IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v578y2020i7795d10.1038_s41586-020-1994-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Closed-loop optimization of fast-charging protocols for batteries with machine learning

Author

Listed:
  • Peter M. Attia

    (Stanford University)

  • Aditya Grover

    (Stanford University)

  • Norman Jin

    (Stanford University)

  • Kristen A. Severson

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

  • Todor M. Markov

    (Stanford University)

  • Yang-Hung Liao

    (Stanford University)

  • Michael H. Chen

    (Stanford University)

  • Bryan Cheong

    (Stanford University
    Stanford University)

  • Nicholas Perkins

    (Stanford University)

  • Zi Yang

    (Stanford University)

  • Patrick K. Herring

    (Toyota Research Institute)

  • Muratahan Aykol

    (Toyota Research Institute)

  • Stephen J. Harris

    (Stanford University
    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory)

  • Richard D. Braatz

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

  • Stefano Ermon

    (Stanford University)

  • William C. Chueh

    (Stanford University
    SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory)

Abstract

Simultaneously optimizing many design parameters in time-consuming experiments causes bottlenecks in a broad range of scientific and engineering disciplines1,2. One such example is process and control optimization for lithium-ion batteries during materials selection, cell manufacturing and operation. A typical objective is to maximize battery lifetime; however, conducting even a single experiment to evaluate lifetime can take months to years3–5. Furthermore, both large parameter spaces and high sampling variability3,6,7 necessitate a large number of experiments. Hence, the key challenge is to reduce both the number and the duration of the experiments required. Here we develop and demonstrate a machine learning methodology to efficiently optimize a parameter space specifying the current and voltage profiles of six-step, ten-minute fast-charging protocols for maximizing battery cycle life, which can alleviate range anxiety for electric-vehicle users8,9. We combine two key elements to reduce the optimization cost: an early-prediction model5, which reduces the time per experiment by predicting the final cycle life using data from the first few cycles, and a Bayesian optimization algorithm10,11, which reduces the number of experiments by balancing exploration and exploitation to efficiently probe the parameter space of charging protocols. Using this methodology, we rapidly identify high-cycle-life charging protocols among 224 candidates in 16 days (compared with over 500 days using exhaustive search without early prediction), and subsequently validate the accuracy and efficiency of our optimization approach. Our closed-loop methodology automatically incorporates feedback from past experiments to inform future decisions and can be generalized to other applications in battery design and, more broadly, other scientific domains that involve time-intensive experiments and multi-dimensional design spaces.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter M. Attia & Aditya Grover & Norman Jin & Kristen A. Severson & Todor M. Markov & Yang-Hung Liao & Michael H. Chen & Bryan Cheong & Nicholas Perkins & Zi Yang & Patrick K. Herring & Muratahan Ayko, 2020. "Closed-loop optimization of fast-charging protocols for batteries with machine learning," Nature, Nature, vol. 578(7795), pages 397-402, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:578:y:2020:i:7795:d:10.1038_s41586-020-1994-5
    DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-1994-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-1994-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41586-020-1994-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:578:y:2020:i:7795:d:10.1038_s41586-020-1994-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.