ArticleScientific reports2025
Energy consumption prediction of PEVs incorporating traffic flow information.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The problem of range anxiety caused by the discrepancy between the mileage on the dashboard and the driving mileage of pure electric vehicles (PEVs) is one of the most important reasons hindering the development of PEVs. Prediction of energy consumption can effectively reduce the driver's range anxiety and provide support for energy management strategies optimization and energy-efficient route plan. To this end, this paper analyzes the effects of velocity, environment and driving style on energy consumption from the real driving data of PEVs. Based on the analysis, a driving condition prediction method combining with real-time traffic information is proposed, and integrated into the energy consumption prediction model. The real-world trip test results show that the prediction errors of RMSE and MAPE of the proposed method are respectively reduced by 66.37% and 68.10% compared to the conventional method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.