging effect in the estimation [31]. [57] proposed novel nonlinear
autoregressive models, including NARX, FPNARX, SPNARX, and FFNN,
for precise SOC prediction. Furthermore, [58] compared the perfor-
mance of FFNN and RNN for SOC estimation of lead–acid batteries
based on mean squared error and convergence speed.
The RUL is defined as the duration that a battery can be utilized in a
specific application before it reaches a predetermined end-of-life crite-
rion [59–61]. Although model-based approaches for determining SOH
and SOC are generally intricate and challenging to execute, machine
learning-based models have been found to be more suitable for RUL
estimation, especially due to their numerous practical applications [62–
64]. In a recent study [35], an online approach for RUL estimation is
proposed. The authors simulated battery terminal voltage curves under
various cycle numbers using FFNN, and importance sampling (IS) was
employed for FFNN input selection to define RUL. As correct data
processing is crucial for machine learning-based models, a study [65]
has employed data normalization and filtering based on multi-regime
normalization using FFNN for RUL estimation.
The use of ML techniques in BMS has emerged as a major research
focus in recent years due to its ability to efficiently, reliably, and
accurately predict the essential states of LIBs, including SOH, SOC, and
RUL [66]. While several research studies have recently been developed
on battery fault/diagnosis using model-based methods, only a few ML-
based approaches, particularly ANN, have been employed [67,68]. The
availability of high-quality data is crucial for the success of data-driven
prognostic strategies. Insufficient data can lead to poor predictions.
In [68], a prognostic technique is used to calculate the SOH of a battery
by utilizing data from a collection of batteries with similar design and
operating conditions.
2.3. Deep NN
DL is a subfield of ML methods that are based on ANNs. The term
‘‘deep’’ refers to the utilization of multiple hidden layers in the network
architecture [69]. There are three primary DL algorithms utilized for
state assessments of BMS: DNNs, CNNs, and RNNs. These three algo-
rithms have different structures that are employed for state assessments
of BMS. DNNs are essentially FFNNs with multiple hidden layers. One
or more activation functions can also be included while passing the
information through the hidden layers, making it a powerful tool for
extracting complex features from data.
The correlation between DNN calculation and other ML-based calcu-
lations, including support vector machines (SVM), k-nearest neighbors
(k-NN), ANNs, and logistic regression (LR), for SOH estimation is inves-
tigated in [70] using the NASA Ames Prognostics Center of Excellence
(PCoE) database. While the proposed method [71] is utilized for capac-
ity estimation based on SOC and 2 C, it also corrects the kernel function
in DNN. This technique accurately assesses the SOH of the battery with
different starting SOC and C-rate current. In [72], a DNN algorithm is
proposed for SOH estimation, where SOH is divided into five intervals
from 100% to 80%. The proposed structure in [73] simplifies the
calculation while utilizing the DNN algorithm with a selected polyno-
mial function. Moreover, an intelligent SOH prediction is performed by
DNN using a one-year dataset obtained from 700 unique vehicles with
various driving modes in [74]. In [75], a novel SOH estimation strategy
is proposed for echelon utilization batteries using DNN. Additionally,
the Markov chain error correction is employed to further improve the
accuracy of the DNN predictions. In [76], SOH prediction is achieved
by utilizing the DNN state classifier to diagnose the fault of a battery
cell. To avoid the potential risks associated with using a degraded
battery, [77] proposes a method that employs DNN for SOH diagnosis.
The method involves four DNN models for the SOH diagnostic model
whose outputs are used as data for the learning process of a fault model,
which is then compared with SOC estimation in experiments. In [78], a
7
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
hybrid approach combining a circuit model-based method, specifically
the extended Kalman filter, and a data-driven model, specifically a
fully connected DNN, was proposed for estimating the SOH of batteries.
In [79], a novel DNN architecture with a convolutional training strategy
was developed to estimate the remaining life of a battery, achieving
an error rate of 6.46% with a single cycle. [80] utilized DNN to
extract complex relationships between SOH indicators and SOH values,
developing multiple DNN-based estimators for SOH. Unlike previous
studies, [81] assessed battery aging using constant simulations and a
hardware platform, obtaining real-time experimental results with ML-
based DNN for SOH forecasting and creating various battery statistics.
Prognosis and health management (PHM) play a crucial role in battery
analysis to ensure dependable and secure battery operation in SOH and
RUL predictions, and therefore, [82] presented its initial development
using the DNN algorithm for PHM. To estimate battery performance
with accuracy, precise metrics are critical. Instead of the discharge volt-
age used in earlier studies for SOH calculation, [83] employed dQ/dV,
the first-order derivative of the discharge curve, as the appropriate
parameter estimation and used DNN as the optimization algorithm.
In the field of lithium-ion battery management, [84] has proposed
several DNN models and their learning algorithms to improve SOC
estimation. The models consist of varying numbers of hidden layers,
and the results show that adding more layers decreases the error rate
and provides better SOC estimations for electric vehicle applications.
Another approach for SOC estimation based on DNN has been devel-
oped by [85], where training data from a Li-ion battery is obtained
by applying drive cycle loads at various ambient temperatures. The
approach yields more accurate estimations under different temperature
conditions.
In order to prevent overcharging or over-discharging of lithium-
ion batteries, [86] has presented a DNN-based SOC observer design,
which achieves faster convergence speeds and higher precision than the
original model for SOC estimation. Another DNN-based approach for
SOC estimation using only 10-minute charging voltage and current data
as input has been studied by [87]. The approach offers fast and accurate
SOC estimation with less error rate, making it a good candidate for the
ampere-hour counting method to calibrate SOC prediction.
In recent years, DNN approaches have been utilized for SOC es-
timation of lithium-ion batteries. [88] applied DNN to estimate SOC
during the charging process of LiFePO4 batteries. The training data was
generated from five state-of-the-art charging protocols, and the results
demonstrated an error rate of 2.5% and a root mean square error of
0.8%.
Another study by [89] utilized DNN models in combination with
linear regression and backpropagation neural network models for SOC
estimation. The training data was obtained from the Advanced Energy
Storage and Applications group, and the results indicated a lower
root mean square error, average absolute proportional error, and SOC
estimation error compared to the ordinary BPNN model during the
charging and discharging period.
In addition, [90] improved the estimation algorithm for SOC and
state of energy (SOE) simultaneously using LSTM DNN. The approach
achieved higher accuracy and robustness compared to support vec-
tor regression, random forest, and simple recurrent neural network.
Non-electrical parameters were also considered by [91] for SOC estima-
tion using DNN, which demonstrated an increased FBG signal quality
impacting the performance of SOC estimation.
Furthermore, [92,93] proposed an adaptive model using DNN that
utilizes historical cycle information to provide accurate SOC estima-
tion. [94] developed a DNN model that estimates complete charging
curves using small portions of the curves as input, which can improve
curve estimation for batteries operating under different conditions.
Finally, [95] combined DNN with Electrochemical Impedance Spec-
troscopy for battery SOC estimation, and the root mean square error
of both networks was less than 5% for SOC of 30%.
M. Kurucan et al.
DNN algorithms have emerged as a promising approach for RUL
estimation, akin to SOH estimation. One such approach, as presented
by [96], involves integrating DNN with an autoencoder to extract mul-
tidimensional features for RUL prediction. The autoencoder performs
automatic encoding, and the DNN is subsequently trained to estimate
the remaining cycle life. Similarly, a study by [70] compares DNN
with other ML algorithms such as support vector machine (SVM), k-
nearest neighbors (k-NN), ANN, and linear regression (LR) for SOH
and RUL estimation. Furthermore, [81] uses a long short-term memory
neural network model to perform real-time RUL estimation with the
same individual hardware platform as in SOH estimation. Hybrid DNN
techniques that capture multivariate and nonlinear features are likely
to be used for improved RUL estimation. In this regard, [97] proposes a
novel hybrid DNN approach that combines CNN, LSTM, and traditional
neural networks for RUL prediction. Another study by [98] statistically
analyzes capacity reduction caused by long charge/discharge cycles
during a battery’s life and utilizes DNN for accurate RUL estimates
based on various charge/discharge properties. Moreover, [99] divides
the dischargeable capacity of a battery into two categories using empiri-
cal mode decomposition, namely global degradation trend and capacity
regeneration. The DNN predicts the trend of global degradation, while
LSTM is used to handle the other decomposition. The RUL estimation
of the battery is then produced by finding its dischargeable capacity.
In recent studies, DNN algorithms have gained attention for their
potential to estimate the RUL of lithium-ion batteries. One proposed
technique in [100] utilizes transfer learning based on DNN to estimate
RUL. This method selects a reference battery from a dataset containing
the most comparable historical test data, using the average Euclidean
distance (AED) to determine the battery whose performance is closest
to the target battery. The estimation model based on stacked denoising
autoencoder (SDA) is then trained using the selected data to predict the
RUL of the target battery.
Another study in [101] presents an end-to-end deep learning system
based on DNN to estimate the RUL of LIBs using short-term data.
Similarly, [98] employs two DNNs to estimate the RUL of LIBs. One of
these DNNs performs a statistical analysis of the capacity weakening-
related impedance weakening caused by an increase in the degree of
distortion, while the other DNN predicts the capacity weakening trend
to improve the accuracy of the RUL estimation.
2.4. Convolutional NN
CNNs have been widely utilized in computer vision applications.
Recently, CNNs have also been applied in BMS state predictions. CNNs
consist of convolution layers, pooling layers, and a fully connected layer
in each hidden layer. CNNs are a type of multilayer perceptron in which
each neuron in a layer is connected to every neuron in the next layer.
This makes CNNs a normal form of multilayer perceptrons [102].
The convolutional layer and the pooling layer enable the CNN
method to automatically extract and select features from raw data. Re-
cently, [103] used CNN for the first time to estimate SOH of LIBs based
on the voltage, current, and charging capacity measurements during a
partial charging cycle. BMS should track each cell’s SOH condition for
safe and reliable operation of battery packs composed of multiple cells.
To achieve accurate SOH predictions in their study, [103] employed a
deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) that utilizes shared weights
and local connections. The CNN model offers benefits such as high
prediction accuracy, short testing periods, and low memory require-
ments. To facilitate online SOH estimation, a pre-trained model was
applied to the microcontroller using the STM32Cube.AI tool [104].
The authors reported similar SOH prediction performance on both
the microcontroller and PC. To leverage the strengths of CNN, hybrid
neural networks have been employed in SOH predictions, as is the
case in the suggested model proposed by [105], based on a hybrid
neural network known as the gate recurrent unit-convolutional neural
network (GRU-CNN). This model infers SOH from the observed new
8
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
charge curves such as voltage, current, and temperature, by learning
the temporal dependencies of the charge curves. [106] presented a
model that combines CNN with empirical mode decomposition (EMD)
to monitor the SOH of LIBs. This approach reduces training time and
memory demands while still achieving effective SOH predictions.
Several studies have explored the use of CNN and LSTM methods for
estimating the SOC of LIBs. [107] employed the CNN method to esti-
mate battery capacity accurately from any initial SOC. Similarly, [108]
used a real dataset obtained from New York City cycle experiments to
estimate the SOC of LIBs in EV applications using CNN. Their study
showed that using varying numbers of filters in convolutional layers
improved estimation performance compared to other alternatives.
The combined CNN-LSTM method proposed by [109] is capable of
extracting both spatial and temporal features from input data. Their ap-
proach outperformed single networks by better capturing the nonlinear
relationships between SOC and measurable variables. [110] improved
upon a two-dimensional CNN model by converting LIB signals into
multi-channel images and using a stacked bidirectional LSTM as an
estimator to capture the backward and forward temporal dependen-
cies of battery sequential states. Their approach achieved precise SOC
estimation.
[111] combined multichannel CNN and bidirectional RNN meth-
ods to capture localized invariant characteristics hidden in battery
measurement perturbations at multiple scales and inter-correlations
among measurements in both time and reverse-time orders. Their
results demonstrated better performance in terms of robustness and
accuracy under situations where multi-scale perturbations and their
co-movements existed in measurements than other estimators.
In addition, [112] proposed a novel deep fully CNN model for Li-
ion battery SOC estimation directly from voltage, current, and battery
temperature values. Their model outperformed for SOC estimation
without needing to be retrained. [113] proposed estimating the results
of offline open circuit voltage-based aging diagnosis to constitute a
basis for SOC estimation. [114] presented a hybrid model for LIBs
by taking the sequence of sampling points of voltage, current, and
temperature as input, where feature information is extracted from the
sequence of sampling points and outputting feature maps are achieved
by using CNN. This approach is a good solution for unknown aging
states and complex operating conditions.
Furthermore, [115] studied the influence of different types of noises
on estimation capabilities using the one-dimensional CNN method and
proposed a transfer learning mechanism for EVs. Their approach per-
formed well in terms of estimation accuracy, learning speed, and
generalization capability. These studies demonstrate the effectiveness
of deep learning techniques in estimating the SOC of LIBs.
CNNs have been widely used in the field of RUL estimation, a crucial
aspect of predictive maintenance in various industries. In recent years,
hybrid neural networks combining CNNs with other DL methods such
as LSTM and DNN have been proposed to enhance RUL prediction
accuracy.
One such hybrid model proposed in [116] combines CNNs and
LSTMs to effectively extract features from battery data for RUL pre-
diction. The dilated CNN is also utilized as a key component of an
end-to-end DL framework in [101] to automatically extract appropriate
features for RUL estimation.
Data-driven techniques for RUL estimation often suffer from in-
accurate sliding window sizes determined empirically, which can be
addressed by using hybrid neural networks with the false closest neigh-
bors method as suggested in [117]. Other studies have also proposed
the combination of RNN and CNN, such as in [118], where LSTM and
CNN are utilized to estimate SOH and RUL of LIBs. A novel estimate
method proposed in [119] uses a two-dimensional CNN, adaptive mul-
tiple error corrections, and wavelet packet decomposition to forecast
the RUL of LIBs by generating unpredictable residuals with changing
variance from the signal-based nonparametric distribution.
M. Kurucan et al.
In [120], an end-to-end prognostic approach is proposed using a
hybrid NN that concatenates an active-state-tracking LSTM and a one-
dimensional CNN to capture the hierarchical features and temporal
dependencies affecting battery degeneration. The CNN-LSTM-DNN pro-
posed in [121] combines CNN, LSTM, and DNN to estimate RUL and
enhance prediction accuracy with tolerable execution time.
To increase RUL prediction accuracy, data-driven approaches re-
quire larger amounts of training data, which can be achieved by
detecting the knee in the capacity degradation curve using a novel
online and offline knee detection algorithm proposed in [122]. Another
hybrid model proposed in [97] combines conventional neural networks,
CNN, and LSTM to extract spatiotemporal correlations and capture
nonlinear properties in multivariate time series data.
Furthermore, the performance of the hybrid NNs can be further
optimized using particle swarm optimization (PSO) to simultaneously
optimize network hyperparameters and model performance.
Various ML techniques have been explored for the diagnosis of
faults in LIBs, including the use of RNN approaches. In addition to
RNN, CNN methods have also gained attention for fault diagnosis in
LIBs, as highlighted in various review publications [6]. For instance,
in [123], a CNN-based model was proposed to improve the security and
dependability of battery energy storage systems (BESS) by detecting
and categorizing false sensor data and communication data associated
with LIBs. LIB-based systems commonly consist of multiple batteries or
battery cells that experience aging-related degradation leading to unsta-
ble cell states. Therefore, the battery balancing circuit, which is a vital
component of BMS, is crucial in ensuring the safe and reliable operation
of multi-cell LIB systems. The detection of defective battery balancing
circuits using CNN models has also been investigated in [124], where
an accuracy of about 95.31 percent was achieved with an F-1 score for
the detection process.
2.5. Recurrent NN
RNN are a form of neural network whose architecture is derived
from the FFNN. Their memory, which stores data from prior hidden
layers for use as input in the current hidden layer, is their distinguishing
characteristic [125]. In simple terms, the estimation of the current
state is done by the input and the previous state. With this memory
innovation, RNNs become powerful models with a special ability to
handle sequential input [7]. However, despite their ability to process
sequential inputs, RNNs face the challenge of the long-term dependency
problem for long-term time sequences, which can cause the gradient
to disappear. To overcome this issue, the LSTM approach, which uses
controlled storage, has been proposed [7]. LSTM layers incorporate
three gates: the input gate, the forget gate, and the output gate.
The Elman neural network (Elman NN) is a fundamental structure
of RNNs that has been employed for SOH estimation in [126]. In
this work, the raw aging data is processed using the empirical mode
decomposition (EMD) approach to generate two distinct sequences:
the intrinsic mode function, which is subject to considerable fluctua-
tions and may be estimated using the autoregressive moving average
model to overcome the problem of capacity regeneration, and the final
residue, which may be calculated using a pre-trained Elman NN to yield
a smooth, monotonic curve. This fusion approach allows for accurate
SOH estimation while also capturing local variations in capacity fading.
Similarly, in [127], Elman NN is utilized for SOH estimation and is
further applied to real-time battery SOC correction.
To address the long-term dependency problem that arises when
processing long-term time sequences using RNNs, the echo state net-
work (ESN) has been proposed as an alternative approach to overcome
the gradient problem, as in the case of LSTM [128]. ESN’s strong
memory is attributed to its utilization of a dynamic reservoir with a
large number of sparsely connected neurons, and its simple training
procedure involves only training the output weights, much like the
extreme learning machine (ELM) [7].
9
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
In [129], SOH was defined as the period of equal discharge volt-
age difference, which was extracted using the constant current (CC)
voltage curve. To monitor nonlinear battery deterioration patterns, the
monotonic echo state networks (MONESNs) technique was employed.
Furthermore, the enhancement of LSTM for SOH feature optimization
has been extensively investigated using feature extraction and selection
techniques. Models have also been combined to improve stability and
estimation accuracy in accordance with the probability distribution.
In [130], the authors utilized the gray relational analysis (GRA)
and entropy weight techniques to enhance the features of their LSTM
model. The LSTM was then trained to map the improved features to
SOH estimates. Particle-filtering (PF) was employed by [131] to smooth
the feature curve for estimating the state of lithium-ion batteries. The
adaptive moment estimation method (Adam) was employed in [132]
and was found to significantly improve the performance of the neural
network. Using the k-means clustering approach, [133] divided the
V/I points into 30 subregions, which could represent battery aging.
The LSTM was then used to estimate the SOH based on the density
distribution of these subregions, requiring only a small number of V/I
instances over a brief period. The proposed technique exhibited high
accuracy, flexibility, noise resilience, and an average error rate of less
than
In [134], a multi-channel method based on V, I, and 𝑇 profiles
was used to estimate the SOH of batteries. The method resulted in a
%25 reduction in estimation error compared to using voltage alone.
LSTM was employed to efficiently merge multi-cell degradation data,
which improved the accuracy and stability of the battery pack’s SOH
estimation. This finding was confirmed in battery packs with various
series, parallel, and series–parallel architectures in [135].
In addition to broadening the variety of the input signal, sparse
sampling is a useful technique for enhancing model performance [136].
Sparse data can compactly represent battery properties, and optimiza-
tion techniques can exploit signal sparsity to recover the signal with less
data without sacrificing information. The LSTM algorithm’s advantages
can be fully utilized by optimizing the network topology to simplify
online implementation. In [137], the linked path between the LSTM
gates was modified for SOH prediction. The enhanced LSTM deter-
mined fresh and old information concurrently in the input and forget
gates, respectively. The past cell states were also fed back into the
input and output gates, preserving useful information and attenuating
undesired error signals. The proposed approach achieved an average
RMSE of %2.16 on the NASA dataset.
In [138], a novel LIB prognosis approach based on deep learning is
proposed. The proposed approach utilizes an efficient variant of the
LSTM network, which can be trained with more labeled examples,
even with varied input dimensions. Moreover, an online validation
technique is suggested for real-time parameter modification based on
available system data, allowing for continuous model improvement.
The proposed approach is designed for online implementation, making
it suitable for real-time applications.
Another research study [139] proposes a novel SOH estimation
technique based on the historical data of lithium-ion batteries. The pro-
posed approach utilizes an Independently Recurrent Neural Network
(IndRNN) to capture the complex non-linear properties of batteries and
to remove the gradient problem, enabling the network to learn long-
term relationships among capacity degradations. Experimental results
demonstrate that the proposed IndRNN-based model can reliably pre-
dict a battery’s SOH, with a RMSE of %1.14 and a MAE of %1.33. The
maximum error (MAX) achieved by the proposed model during testing
is %2.5943, which is significantly less than the permitted SOH error
range of ±%5 for electric vehicles. The proposed approach provides a
reliable and accurate SOH estimation technique for LIBs.
In the field of lithium-ion battery SOC estimation, various stud-
ies have employed RNNs and their extensions. For instance, [140]
combined RNN with the internal resistance measuring method to im-
prove SOC estimation accuracy. Other studies, such as [141–147],
M. Kurucan et al.
extended RNN with gated recurrent units (GRUs) to estimate SOC using
measured current, voltage, and temperature signals, outperforming tra-
ditional networks by utilizing previous SOC information and requiring
no knowledge of the battery’s internal parameters. In [148], two RNNs
were used, and the charging and discharging times were included as
inputs to estimate SOC. A comparative study of RNN with LSTM cells
and extended Kalman filtering based on equivalent circuit models was
presented in [149]. The combination of RNN and particle-filtering-
based errors redress was proposed in [131] to develop a SOC indicator
for lithium-ion batteries.
Several studies have investigated the use of RNNs and their ex-
tensions for SOC estimation of various battery types, including Li-ion
batteries [90,141,150–156]. The performance of the NARX network
and an improved RNN for SOC estimation of batteries used in EVs,
UAVs, etc., was evaluated in [157–159]. In addition, the NARX net-
work, a well-known subclass of RNN, has been studied in [160–164].
Clockwork-RNN, a new RNN structure that separates hidden layers
into separate modules to solve long-term dependencies, was developed
in [165].
The co-estimation of SOC and capacity for lithium-ion batteries
using RNN and support vector machine was proposed in [166], and
a moving window method was applied to solve the long-term depen-
dency loss problem of RNN. However, unexpected overfitting or poor
performances were also reported in [167] when using time-delayed
RNN for lithium-ion battery modeling and SOC estimation. Finally,
RNN was used in [168] to provide a state-of-charge observer and model
parameter estimation and tuning for the lead–acid battery modeling
and simulation problem.
In recent studies, several approaches based on the RNN have been
proposed for RUL prediction of LIBs and aircraft components. For
instance, [167] compared the performance of the classical RNN-LSTM
and hybrid CNN-LSTM methods for RUL assessment of lithium-ion
batteries. The hybrid method demonstrated superior results, especially
in terms of data processing time, making it suitable for electric vehicle
applications. Another study by [169] used category theory to extract
eigenvalues from RNN models for RUL prediction. Additionally, [170]
combined the empirical mode decomposition (EMD) with RNN-LSTM
methods to develop RUL prediction models with high accuracy. In
the field of aircraft maintenance, [171] used deep-layer RNN models
for RUL prediction based on the entire life cycle data, while [172]
integrated the RNN method with a state-space estimation technique to
improve the accuracy and precision of RUL estimation for lithium-ion
batteries. Moreover, the RNN method has been utilized in RUL esti-
mation of aircraft components in works such as [172,173], providing
promising methods for aero-engine RUL estimation to support health
monitoring.
While model-based techniques have been widely employed for bat-
tery diagnosis and prognosis, studies utilizing machine learning ap-
proaches such as ANNs are relatively scarce [174]. Both [6] and [174]
refer to a previous work that introduced a DL-based fault prognosis
method employing a LSTM-RNN for predicting battery faults and mit-
igating runaway risk [66]. The proposed approach is found to exhibit
a high degree of accuracy in predicting battery voltage. Furthermore,
comparison of various hyper-parameters reveals that the method is both
robust and accurate.
3. Application fields
3.1. Classification of ANN based applications
Over the last decade, a significant transition has occurred in the
usage of LIBs, which have been increasingly utilized not only in elec-
tronic devices but also in transportation vehicles. While the adoption
rate of EVs, including electric scooters, is not as high as that of internal
combustion engine vehicles, their presence on the road has been on the
10
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
rise. To ensure the safe and efficient operation of such vehicles that rely
on LIBs, the development of a robust BMS is crucial.
This review paper provides a comprehensive classification of ANN-
based BMS scenarios into four separate categories, each of which
is associated with a specific LIB-containing application that requires
further research. The majority of the references cited in this review
article for each BMS category are focused on investigations related to
EVs and HEVs, as evidenced by Fig. 4. However, it should be noted
that Li-ion batteries have a wide range of applications beyond EVs
and HEVs. Other research areas that could be explored include the
development of novel techniques and algorithms, the integration of
models from other ANN subclasses to create hybrid NNs, and general
studies on the application of LIBs.
In [36], a FFNN-based approach was utilized for SOH estimation
of Li-ion batteries employed in satellites, despite the predominance of
studies focused on SOH of EVs. Furthermore, various new techniques
have been proposed without any specific application domain in focus.
For example, in [49], a novel model is suggested to enhance the accu-
racy of extreme learning machines (ELMs). Meanwhile, in [103,132],
online studies on SOH prediction have been conducted using CNNs
and RNNs, respectively. In addition, microcontroller-based approaches
such as STM32Cube.AI have been explored, as described in [104].
Another technique, the monotonic echo state networks (MONESNs), has
been utilized to monitor battery degradation patterns [129]. Recently,
hybrid NNs that fuse multiple techniques have been proposed for SOH
estimation, and have shown promising results in recent studies, as
reported in [105,131].
Studies on SOC estimation have been conducted across various ap-
plications, including portable electronics [92,94], despite the fact that
EVs have traditionally been the primary focus of such studies. ANN-
based SOC calculations have also been investigated in other battery-
powered vehicles such as aircraft [131] and unmanned aerial vehicles
(UAVs) [157]. Furthermore, ANN-based SOC estimation techniques
have been applied to electric applications [148], smart grids [107], and
energy storage and renewable energy [142].
Numerous innovative approaches have been proposed in the studies
on RUL calculation [35,62,64,65,81,169]. While some investigations
have focused on EVs, other applications have also been taken into
account, such as energy storage systems [101], solar power [118],
and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) [167]. RUL estimations have
also been conducted for aircraft powered by batteries [96,171,173].
Furthermore, studies in areas including prognostics and health man-
agement (PHM) [97], portable electronics [117], battery design [100],
and hybrid NN [61] have explored RUL calculations.
The diagram does not include the locations where the current
experiments were conducted, as there is a limited amount of research
on ANN-based LIBs for fault diagnosis, as reported in [6]. Nevertheless,
the majority of investigations in the publications cited in Section 2
focused on the diagnosis of faulty EV batteries.
3.2. Literature analysis from BMS estimations perspective
The ANN-based approaches for predicting BMS states, including
SOH, SOC, and RUL, often use LIBs with NMC (LiNiCoMnO2 ) chemistry,
as reported in the reviewed literature. It is worth noting that the
‘‘density of using battery’’ column in Table 3 represents the proportion
of the battery type employed in BMS predictions. LFP (LiFePO4 ) is
another common battery chemistry utilized in research, while a few
studies, such as [47,139], focused on LCO (LiCoO2 ) batteries. The
prevalence of NMC and LFP batteries in research could be attributed
to their frequent use in commercial applications and accessibility.
The databases used for BMS state estimation can be either generated
by institutions or privately in labs. Recently, the open-source data
provided by institutions has become more prevalent. During the testing
phase, research may need publically accessible datasets to keep track
of how well their methods for estimating the BMS states are working.
The following is a list of some of the most popular open-source datasets
used in this field:
M. Kurucan et al.
Fig. 4. The density of the application areas that are used in BMS estimations.
• NASA dataset [175]: Various data sets of batteries subjected
to different temperatures through charging, discharging, and
impedance operations are provided by the NASA. Specifically,
data sets such as B0005, B0006, B0007, and B0018 have under-
gone cycles at room temperature and are suitable for the CC-CV
charging profile in the context of BMS state estimation.
• CALCE dataset [176]: This dataset is an open-source resource
that collects information from batteries under various stress con-
ditions. These conditions can be classified as Dynamic Stress
Test (DST), Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule(UDDS), and
US06 Highway Driving Schedule. This resource provides ample
amounts of datasets for SOC estimation and RUL prediction.
• Oxford dataset [177]: Oxford University acquired data by putting
eight Kokam (SLPB533459H4) 740 mAh LIBs through a CC-CV
charging profile at 40 degrees Celsius. A test Artemis discharge
profile for urban areas was also obtained.
• MIT dataset [178]: The data from 124 commercial LIBs are col-
lected in this open-source project. In this dataset, all cells are
charged fast in one or two steps. The aim is to improve the SOH
and RUL performance of the batteries for fast charging.
• Aging dataset [179]: These kinds of data sets are produced to test
machine learning techniques on huge battery aging data sets. Bat-
teries are charged and discharged using CC-CV and CC profiles,
respectively. The three primary components of the acquired data
are then separated for the purposes of accelerated aging testing,
weakly supervised learning, and model evaluation
Furthermore, several other databases, such as NYCC (New York
City Cycle) [54,108], CATL (Contemporary Amperex Technology Co.
Limited) [61], have been utilized to train proposed models for SOC and
RUL calculations. In the area of battery fault detection, SMC (Service
and Management Center for electric vehicles) was used as a database
in [66] instead of the NASA database. The density of the utilized
database is shown in Table 3 under the ‘‘density of using the database’’
column title.
V, I, T, and t are important parameters that are monitored by BMS to
ensure optimal battery performance, health, and safety. Voltage, which
represents the potential difference between a battery cell’s positive
and negative terminals, is a crucial parameter that provides valuable
information on the battery’s SOC, SOH. The BMS measures the V
of each battery cell and compares it to a reference V to determine
the SOC, SOH of the battery. Monitoring the V of the battery cells
is essential to prevent overcharging or over-discharging, which can
damage the battery and reduce its lifespan. The BMS may also utilize V
measurements to balance the charge among the battery cells to ensure
that they all have similar voltages, which prolongs the battery’s life.
11
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
Current, which indicates the flow of electrons in and out of the battery,
is another critical parameter that is continuously monitored by BMS to
maintain safe limits and detect any abnormalities in the system. The
BMS utilizes current measurements to estimate the SOC and SOH of the
battery, which is crucial for optimizing the performance and extending
the life of the battery. T, which affects the battery’s performance
and lifespan, is also a critical parameter that BMS systems monitor.
High temperatures can cause thermal runaway, leading to overheating,
degradation, and battery failure. BMS systems use temperature sensors
to measure the temperature of the battery cells and pack, which helps
control the temperature through thermal management systems such
as cooling or heating. Additionally, temperature data can be used to
estimate the battery’s SOC and SOH, which can optimize the battery’s
performance and lifespan. Time is also a crucial parameter to consider.
The performance and health of the battery over time can have a
significant impact on the overall performance and range of the vehicle.
The BMS continuously monitors the battery over time and makes
adjustments to charging and discharging rates as needed to maintain
optimal performance. Moreover, the BMS keeps track of the age and
usage history of the battery over time to determine when it may need to
be replaced or undergo maintenance. Time is also a factor in modeling
and simulating the battery system, as the battery behavior can change
over time due to aging and cycling. Accurately modeling the effects of
time on the battery behavior is essential for developing effective BMS
strategies and optimizing the performance of the electric vehicle.
Each subclass of ANN has a different set of input signals (measure-
ments) that are utilized for the predictions. For instance, in FFNN-based
SOH estimation, the signal V, I, t is frequently employed, whereas V,
I is favored in the same FFNN-based SOC estimation. In contrast, V,
I, and 𝑇 is the most commonly used signal in CNN-based SOC estima-
tion. Observations indicate that the estimation and approach employed
when using the most preferred input signals differ, as demonstrated in
Table 3.
It is worth noting that most studies employ cycle data to train their
models for battery state estimation. Although a wide range of cycle
counts are employed in literature, ranging from small numbers to large
amounts, typically between 168 and 5000 cycles are utilized. However,
in studies that include calendar aging, such as those in [39,139], larger
cycle data sizes, such as 21 K cycles, are used. The use of the constant
current constant voltage (CCCV) cycling method is typically the reason
for employing cycle data.
The ‘‘test method’’ column in Table 3 indicates that the validation
method is the most frequently utilized approach by researcher during
the testing process. However, some studies with large-scale datasets
have achieved results using cross-validation [80,103,136].
M. Kurucan et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262

Table 3
Comparison of analyzing ANN-based methods for estimation of BMS states.
Estimation Method Density of using Density of using the Measurement Cycles Test method Error metric & Min-error
the battery database signal [𝑚𝑖𝑛–𝑚𝑎𝑥]
FFNN ∙ %74 NMC ∙ %32 NASA ∙ %45 V,I,t [168–5000] ∙ %100 validation ∙ RMSE = %1.06 [30]
∙ %23 LFP ∙ %32 CCCV ∙ %25 V,t ∙ MAE = %1.65 [50]
∙ %3 LCO ∙ %19 Lab exp. ∙ %25 V ∙ MaxE = %1.5 [40]
∙ %12 Calendar ∙ %5 V,I,T,t ∙ MSE = %0.21 [49]
aging
∙ %5 NEDC
DNN ∙ %68 NMC ∙ %55 CCCV ∙ %40 V,I,T,t [100–2000] ∙ %90 validation ∙ RMSE = % <3.247 [82]
∙ %32 LFP ∙ %40 NASA ∙ %25 V ∙ %10 ∙ MAE = %0.39 [71]
∙ %5 SHEVDC ∙ %20 V,I,T,C cross-validation ∙ MaxE = % <0.3 [72]
∙ %10 V,I,t
∙ %5 V,I,t, SOC
curve
SOH
CNN ∙ %73 NMC ∙ %80 NASA ∙ % 25 V,I,T,t [3000– ∙ %75 validation ∙ RMSE = % <2 [103]
∙ %27 LFP ∙ %10 Calendar ∙ % 25 V,I,T 21000] ∙ %25 ∙ MAE = %1 [106]
aging ∙ % 25 V cross-validation ∙ MaxE = % <1.62 [105]
∙ %7 Oxford ∙ % 25 V,I
∙ %3 CALCE
RNN ∙ %86 NMC ∙ %50 NASA ∙ %33 V,I,T [200–6000] ∙ %85 validation ∙ RMSE = %0.72 [130]
∙ %11 LFP ∙ %30 CCCV ∙ %24 V,t ∙ %15 ∙ MAE = %0.87 [127]
∙ %3 LCO ∙ %10 CALCE ∙ %18 V,I,T,t cross-validation ∙ MaxE = % 1.76 [130]
∙ %10 Lab exp. ∙ %16 V,I ∙ MAPE = %1.03 [134]
∙ %6 I ∙ RE = %4.08 [135]
∙ %3 SOC
determination
FFNN ∙ %72 NMC ∙ %55 NASA ∙ %47 V,I [50–168] ∙ %75 validation ∙ EE = %<2 [54]
∙ %26 LFP ∙ %31 CCCV ∙ %34 V,I,T ∙ %25 ∙ RMSE = %1.17 [31]
∙ %2 LCO ∙ %14 UDDS ∙ %12 V cross-validation ∙ MaxE = %4.97 [103]
∙ %7 V,t ∙ MSE = %2.03 [58]
DNN ∙ %64 NMC ∙ %40 NASA ∙ %50 V,I [100–165] ∙ %100 validation ∙ EE = % 0.8 [88]
∙ %36 LFP ∙ %40 UDDS ∙ %20 V,I,T ∙ RMSE = %0.312 [89]
∙ %20 CCCV ∙ %17 V,t ∙ MAE = %0.01 [86]
∙ %7 V,I,T,t ∙ MAPE = %0.08 [84]
∙ %6 V ∙ MaxE = %5 [88]
∙ MSE = %0.12 [91]
SOC
CNN ∙ %62 NMC ∙ %37 Oxford ∙ %74 V,I,T [45–500] ∙ %100 validation ∙ RMSE = %0.85 [112]
∙ %21 LFP ∙ %24 NASA ∙ %10 V,I ∙ MAE = %0.39 [110]
∙ %17 LCO ∙ %19 Mendeley ∙ %10 V,t ∙ MAPE = %0.41 [108]
∙ %6 V ∙ MMAE = %1 [109]
∙ MRMSE = %2 [109]
RNN ∙ %79 NMC ∙ %32 CALCE ∙ %55 V,I,T [100–700] ∙ %100 validation ∙ EE = % <0.1 [167]
∙ %21 LFP ∙ %23 US06 ∙ %28 V,I ∙ RMSE = %0.03 [157]
∙ %23 DST ∙ %17 V,t ∙ MAE = %0.64 [160]
∙ %22 UDDS ∙ MAPE = %1.24 [158]
∙ MaxE = %12 [151]
∙ MSE = %0.012 [140]
FFNN ∙ %50 NMC ∙ %50 CCCV ∙ %60 V,I [2000–3000] ∙ %60 validation ∙ RMSE = %0.55 [60]
∙ %50 LFP ∙ %20 Private ∙ %14 V,I,T ∙ %40 ∙ MAE = %1.1 [60]
∙ %10 CC ∙ %13 T,SOC cross-validation
∙ %10 NASA ∙ %13 T
∙ %10 CATL
DNN ∙ %86 NMC ∙ %78 NASA ∙ %50 V,I,T [90–175] ∙ %67 validation ∙ EE = %3.59 [98]
∙ %14 LFP ∙ %11 MIT-Stanford ∙ %13 V,I,T,t ∙ %33 ∙ RMSE = %0.16 [99]
∙ %11 CATL ∙ %13 V,I cross-validation
∙ %12 V,T
∙ %12 V
RUL
CNN ∙ %82 NMC ∙ %77 NASA ∙ %50 V,I,T [90-3000] ∙ %63 validation ∙ RMSE = %0.438 [121]
∙ %11 LFP ∙ %14 CALCE ∙ %13 V,I,t ∙ %37 ∙ MAE = %0.3 [121]
∙ %7 LCO ∙ %9 MIT-Stanford ∙ %13 V,I cross-validation ∙ MAPE = %0.416 [122]
∙ %12 V,I,T,t
∙ %12 V,T
RNN ∙ %78 NMC ∙ %79 NASA ∙ %50 V,I [50–800] ∙ %60 validation ∙ EE = %1 [167]
∙ %22 LFP ∙ %11 CALCE ∙ %17 V,I,T ∙ %40 ∙ RMSE = %0.175 [171]
∙ %10 UDDS ∙ %17 V,t cross-validation
∙ %10 NYCC ∙ %16 V
FFNN ∙ NMC ∙ NASA ∙ V 168 ∙ Validation ∙ RMSE = % <1 [68]
DNN – – – – – –
Faulty
prognostic CNN – – – – – –
RNN ∙ NMC ∙ SMC ∙ V, SOC A year ∙ Cross-validation ∙ MRE = %0.56 [66]
∙ RMSE = %0.032 [66]

12
M. Kurucan et al.
The accuracy of the results in the studies is commonly demonstrated
using the RMSE as an error metric. However, Table 3 shows that various
error metrics are used instead of RMSE, including maximum error
(MaxE), MAE, mean square error (MSE), relative error (RE), and mean
relative error (MRE). The last column of Table 3 provides the minimum
error values of the corresponding error metric along with its reference.
4. Challenges and future trends
Each type of neural network architecture can offer a distinct advan-
tage in addressing different aspects of the BMS state estimation problem
in electric vehicles. An FFNN is useful in predicting BMS states by
taking input data, such as voltage and current measurements. However,
FFNNs may not capture temporal dependencies in the data, such as
changes in the BMS states over time. As a result, they may not be as
effective in handling the dynamic nature of the problem.
A CNN can be utilized to analyze sensor data from the BMS sys-
tem, such as temperature and voltage sensor data, for the purpose of
identifying anomalies or predicting the battery’s health state. CNNs
can extract features from sensor data that can be used as inputs for
different neural network architectures. In addition, an RNN can be
useful in predicting BMS states over time by simulating the time-series
data of the battery’s state changes. RNNs have the ability to capture
the temporal dependencies in the data, which facilitates accurate future
predictions for the battery’s behavior.
A DNN that offers a thorough BMS can be created by combining
the advantages of the three different types of neural networks: FFNNs,
CNNs, and RNNs. The DNN can be helpful in predicting BMS states,
spotting anomalies, and giving details on the battery’s condition.
The prediction of battery pack states is a crucial battery manage-
ment issue that can be better addressed by CNNs than FFNNs. For
instance, SoH reflects the overall health and RUL of the battery pack
and is essential for ensuring the safety and reliability of EV operation.
Input data such as voltage, temperature, current, and other sensor
measures are commonly utilized to estimate SoH and RUL prediction.
However, the complex interdependencies among these input variables
can pose a challenge to conventional machine-learning techniques.
CNNs are well-suited to handle this challenge due to their ability to
model the spatial and temporal complexities of this type of input data.
Consequently, CNN-based approaches can achieve higher accuracy in
SoH estimation, thereby enabling the optimization of battery pack per-
formance and lifetime in EVs. CNNs possess the ability to automatically
learn and recognize features that are indicative of the BMS states of a
battery pack. Furthermore, CNNs are well-suited to manage the spatial
and temporal complexity of the input data that characterizes battery
states. Specifically, CNNs can spot patterns in voltage and current
waveforms that are associated with specific degradation mechanisms
such as electrode cracking or capacity fading. In contrast, FFNNs may
find it challenging to estimate the BMS states of the battery pack since
they may not be able to fully capture the intricate correlations among
the input variables.
The type of problem being addressed, the data at hand, and the de-
sired outputs all play a role in determining the specific neural network
architecture(s) to use. It is frequently required to use numerous neural
network architectures rather than any one architecture alone in order
to solve the BMS states problem for electric vehicles.
ANNs, as mentioned at the beginning of the article, are the most
popular models used in recent years for the prediction of the states
existing in ML-based BMS. The reason for this is the ability to learn
the behavior of the battery to introduce non-linear data to the network
by means of the activation function. As is common knowledge, DL can
take in many inputs because it employs more than one hidden layer or
because it necessitates the interaction of brain cells. Large data sets are
required since it handles a lot of input, which is naturally perceived
as a drawback but is actually beneficial for modeling because it will
affect the calculation time. Conversely, its minimal estimating errors
13
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
set it apart from other approaches, particularly in large nonlinear data
sets. One of the subclasses of DL, DNN, appears to be a good approach
for making online predictions. The raw dataset can be used with this
method to extract features. It should be noted that sensor data can
enter the network without having to be manually removed. Similarly,
CNN uses filters to automatically extract the input feature from the raw
dataset.RNNs are known to have memory because they utilize the data
– i.e., history – from the previous hidden layer. Inputs can therefore
be processed as a time sequence. It is dynamic since its underlying
operating concept is sequential. Additionally, it is employed in research
on local capacity regeneration. Because it employs the same data over a
wider range of time intervals, the computing cost is consequently lower.
In recent years, the usage of LSTM has become very popular for solving
the gradient burst problem in RNN.
The analysis is presented in Fig. 5, which illustrates a radar chart
comparing machine learning (ML) algorithms based on five perfor-
mance metrics: implementation, accuracy, overfitting, dataset, and
complexity. The implementation metric assesses the ease of algorithm
implementation, considering factors such as computational resource
utilization and reliance on manual feature extraction. Accuracy is
measured using the RMSE to quantify the deviation between predicted
and actual values. Overfitting refers to the phenomenon where a model
fits training data exceptionally well but performs poorly on new data.
The dataset metric pertains to the size of the training dataset employed.
Lastly, computational complexity is evaluated using big O notation
to gauge algorithm efficiency. The radar chart offers a comprehen-
sive visualization of the performance metrics associated with the ML
algorithms.
This work provides a comprehensive overview of the research con-
ducted on BMS with a particular focus on ANN methodologies. Exten-
sive research was carried out using the Web of Science database, along
with a thorough examination of relevant review articles pertaining to
each BMS state. As highlighted in the introduction, the number of
studies on ANN surpasses those of all other machine learning-based
approaches. This growing trend has led to increased emphasis on
research in this specific domain. Moreover, the analysis reveals that
CNN and RNN have gained significant prominence within the ANN
framework, particularly in BMS prediction applications.
The recent rise in DL can be attributed to the availability of
cloud computing platforms and the accessibility of big data. Processing
large volumes of data presents a well-known challenge, and DL algo-
rithms have proven to be advantageous in scenarios involving massive
datasets. Among DL algorithms, DNNs are particularly suited for han-
dling extensive data due to their capacity to extract high-level features
from raw, unprocessed data. When analyzing multidimensional data,
CNNs excel by automatically extracting features through convolutional
techniques. For time series data, LSTM models are considered the most
suitable choice. While DL offers several advantages, it is important
to note that it comes with the drawback of being computationally
expensive and time-consuming.
In conclusion, this review article has compiled recent studies that
utilize ANN models within the field of ML to predict various states of
BMS and potential faults in batteries. The predictive findings presented
here can serve as a valuable source of motivation for researchers inter-
ested in implementing ANN-based models in their own investigations.
Moreover, it is worth noting the limited exploration of CNN models
for estimating faulty states, indicating a promising avenue for further
research in this specific domain. Additionally,hybrid models for BMS
state predictions is recommended, as it is expected that the develop-
ment of novel hybrid models will contribute to the establishment of
new trends within the field.
5. Conclusion
This research conducts a comprehensive review to emphasize the
importance of the ML approach for the accurate estimation of BMS
M. Kurucan et al.
Fig. 5. Comparison of the four ANN-based algorithms across different metrics.
parameters while acknowledging both its advantages and disadvan-
tages. With the increasing utilization of LIBs in complex devices and
high-power applications, precise estimation of SOH, SOC, RUL in LIB
packs, and fault detection of batteries are of significant importance.
This review highlights the promising future and numerous significant
benefits of ANN-based approaches for BMS estimations and battery
fault detection.
An extensive analysis of approximately 600 recent journal pub-
lications, focusing on ML-based algorithms, reveals that ANN-based
methods are a popular research topic for BMS state estimation. This
work introduces four ANN-based algorithms, namely FFNN, DNN, CNN,
and RNN, along with their respective derivations. To facilitate an
understanding of the relationships and distinctions among these al-
gorithms, a radar chart is provided, offering a comprehensive frame-
work. Furthermore, the applications of these ANN approaches for each
BMS state are described, providing studies with a valuable resource.
Additionally, for quick reference, supplementary information such as
databases, measurement signals, error metrics, and estimation accuracy
of the algorithms, as suggested in certain studies, is compiled in a table.
This work also presents the four ANN-based techniques in terms
of how the algorithms handle incoming data. Finally, the potential
of ANN for future research in battery SOH, SOC, RUL estimates, and
fault detection are discussed, highlighting the promising prospects for
further exploration in this domain.
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
No data was used for the research described in the article.
14
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
References
[1] Jorgensen K. Technologies for electric, hybrid and hydrogen vehicles: Electricity
from renewable energy sources in transport. Util Policy 2008;16(2):72–9. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2007.11.005, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0957178707000781. Sustainable Energy and Transporta-
tion Systems.
[2] Li Zhenhe, Khajepour Amir, Song Jinchun. A comprehensive review of the
key technologies for pure electric vehicles. Energy 2019;182:824–39. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.06.077, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0360544219311909.
[3] Gielen Dolf, Boshell Francisco, Saygin Deger, Bazilian Morgan D, Wag-
ner Nicholas, Gorini Ricardo. The role of renewable energy in the global
energy transformation. Energy Strategy Rev 2019;24:38–50. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.006, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S2211467X19300082.
[4] Contestabile M, Offer GJ, Slade R, Jaeger F, Thoennes M. Battery electric
vehicles, hydrogen fuel cells and biofuels. Which will be the winner? Energy
Environ Sci 2011;4:3754–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/C1EE01804C.
[5] Chen T, Jin Y, Lv H. Applications of lithium-ion batteries in grid-scale energy
storage systems. 26, 2020, p. 208–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12209-020-
00236-w.
[6] Samanta Akash, Chowdhuri Sumana, Williamson Sheldon S. Machine learning-
based data-driven fault detection/diagnosis of lithium-ion battery: A critical re-
view. Electronics 2021;10(11). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/electronics10111309,
URL https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/10/11/1309.
[7] Sui Xin, He Shan, Vilsen Søren B, Meng Jinhao, Teodorescu Re-
mus, Stroe Daniel-Ioan. A review of non-probabilistic machine learning-
based state of health estimation techniques for lithium-ion battery. Appl
Energy 2021;300:117346. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117346,
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261921007546.
[8] Ali Muhammad Umair, Zafar Amad, Nengroo Sarvar Hussain, Hussain Sadam,
Junaid Alvi Muhammad, Kim Hee-Je. Towards a smarter battery management
system for electric vehicle applications: A critical review of lithium-ion battery
state of charge estimation. Energies 2019;12(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
en12030446, URL https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/3/446.
[9] How Dickson NT, Hannan MA, Hossain Lipu MS, Ker Pin Jern. State of charge
estimation for lithium-ion batteries using model-based and data-driven methods:
A review. IEEE Access 2019;7:136116–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.
2019.2942213.
[10] Jin Siyu, Sui Xin, Huang Xinrong, Wang Shunli, Teodorescu Remus,
Stroe Daniel-Ioan. Overview of machine learning methods for lithium-ion
battery remaining useful lifetime prediction. ELECTRONICS 2021;10(24). http:
//dx.doi.org/10.3390/electronics10243126.
M. Kurucan et al.
[11] Li Yi, Liu Kailong, Foley Aoife M, Zülke Alana, Berecibar Maitane, Nanini-
Maury Elise, et al. Data-driven health estimation and lifetime prediction of
lithium-ion batteries: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019;113:109254.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109254, URL https://www.sciencedirect.
com/science/article/pii/S136403211930454X.
[12] Zhang Ying, Li Yan-Fu. Prognostics and health management of lithium-ion
battery using deep learning methods: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2022;161:112282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112282, URL https://
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122002015.
[13] Che Yunhong, Hu Xiaosong, Lin Xianke, Guo Jia, Teodorescu Remus. Health
prognostics for lithium-ion batteries: Mechanisms, methods, and prospects.
Energy Environ Sci 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/D2EE03019E.
[14] Liu Kailong, Peng Qiao, Che Yunhong, Zheng Yusheng, Li Kang, Teodor-
escu Remus, et al. Transfer learning for battery smarter state estimation
and ageing prognostics: Recent progress, challenges, and prospects. Adv Appl
Energy 2023;9:100117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adapen.2022.100117, URL
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266679242200035X.
[15] Hassoun Mohamad H, et al. Fundamentals of artificial neural networks. MIT
Press; 1995.
[16] Chang Wen-Yeau. The state of charge estimating methods for battery: A review.
ISRN Appl Math 2013;2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/953792.
[17] Ndeche Kevin, Ogochukwu Ezeonu. Implementation of Coulomb counting
method for estimating the state of charge of lithium-ion battery. Phys Sci Int
J 2021;1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.9734/psij/2021/v25i330244.
[18] Neoh Dickson, Hannan MA, Hossain Lipu MS, Ker Pin Jern. State of charge
estimation for lithium-ion batteries using model-based and data-driven methods:
A review. IEEE Access 2019;PP:1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.
2942213.
[19] Xiong Rui, Cao Jiayi, Yu Quanqing, Hongwen he, Sun Fengchun. Critical review
on the battery state of charge estimation methods for electric vehicles. IEEE
Access 2017;PP:1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2780258.
[20] Razavi-Far Roozbeh, Zanjani Maryam, Chakrabarti Shiladitya, Saif Mehrdad.
Data-driven prognostic techniques for estimation of the remaining useful life
of lithium-ion batteries. 2016, p. 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICPHM.2016.
7542870.
[21] Lipu MSH, Mamun AA, Ansari S, Miah MS, Hasan K, Meraj ST, et al.
Battery Management, Key Technologies, Methods, Issues, and Future Trends
of Electric Vehicles: A Pathway toward Achieving Sustainable Development
Goals. 2023, URL https://dro.deakin.edu.au/articles/journal_contribution/
Battery_Management_Key_Technologies_Methods_Issues_and_Future_Trends_of_
Electric_Vehicles_A_Pathway_toward_Achieving_Sustainable_Development_Goals/
22757426.
[22] Tang Xiaopeng, Zou Changfu, Yao Ke, Lu Jingyi, Xia Yongxiao, Gao Furong.
Aging trajectory prediction for lithium-ion batteries via model migration
and Bayesian Monte Carlo method. Appl Energy 2019;254:113591. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113591, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0306261919312656.
[23] Che Yunhong, Zheng Yusheng, Wu Yue, Lin Xianke, Li Jiacheng, Hu Xiaosong,
et al. Battery states monitoring for electric vehicles based on transferred multi-
task learning. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2023;1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TVT.2023.3260466.
[24] Che Yunhong, Deng Zhongwei, Li Penghua, Tang Xiaolin, Khosravinia Kavian,
Lin Xianke, et al. State of health prognostics for series battery packs: A universal
deep learning method. Energy 2022;238:121857. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.energy.2021.121857, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0360544221021058.
[25] Che Yunhong, Zheng Yusheng, Wu Yue, Sui Xin, Bharadwaj Pallavi,
Stroe Daniel-Ioan, et al. Data efficient health prognostic for batteries
based on sequential information-driven probabilistic neural network. Appl
Energy 2022;323:119663. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119663,
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261922009618.
[26] Che Yunhong, Stroe Daniel-Ioan, Hu Xiaosong, Teodorescu Remus. Semi-
supervised self-learning-based lifetime prediction for batteries. IEEE Trans Ind
Inf 2023;19(5):6471–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TII.2022.3206776.
[27] Sazli Murat. A brief review of feed-forward neural networks. Commun Fac Sci
Univ Ankara 2006;50:11–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1501/0003168.
[28] Huang Guang-Bin, Zhu Qin-Yu, Siew Chee-Kheong. Extreme learning ma-
chine: Theory and applications. Neurocomputing 2006;70(1):489–501. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2005.12.126, URL https://www.sciencedirect.
com/science/article/pii/S0925231206000385. Neural Networks.
[29] Pao Yoh-Han, Park Gwang-Hoon, Sobajic Dejan J. Learning and gener-
alization characteristics of the random vector functional-link net. Neuro-
computing 1994;6(2):163–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0925-2312(94)90053-
1, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0925231294900531.
Backpropagation, Part IV.
[30] won You Gae, Park Sangdo, Oh Dukjin. Real-time state-of-health estimation for
electric vehicle batteries: A data-driven approach. Appl Energy 2016;176:92–
103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.05.051, URL https://www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261916306456.
15
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
[31] Kashkooli Ali Ghorbani, Fathiannasab Hamed, Mao Zhiyu, Chen Zhongwei.
Application of artificial intelligence to state-of-charge and state-of-health
estimation of calendar-aged lithium-ion pouch cells. J Electrochem Soc
2019;166(4):A605–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1149/2.0411904jes.
[32] Naha Arunava, Han Seongho, Agarwal Samarth, Guha Arijit, Khandel-
wal Ashish, Tagade Piyush, et al. An incremental voltage difference based
technique for online state of health estimation of li-ion batteries. Sci Rep
2020;10(1):1–11.
[33] Zhang Shuzhi, Zhai Baoyu, Guo Xu, Wang Kaike, Peng Nian, Zhang Xiong-
wen. Synchronous estimation of state of health and remaining useful lifetime
for lithium-ion battery using the incremental capacity and artificial neural
networks. J Energy Storage 2019;26:100951.
[34] Han Xuebing, Feng Xuning, Ouyang Minggao, Lu Languang, Li Jianqiu,
Zheng Yuejiu, et al. A comparative study of charging voltage curve analysis and
state of health estimation of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicle. Automot
Innov 2019;2(4):263–75.
[35] Wu Ji, Zhang Chenbin, Chen Zonghai. An online method for lithium-ion
battery remaining useful life estimation using importance sampling and
neural networks. Appl Energy 2016;173:134–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2016.04.057, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0306261916304846.
[36] Cao Mengda, Zhang Tao, Yu Bin, Liu Yajie. A method for interval prediction
of satellite battery state of health based on sample entropy. IEEE Access
2019;7:141549–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2939593.
[37] Dai Houde, Zhao Guangcai, Lin Mingqiang, Wu Ji, Zheng Gengfeng. A novel
estimation method for the state of health of lithium-ion battery using prior
knowledge-based neural network and Markov chain. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2019;66(10):7706–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2018.2880703.
[38] Zhou Ping, He Zhonglin, Han Tingting, Li Xiangjun, Lai Xin, Yan Liqin, et al.
A rapid classification method of the retired LiCoxNiyMn1- x- yO2 batteries for
electric vehicles. Energy Rep 2020;6:672–83.
[39] Chaoui Hicham, Ibe-Ekeocha Chinemerem C, Gualous Hamid. Aging prediction
and state of charge estimation of a LiFePO4 battery using input time-delayed
neural networks. Electr Power Syst Res 2017;146:189–97.
[40] Rahbari Omid, Mayet Clément, Omar Noshin, Van Mierlo Joeri. Battery
aging prediction using input-time-delayed based on an adaptive neuro-fuzzy
inference system and a group method of data handling techniques. Appl Sci
2018;8(8):1301.
[41] Bonfitto Angelo. A method for the combined estimation of battery state
of charge and state of health based on artificial neural networks. Energies
2020;13(10):2548.
[42] Yang Qingxia, Xu Jun, Li Xiuqing, Xu Dan, Cao Binggang. State-of-health
estimation of lithium-ion battery based on fractional impedance model and
interval capacity. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2020;119:105883.
[43] Andre D, Nuhic A, Soczka-Guth T, Sauer Dirk Uwe. Comparative study of a
structured neural network and an extended Kalman filter for state of health
determination of lithium-ion batteries in hybrid electric vehicles. Eng Appl Artif
Intell 2013;26(3):951–61.
[44] Bai Guangxing, Wang Pingfeng, Hu Chao, Pecht Michael. A generic model-
free approach for lithium-ion battery health management. Appl Energy
2014;135:247–60.
[45] Kim Jonghoon, Lee Seongjun, Cho BH. Complementary cooperation algorithm
based on DEKF combined with pattern recognition for SOC/capacity estimation
and SOH prediction. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2011;27(1):436–51.
[46] Pan Haihong, Lü Zhiqiang, Wang Huimin, Wei Haiyan, Chen Lin. Novel
battery state-of-health online estimation method using multiple health indi-
cators and an extreme learning machine. Energy 2018;160:466–77. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.220, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0360544218312854.
[47] Liu Wei, Xu Yan. Data-driven online health estimation of li-ion batteries
using a novel energy-based health indicator. IEEE Trans Energy Convers
2020;35(3):1715–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2020.2995112.
[48] Zhu Yiduo, Yan Fuwu, Kang Jianqiang, Du Changqing. State of health es-
timation based on OS-ELM for lithium-ion batteries. Int J Electrochem Sci
2017;12:6895–907. http://dx.doi.org/10.20964/2017.07.35.
[49] Ma Yanying, Wu Lifeng, Guan Yong, Peng Zhen. The capacity estimation
and cycle life prediction of lithium-ion batteries using a new broad ex-
treme learning machine approach. J Power Sources 2020;476:228581. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.228581, URL https://www.sciencedirect.
com/science/article/pii/S0378775320308855.
[50] Jia Bowen, Guan Yong, Wu Lifeng. A state of health estimation frame-
work for lithium-ion batteries using transfer components analysis. Energies
2019;12(13). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en12132524, URL https://www.mdpi.
com/1996-1073/12/13/2524.
[51] Li Jianhua, Liu Mingsheng, Wen Hongnian, Xu Aixue. State of charge estimation
of battery in low power states based on chaotic neural network. In: Liu L,
Xiao J, Zhou Y, editors. 2ND International conference on green energy and
sustainable development. AIP conference proceedings, vol. 2122, 2019, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.5116465.
M. Kurucan et al.
[52] Enache Bogdan-Adrian, Diaconescu Eugen. Estimating a battery state of charge
using neural networks. In: 2014 International symposium on fundamentals of
electrical engineering. Univ Politehn Bucharest,Fac Elect Engn,Elect Engn Dept;
Assoc Romanian Elect Elect Engineers; IEEE Romania Sect CAS/CS Chapter;
IEEE Advancing Technol Human; Minist Natl Educ; 2014.
[53] Li Jianhua, Liu Mingsheng. State-of-charge estimation of lithium-ion batteries
using composite multi-dimensional features and a neural network. IET Power
Electron 2019;12(6):1470–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-pel.2018.6144.
[54] Chen Cheng, Xiong Rui, Yang Ruixin, Shen Weixiang, Sun Fengchun. State-
of-charge estimation of lithium-ion battery using an improved neural network
model and extended Kalman filter. J Clean Prod 2019;234:1153–64. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.273, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0959652619322383.
[55] Soylu Emel, Soylu Tuncay, Bayir Raif. Design and implementation of SOC
prediction for a li-ion battery pack in an electric car with an embedded system.
Entropy 2017;19(4):146.
[56] Cheng Bo, Zhou Yanlu, Zhang Jiexin, Wang Junping, Cao Binggang. SOC pre-
diction based on evolutionary network. In: 2009 IEEE International conference
on automation and logistics. IEEE; 2009, p. 880–4.
[57] Li Jianhua, Liu Mingsheng. SOC estimation for lithium batteries based on the
full parallel nonlinear autoregressive neural network with external inputs. J
Renew Sustain Energy 2018;10(6):064101.
[58] Cho Tae-Hyun, Hwang Hye-Rin, Lee Jong-Hyun, Lee In-Soo. Comparison of
intelligent methods of SOC estimation for battery of photovoltaic system. Int J
Adv Comput Sci Appl 2018;9(9):49–56.
[59] Corno Matteo, Pozzato Gabriele. Active adaptive battery aging management for
electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2020;69(1):258–69. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/TVT.2019.2940033.
[60] Liu Kailong, Li Yi, Hu Xiaosong, Lucu Mattin, Widanage Widanalage Dhammika.
Gaussian process regression with automatic relevance determination kernel
for calendar aging prediction of lithium-ion batteries. IEEE Trans Ind Inf
2020;16(6):3767–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TII.2019.2941747.
[61] Ma Jian, Xu Shu, Shang Pengchao, ding Yu, Qin Weili, Cheng Yujie,
et al. Cycle life test optimization for different Li-ion power battery for-
mulations using a hybrid remaining-useful-life prediction method. Appl
Energy 2020;262:114490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114490,
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261920300027.
[62] Lin Chun-Pang, Cabrera Javier, Yang Fangfang, Ling Man-Ho, Tsui Kwok-
Leung, Bae Suk-Joo. Battery state of health modeling and remaining useful
life prediction through time series model. Appl Energy 2020;275:115338. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115338, URL https://www.sciencedirect.
com/science/article/pii/S0306261920308503.
[63] Lipu MS Hossain, Hannan MA, Hussain Aini, Hoque MM, Ker Pin J, Saad MHM,
et al. A review of state of health and remaining useful life estimation methods
for lithium-ion battery in electric vehicles: Challenges and recommendations. J
Clean Prod 2018;205:115–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.065,
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652618327793.
[64] Lui Yu Hui, Li Meng, Downey Austin, Shen Sheng, Nemani Venkat Pavan,
Ye Hui, et al. Physics-based prognostics of implantable-grade lithium-ion battery
for remaining useful life prediction. J Power Sources 2021;485:229327. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2020.229327, URL https://www.sciencedirect.
com/science/article/pii/S0378775320316153.
[65] Bektas Oguz, Jones Jeffrey A, Sankararaman Shankar, Roychoudhury Indranil,
Goebel Kai. A neural network filtering approach for similarity-based remaining
useful life estimation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2019;101(1–4):87–103. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2874-0.
[66] Hong Jichao, Wang Zhenpo, Yao Yongtao. Fault prognosis of battery system
based on accurate voltage abnormity prognosis using long short-term memory
neural networks. Appl Energy 2019;251:113381. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2019.113381, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S0306261919310554.
[67] Sbarufatti Claudio, Corbetta Matteo, Giglio Marco, Cadini Francesco.
Adaptive prognosis of lithium-ion batteries based on the combination
of particle filters and radial basis function neural networks. J Power
Sources 2017;344:128–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.01.105,
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775317301155.
[68] Razavi-Far Roozbeh, Chakrabarti Shiladitya, Saif Mehrdad, Zio Enrico,
Palade Vasile. Extreme learning machine based prognostics of battery life.
Int J Artif Intell Tools 2018;27(08):1850036. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/
S0218213018500367.
[69] Ivakhnenko AG. Polynomial theory of complex systems. IEEE Trans Syst
Man Cybern 1971;SMC-1(4):364–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1971.
4308320.
[70] Khumprom Phattara, Yodo Nita. A data-driven predictive prognostic model
for lithium-ion batteries based on a deep learning algorithm. Energies
2019;12(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en12040660, URL https://www.mdpi.
com/1996-1073/12/4/660.
[71] Park Minjun, Seo Minhwan, Song Youngbin, Kim Sang Woo. Capacity estimation
of li-ion batteries using constant current charging voltage with multilayer per-
ceptron. IEEE Access 2020;8:180762–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.
2020.3028095.
16
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
[72] Kim Jungsoo, Yu Jungwook, Kim Minho, Kim Kwangrae, Han Soohee. Estima-
tion of Li-ion battery state of health based on multilayer perceptron: as an
EV application. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2018;51(28):392–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.ifacol.2018.11.734, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S2405896318334542. 10th IFAC Symposium on Control of Power and
Energy Systems CPES 2018.
[73] Wu Ji, Wang Yujie, Zhang Xu, Chen Zonghai. A novel state of health estimation
method of Li-ion battery using group method of data handling. J Power
Sources 2016;327:457–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.07.065,
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775316309326.
[74] Song Lingjun, Zhang Keyao, Liang Tongyi, Han Xuebing, Zhang Yingjie.
Intelligent state of health estimation for lithium-ion battery pack based on
big data analysis. J Energy Storage 2020;32:101836. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.est.2020.101836, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S2352152X2031673X.
[75] Wei Zixuan, Han Xiaojuan, Li Jiarong. State of health assessment for eche-
lon utilization batteries based on deep neural network learning with error
correction. J Energy Storage 2022;51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2022.
104428.
[76] Lee Jong-Hyun, Kim Hyun-Sil, Lee In-Soo. Deep neural network based SOH
monitoring of battery module. In: Meen TH, editor. Proceedings of the 2019
IEEE eurasia conference on IOT, communication and engineering. Inst Elect &
Elect Engineers; Int Inst Knowledge Innovat & Invent; MDPI; Bur Foreign Trade;
Minist Sci & Technol; 2019, p. 14–6.
[77] Lee Jong-Hyun, Kim Hyun-Sil, Lee In-Soo. State of charge estimation and
state of health diagnostic method using multilayer neural networks. In: 2021
International conference on electronics, information, and communication. 2021,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICEIC51217.2021.9369782.
[78] Shi Yu, Ahmad Shakeel, Tong Qing, Lim Tuti M, Wei Zhongbao, Ji Dongxu,
et al. The optimization of state of charge and state of health estimation for
lithium-ions battery using combined deep learning and Kalman filter methods.
Int J Energy Res 2021;45(7):11206–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.6601.
[79] Hsu Chia-Wei, Xiong Rui, Chen Nan-Yow, Li Ju, Tsou Nien-Ti. Deep neural
network battery life and voltage prediction by using data of one cycle only.
Appl Energy 2022;306(B). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.118134.
[80] Xia Zhiyong, Abu Qahouq Jaber A. Lithium-ion battery ageing behavior pattern
characterization and state-of-health estimation using data-driven method. IEEE
Access 2021;9:98287–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3092743.
[81] Venugopal Prakash, Shankar S Siva, Jebakumar C Phillip, Agarwal Rishab,
Alhelou Hassan Haes, Reka S Sofana, et al. Analysis of optimal machine
learning approach for battery life estimation of Li-ion cell. IEEE Access
2021;9:159616–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3130994.
[82] Khumprom Phattara, Yodo Nita. Data-driven prognostic model of li-ion battery
with deep learning algorithm. In: 2019 Annual reliability and maintainability
symposium. Reliability and maintainability symposium, 2019.
[83] Lin Wei-Jen, Chen Kuo-Ching. Evolution of parameters in the doyle-fuller-
newman model of cycling lithium ion batteries by multi-objective optimization.
Appl Energy 2022;314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118925.
[84] How Dickshon NT, Hannan Mahammad A, Lipu Molla S Hossain, Sa-
hari Khairul SM, Ker Pin Jern, Muttaqi Kashem M. State-of-charge estimation of
li-ion battery in electric vehicles: A deep neural network approach. IEEE Trans
Ind Appl 2020;56(5):5565–74.
[85] Chemali Ephrem, Kollmeyer Phillip J, Preindl Matthias, Emadi Ali. State-of-
charge estimation of li-ion batteries using deep neural networks: A machine
learning approach. J Power Sources 2018;400:242–55.
[86] Zhao Fen, Li Penghua, Li Yinguo, Li Yuanyuan. The li-ion battery state of charge
prediction of electric vehicle using deep neural network. In: 2019 Chinese
control and decision conference. IEEE; 2019, p. 773–7.
[87] Tian Jinpeng, Xiong Rui, Shen Weixiang, Lu Jiahuan. State-of-charge estimation
of LiFePO4 batteries in electric vehicles: A deep-learning enabled approach.
Appl Energy 2021;291:116812.
[88] Hu Chunsheng, Ma Liang, Guo Shanshan, Guo Gangsheng, Han Zhiqiang. Deep
learning enabled state-of-charge estimation of LiFePO4 batteries: A systematic
validation on state-of-the-art charging protocols. Energy 2022;246:123404.
[89] Mu Di, Wang Shuning. Estimation of state of charge of lithium-ion batteries
based on wide and deep neural network model. Math Probl Eng 2021;2021.
[90] Ma L, Hu C, Cheng F. State of charge and state of energy estimation for lithium-
ion batteries based on a long short-term memory neural network. J Energy
Storage 2021;37:102440.
[91] Ee Yen-Jie, Tey Kok-Soon, Lim Kok-Sing, Shrivastava Prashant, Adnan SBRS,
Ahmad Harith. Lithium-ion battery state of charge (SoC) estimation with non-
electrical parameter using uniform fiber bragg grating (FBG). J Energy Storage
2021;40:102704.
[92] Savargaonkar Mayuresh, Chehade Abdallah. An adaptive deep neural network
with transfer learning for state-of-charge estimations of battery cells. In: 2020
IEEE transportation electrification conference & expo. IEEE; 2020, p. 598–602.
[93] Savargaonkar Mayuresh, Chehade Abdallah, Shi Zunya, Hussein Ala A. A cycle-
based recurrent neural network for state-of-charge estimation of li-ion battery
cells. In: 2020 IEEE transportation electrification conference & expo. IEEE;
2020, p. 584–7.
M. Kurucan et al.
[94] Tian Jinpeng, Xiong Rui, Shen Weixiang, Lu Jiahuan, Yang Xiao-Guang. Deep
neural network battery charging curve prediction using 30 points collected in
10 min. Joule 2021;5(6):1521–34.
[95] Messing Marvin, Shoa Tina, Ahmed Ryan, Habibi Saeid. Battery SoC estima-
tion from EIS using neural nets. In: 2020 IEEE transportation electrification
conference & expo. IEEE; 2020, p. 588–93.
[96] Ren Lei, Zhao Li, Hong Sheng, Zhao Shiqiang, Wang Hao, Zhang Lin. Remaining
useful life prediction for lithium-ion battery: A deep learning approach. IEEE
Access 2018;6:50587–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2858856.
[97] Kara Ahmet. A data-driven approach based on deep neural networks for
lithium-ion battery prognostics. Neural Comput Appl 2021;33(20):13525–38.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-05976-x.
[98] Lee Chul-Jun, Kim Bo-Kyong, Kwon Mi-Kyeong, Nam Kanghyun, Kang Seok-
Won. Real-time prediction of capacity fade and remaining useful life of
lithium-ion batteries based on charge/discharge characteristics. Electronics
2021;10(7). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/electronics10070846.
[99] Qiao Jianshu, Liu Xiaofeng, Chen Zehua. Prediction of the remaining useful
life of lithium-ion batteries based on empirical mode decomposition and
deep neural networks. IEEE Access 2020;8:42760–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
ACCESS.2020.2977429.
[100] Ma Jian, Shang Pengchao, Zou Xinyu, Ma Ning, Ding Yu, Su Yuzhuan,
et al. Remaining useful life transfer prediction and cycle life test opti-
mization for different formula Li-ion power batteries using a robust deep
learning method. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2020;53(3):54–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.ifacol.2020.11.064, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S2405896320302226.
[101] Hong Joonki, Lee Dongheon, Jeong Eui-Rim, Yi Yung. Towards the swift
prediction of the remaining useful life of lithium-ion batteries with end-to-
end deep learning. Appl Energy 2020;278:115646. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2020.115646, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S0306261920311429.
[102] Yamashita Rikiya, Nishio Mizuho, Do Richard KG, Togashi Kaori. Convolutional
neural networks: an overview and application in radiology. Insights Imaging
2018;9:611–29.
[103] Shen Sheng, Sadoughi Mohammadkazem, Chen Xiangyi, Hong Mingyi, Hu Chao.
A deep learning method for online capacity estimation of lithium-ion batteries. J
Energy Storage 2019;25:100817. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2019.100817,
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352152X19302233.
[104] Crocioni Giulia, Pau Danilo, Delorme Jean-Michel, Gruosso Giambattista. Li-
ion batteries parameter estimation with tiny neural networks embedded on
intelligent IoT microcontrollers. IEEE Access 2020;8:122135–46. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3007046.
[105] Fan Yaxiang, Xiao Fei, Li Chaoran, Yang Guorun, Tang Xin. A novel deep
learning framework for state of health estimation of lithium-ion battery. J
Energy Storage 2020;32:101741. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2020.101741,
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352152X20315784.
[106] Zhou Danhua, Li Zhanying, Zhu Jiali, Zhang Haichuan, Hou Lin. State of
health monitoring and remaining useful life prediction of lithium-ion batteries
based on temporal convolutional network. IEEE Access 2020;8:53307–20. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2981261.
[107] Li Yihuan, Li Kang, Liu Xuan, Zhang Li. Fast battery capacity esti-
mation using convolutional neural networks. Trans Inst Meas Control
2020;0142331220966425.
[108] Bhattacharyya Himadri Sekhar, Yadav Aviral, Choudhury Amalendu Bikash,
Chanda Chandan Kumar. Convolution neural network-based SOC estimation
of li-ion battery in ev applications. In: 2021 5th international conference on
electrical, electronics, communication, computer technologies and optimization
techniques. IEEE; 2021, p. 587–92.
[109] Song Xiangbao, Yang Fangfang, Wang Dong, Tsui Kwok-Leung. Combined CNN-
LSTM network for state-of-charge estimation of lithium-ion batteries. IEEE
Access 2019;7:88894–902.
[110] Ardeshiri Reza Rouhi, Ma Chengbin. State of charge estimation of lithium-ion
battery using deep convolutional stacked bidirectional LSTM. In: 2021 IEEE
30th international symposium on industrial electronics. IEEE; 2021, p. 01–6.
[111] Bian Chong, Yang Shunkun, Liu Jie, Zio Enrico. Robust state-of-charge estima-
tion of li-ion batteries based on multichannel convolutional and bidirectional
recurrent neural networks. Appl Soft Comput 2022;116:108401.
[112] Hannan Mahammad A, How Dickson NT, Lipu MS Hossain, Ker Pin Jern,
Dong Zhao Yang, Mansur M, Blaabjerg Frede. SOC estimation of li-ion batteries
with learning rate-optimized deep fully convolutional network. IEEE Trans
Power Electron 2020;36(7):7349–53.
[113] Tian Jinpeng, Xiong Rui, Shen Weixiang, Sun Fengchun. Electrode ageing
estimation and open circuit voltage reconstruction for lithium ion batteries.
Energy Storage Mater 2021;37:283–95.
[114] Gong Qingrui, Wang Ping, Cheng Ze, et al. A method for estimating state
of charge of lithium-ion batteries based on deep learning. J Electrochem Soc
2021;168(11):110532.
[115] Bhattacharjee Arnab, Verma Ashu, Mishra Sukumar, Saha Tapan K. Estimating
state of charge for xEV batteries using 1D convolutional neural networks and
transfer learning. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2021;70(4):3123–35.
17
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
[116] Yang Hao, Wang Penglei, An Yabin, Shi Changli, Sun Xianzhong, Wang Kai,
et al. Remaining useful life prediction based on denoising technique and
deep neural network for lithium-ion capacitors. Etransportation 2020;5. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.etran.2020.100078.
[117] Ma Guijun, Zhang Yong, Cheng Cheng, Zhou Beitong, Hu Pengchao, Yuan Ye.
Remaining useful life prediction of lithium-ion batteries based on false nearest
neighbors and a hybrid neural network. Appl Energy 2019;253. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113626.
[118] Toughzaoui Yassine, Toosi Safieh Bamati, Chaoui Hicham, Louahlia Hasna,
Petrone Raffaele, Le Masson Stephane, et al. State of health estimation and
remaining useful life assessment of lithium-ion batteries: A comparative study.
J Energy Storage 2022;51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2022.104520.
[119] Ding Pan, Liu Xiaojuan, Li Huiqin, Huang Zequan, Zhang Ke, Shao Long,
Abedinia Oveis. Useful life prediction based on wavelet packet decomposition
and two-dimensional convolutional neural network for lithium-ion batteries.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2021;148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.
111287.
[120] Li Penghua, Zhang Zijian, Grosu Radu, Deng Zhongwei, Hou Jie, Rong Yujun,
et al. 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 2022;156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111843.
[121] Zraibi Brahim, Okar Chafik, Chaoui Hicham, Mansouri Mohamed. Remaining
useful life assessment for lithium-ion batteries using CNN-LSTM-DNN hybrid
method. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2021;70(5):4252–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1109/TVT.2021.3071622.
[122] Haris Muhammad, Hasan Muhammad Noman, Qin Shiyin. Degradation curve
prediction of lithium-ion batteries based on knee point detection algorithm
and convolutional neural network. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 2022;71. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2022.3181307.
[123] Lee Hyun-Jun, Kim Kyoung-Tak, Park Joung-Hu, Bere Gomanth,
Ochoa Justin Joshua, Kim Taesic. Convolutional neural network-
based false battery data detection and classification for battery energy
storage systems. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2021;36(4):3108–17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2021.3061493.
[124] Kim Kyoung-Tak, Lee Hyun-Jun, Park Joung-Hu, Bere Gomanth, Ochoa Justin J,
Kim Taesic. Artificial intelligence-based hardware fault detection for battery
balancing circuits. In: 2021 IEEE energy conversion congress and exposition.
IEEE energy conversion congress and exposition, IEEE; ST Microelectron; OPAL
RT Technologies; GMW Associates; IEEE Ind Applicat Soc; IEEE Power Elect
Soc; 2021, p. 1387–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ECCE47101.2021.9595404.
[125] Sherstinsky Alex. Fundamentals of Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) and Long
Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network. Physica D 2020;404:132306. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.physd.2019.132306.
[126] Chen Zheng, Xue Qiao, Xiao Renxin, Liu Yonggang, Shen Jiangwei. State
of health estimation for lithium-ion batteries based on fusion of autore-
gressive moving average model and elman neural network. IEEE Access
2019;7:102662–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2930680.
[127] Li Xiaoyu, Wang Zhenpo, Zhang Lei. Co-estimation of capacity and
state-of-charge for lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles. Energy
2019;174:33–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.02.147, URL
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544219303469.
[128] Sánchez Luciano, Anseán David, Otero José, Couso Inés. Assessing the
health of LiFePO4 traction batteries through monotonic echo state networks.
Sensors 2018;18(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s18010009, URL https://www.
mdpi.com/1424-8220/18/1/9.
[129] Liu Datong, Xie Wei, Liao Haitao, Peng Yu. An integrated probabilistic approach
to lithium-ion battery remaining useful life estimation. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas
2015;64:660–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2014.2348613.
[130] Wu Yitao, Xue Qiao, Shen Jiangwei, Lei Zhenzhen, Chen Zheng, Liu Yonggang.
State of health estimation for lithium-ion batteries based on healthy features
and long short-term memory. IEEE Access 2020;8:28533–47. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2972344.
[131] Zhang Chenbin, Zhu Yayun, Dong Guangzhong, Wei Jingwen. Data-driven
lithium-ion battery states estimation using neural networks and particle filter-
ing. Int J Energy Res 2019;43(14):8230–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.4820,
URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/er.4820.
[132] Ungurean Lucian, Micea Mihai V, Cârstoiu Gabriel. Online state of health
prediction method for lithium-ion batteries, based on gated recurrent unit
neural networks. Int J Energy Res 2020;44(8):6767–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1002/er.5413, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/er.5413.
[133] won You Gae, Park Sangdo, Oh Dukjin. Diagnosis of electric vehicle batteries
using recurrent neural networks. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2017;64:4885–93.
[134] Choi Yohwan, Ryu Seunghyoung, Park Kyungnam, Kim Hongseok. Machine
learning-based lithium-ion battery capacity estimation exploiting multi-channel
charging profiles. IEEE Access 2019;7:75143–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
ACCESS.2019.2920932.
[135] Wang Xiaohong, Fan Wenhui, Li Shixiang, Li Xinjun, Wang Lizhi. SOH es-
timation of lithium-ion battery pack based on integrated state information
from cells. Appl Sci 2020;10(19). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app10196637, URL
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/10/19/6637.
M. Kurucan et al.
[136] Kaur Kirandeep, Garg Akhil, Cui Xujian, Singh Surinder, Panigrahi Bijaya Ketan.
Deep learning networks for capacity estimation for monitoring SOH of li-ion
batteries for electric vehicles. Int J Energy Res 2021;45(2):3113–28. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.6005, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.
1002/er.6005.
[137] Li Penghua, Zhang Zijian, Xiong Qingyu, Ding Baocang, Hou Jie, Luo Dechao,
et al. State-of-health estimation and remaining useful life prediction for
the lithium-ion battery based on a variant long short term memory neu-
ral network. J Power Sources 2020;459:228069. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jpowsour.2020.228069, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S0378775320303724.
[138] Zhang Wei, Li Xiang, Li Xu. Deep learning-based prognostic approach
for lithium-ion batteries with adaptive time-series prediction and on-
line validation. Measurements 2020;164:108052. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
measurement.2020.108052.
[139] Venugopal Prakash, Vigneswaran T. State-of-health estimation of li-ion batteries
in electric vehicle using IndRNN under variable load condition. Energies
2019;12(22). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en12224338, URL https://www.mdpi.
com/1996-1073/12/22/4338.
[140] Liu Van-Tsai, Sun Yi-Kai, Lu Hong-Yi, Wang Sun-Kai. State of charge esti-
mation for lithium-ion battery using recurrent neural network. In: 2018 IEEE
international conference on advanced manufacturing. IEEE; 2018, p. 376–9.
[141] Yang Fangfang, Li Weihua, Li Chuan, Miao Qiang. State-of-charge estimation
of lithium-ion batteries based on gated recurrent neural network. Energy
2019;175:66–75.
[142] Li Chaoran, Xiao Fei, Fan Yaxiang. An approach to state of charge estimation of
lithium-ion batteries based on recurrent neural networks with gated recurrent
unit. Energies 2019;12(9):1592.
[143] Chen Junxiong, Feng Xiong, Jiang Lin, Zhu Qiao. State of charge estimation
of lithium-ion battery using denoising autoencoder and gated recurrent unit
recurrent neural network. Energy 2021;227:120451.
[144] Duan Wenxian, Song Chuanxue, Peng Silun, Xiao Feng, Shao Yulong,
Song Shixin. An improved gated recurrent unit network model for
state-of-charge estimation of lithium-ion battery. Energies 2020;13(23):6366.
[145] Hannan MA, How Dickson NT, Mansor M, Lipu MS Hossain, Ker Pin Jern,
Muttaqi Kashem M. State-of-charge estimation of Li-ion battery at variable
ambient temperature with gated recurrent unit network. In: 2020 IEEE industry
applications society annual meeting. IEEE; 2020, p. 1–8.
[146] Zhang Zhaowei, Dong Zhekang, Lin Huipin, He Zhiwei, Wang Minghao,
He Yufei, et al. An improved bidirectional gated recurrent unit method for
accurate state-of-charge estimation. IEEE Access 2021;9:11252–63.
[147] Xiao Bin, Liu Yonggui, Xiao Bing. Accurate state-of-charge estimation approach
for lithium-ion batteries by gated recurrent unit with ensemble optimizer. IEEE
Access 2019;7:54192–202.
[148] Li Shuqing, Ju Chuankun, Li Jianliang, Fang Ri, Tao Zhifei, Li Bo, et al. State-
of-charge estimation of lithium-ion batteries in the battery degradation process
based on recurrent neural network. Energies 2021;14(2):306.
[149] Wassiliadis Nikolaos, Herrmann Thomas, Wildfeuer Leo, Reiter Christoph,
Lienkamp Markus. Comparative study of state-of-charge estimation with recur-
rent neural networks. In: 2019 IEEE transportation electrification conference
and expo. IEEE; 2019, p. 1–6.
[150] Li Chaoran, Xiao Fei, Fan Yaxiang, Yang Guorun, Zhang Weiwei. A recurrent
neural network with long short-term memory for state of charge estimation
of lithium-ion batteries. In: 2019 IEEE 8th joint international information
technology and artificial intelligence conference. IEEE; 2019, p. 1712–6.
[151] Bockrath Steffen, Rosskopf Andreas, Koffel Stéphane, Waldhör Stefan, Srivas-
tava Kushal, Lorentz Vincent RH. State of charge estimation using recurrent
neural networks with long short-term memory for lithium-ion batteries. In:
IECON 2019-45th annual conference of the IEEE industrial electronics society,
vol. 1. IEEE; 2019, p. 2507–11.
[152] Javid Gelareh, Ould Abdeslam Djaffar, Basset Michel. Adaptive online state
of charge estimation of EVs lithium-ion batteries with deep recurrent neural
networks. Energies 2021;14(3):758.
[153] Geng Pan, Xu Xiaoyan, Tarasiuk Tomasz. State of charge estimation method
for lithium-ion batteries in all-electric ships based on LSTM neural network.
Pol Marit Res 2020;100–8.
[154] Lai Ching-Ming, Kuo Ting-Jung. Available capacity computation model based
on long short-term memory recurrent neural network for gelled-electrolyte
batteries in golf carts. IEEE Access 2021;10:54433–44.
[155] Wang Zhihuo, Fotouhi Abbas, Auger Daniel J. State of charge estimation in
lithium-sulfur cells using lstm recurrent neural networks. In: 2020 European
control conference. IEEE; 2020, p. 1079–85.
[156] Liu Yu, Shu Xing, Yu Hanzhengnan, Shen Jiangwei, Zhang Yuanjian, Liu Yong-
gang, et al. State of charge prediction framework for lithium-ion batteries
incorporating long short-term memory network and transfer learning. J Energy
Storage 2021;37:102494.
18
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 192 (2024) 114262
[157] Abbas Ghulam, Nawaz Menaa, Kamran Farrukh. Performance comparison of
NARX & RNN-LSTM neural networks for LiFePO4 battery state of charge
estimation. In: 2019 16th international bhurban conference on applied sciences
and technology. IEEE; 2019, p. 463–8.
[158] Wei Meng, Ye Min, Li Jia Bo, Wang Qiao, Xu Xinxin. State of charge estimation
of lithium-ion batteries using LSTM and NARX neural networks. IEEE Access
2020;8:189236–45.
[159] Chemali Ephrem, Kollmeyer Phillip J, Preindl Matthias, Ahmed Ryan,
Emadi Ali. Long short-term memory networks for accurate state-of-charge
estimation of Li-ion batteries. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2017;65(8):6730–9.
[160] Lipu MS Hossain, Hussain Aini, Saad MHM, Ayob A, Hannan MA. Improved
recurrent NARX neural network model for state of charge estimation of lithium-
ion battery using pso algorithm. In: 2018 IEEE symposium on computer
applications & industrial electronics. IEEE; 2018, p. 354–9.
[161] Chen Lin, Wang Zhengzheng, Lü Zhiqiang, Li Junzi, Ji Bing, Wei Haiyan,
et al. A novel state-of-charge estimation method of lithium-ion batteries
combining the grey model and genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Power Electron
2017;33(10):8797–807.
[162] Moura Jonathan JP, Albuquerque Kaique RA, Medeiros Rafael P, Vil-
lanueva Juan MM, Tavares Euler CM, Catunda Sebastian YC. State of charge
estimation for li-ion batteries based on recurrent NARX neural network
with temperature effect. In: 2019 IEEE international instrumentation and
measurement technology conference. IEEE; 2019, p. 1–6.
[163] Lipu Molla S Hossain, Hannan Mahammad A, Hussain Aini, Saad Mohamad HM,
Ayob Afida, Blaabjerg Frede. State of charge estimation for lithium-ion battery
using recurrent NARX neural network model based lighting search algorithm.
IEEE Access 2018;6:28150–61.
[164] Chmielewski Adrian, Możaryn Jakub, Piórkowski Piotr, Bogdziński Krzysztof.
Battery voltage estimation using NARX recurrent neural network model. In:
Conference on automation. Springer; 2019, p. 218–31.
[165] Feng Xiong, Chen Junxiong, Zhang Zhongwei, Miao Shuwen, Zhu Qiao. State-
of-charge estimation of lithium-ion battery based on clockwork recurrent neural
network. Energy 2021;236:121360.
[166] Wang Qiao, Ye Min, Wei Meng, Lian Gaoqi, Wu Chenguang. Co-estimation of
state of charge and capacity for lithium-ion battery based on recurrent neural
network and support vector machine. Energy Rep 2021;7:7323–32.
[167] Xi Zhimin, Wang Rui, Fu Yuhong, Mi Chris. Accurate and reliable state
of charge estimation of lithium ion batteries using time-delayed recurrent
neural networks through the identification of overexcited neurons. Appl Energy
2022;305:117962.
[168] Capizzi Giacomo, Bonanno Francesco, Tina Giuseppe M. Recurrent neural
network-based modeling and simulation of lead-acid batteries charge–discharge.
IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2011;26(2):435–43.
[169] Lu Jide, Andrian Jean. Using pixel array method to optimize battery remaining
useful life model. In: 2018 IEEE vehicle power and propulsion conference. IEEE;
2018, p. 1–4.
[170] Cheng Gong, Wang Xinzhi, He Yurong. Remaining useful life and state of health
prediction for lithium batteries based on empirical mode decomposition and a
long and short memory neural network. Energy 2021;232:121022.
[171] Thakkar Unnati, Chaoui Hicham. Remaining useful life prediction of an aircraft
turbofan engine using deep layer recurrent neural networks. In: Actuators, vol.
1, no. 3. MDPI; 2022, p. 67.
[172] Catelani Marcantonio, Ciani Lorenzo, Fantacci Romano, Patrizi Gabriele,
Picano Benedetta. Remaining useful life estimation for prognostics of lithium-
ion batteries based on recurrent neural network. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas
2021;70:1–11.
[173] Lan Guoxing, Li Qing, Cheng Nong. Remaining useful life estimation of turbofan
engine using lstm neural networks. In: 2018 IEEE CSAA guidance, navigation
and control conference. IEEE; 2018, p. 1–5.
[174] Ardeshiri Reza Rouhi, Balagopal Bharat, Alsabbagh Amro, Ma Chengbin,
Chow Mo-Yuen. Machine learning approaches in battery management systems:
State of the art: Remaining useful life and fault detection. In: 2020 2nd IEEE
international conference on industrial electronics for sustainable energy systems,
vol. 1. 2020, p. 61–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/IESES45645.2020.9210642.
[175] dos Reis Gonçalo, Strange Calum, Yadav Mohit, Li Shawn. Lithium-ion battery
data and where to find it. Energy AI 2021;5:100081. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.egyai.2021.100081, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S2666546821000355.
[176] Pecht M. Battery data set. In: Calce. CALCE battery research group; 2017.
[177] Birkl Christoph. Diagnosis and prognosis of degradation in lithium-ion batteries
[Ph.D. thesis], University of Oxford; 2017.
[178] Severson Kristen, Attia Peter, Jin Norman, Perkins Nicholas, Jiang Benben,
Yang Zi, et al. Data-driven prediction of battery cycle life before capac-
ity degradation. Nature Energy 2019;4:1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41560-
019-0356-8.
[179] Xiaopeng Tang, Liu Kailong, Li Kang, Widanage Widanalage, Kendrick Emma,
Gao Furong. Recovering large-scale battery aging dataset with machine
learning. Patterns 2021;2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100302.