ArticleScientific reports2026
A case study to compare the methods of SOC estimation for lithium-ion batteries using second-order RC circuit model.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate modeling and state-of-charge (SOC) estimation of power batteries are key issues in battery management systems (BMSs). In this study, a 24 Ah lithium-ion power battery is taken as the research object. Based on HPPC test data and constant-current discharge data, a second-order RC equivalent circuit model is established, and the performance of three parameter identification methods (RLS, FFRLS, and VFFRLS) as well as two state estimation algorithms (EKF and UKF) for SOC estimation is systematically compared.The results show that all three algorithms can achieve online parameter identification, among which VFFRLS improves parameter convergence speed and identification accuracy through a dynamically adjusted forgetting factor. For SOC estimation, the EKF maintains terminal voltage errors within 80 mV, and the SOC estimation error converges after approximately 1700 s, with an RMSE of 8.93%. In contrast, the UKF exhibits better performance, with terminal voltage errors mainly within 20 mV (maximum below 50 mV) and SOC estimation errors within 2%. Overall, the VFFRLS–UKF combination demonstrates the best SOC estimation performance under dynamic operating conditions.The results provide a reference for the selection and optimization of online SOC estimation methods in practical BMS applications.
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.