IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v18y2025i1p209-d1825763.html

Comparative Battery State of Charge (SoC) Estimation Using Shallow and Deep Machine Learning Models

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammed Almubarak

    (Electrical Engineering Department, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia)

  • Md Ismail Hossain

    (Aerospace Engineering Department, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
    Interdisciplinary Research Center for Aviation & Space Exploration (IRC-ASE), King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia)

  • Md Shafiullah

    (Control & Instrumentation Engineering Department, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
    Interdisciplinary Research Center for Sustainable Energy Systems (IRC-SES), King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

This paper evaluates neural-network approaches for lithium-ion battery state-of-charge (SoC) estimation under a unified pipeline, fixed data partitions, and identical preprocessing. We study FNNs trained with Levenberg–Marquardt (LM), Bayesian Regularization (BR), and Scaled Conjugate Gradient (SCG) across three hidden sizes (10, 20, 30) and three topologies: Fitting, Nonlinear Input–Output (Nonlinear I/O), and time-series NAR/NARX. Models are assessed using test MSE and RMSE, correlation (R), generalization gap, convergence indicators (final gradient, damping factor), wall time per epoch, and a relative compute-cost index. On the Fitting task, BR-Fitting-FNN with 20 neurons provides the best accuracy-efficiency balance, while LM-Fitting-FNN with 30 neurons reaches slightly lower error at a higher cost. For Nonlinear I/O, BR-Nonlinear I/O-FNN with 30 neurons achieves the lowest test MSE with clear evidence of effective weight shrinkage; LM-Nonlinear I/O-FNN with 20 neurons is a close alternative. In time-series settings, LM-NAR-FNN with 10 neurons attains the lowest test error and fastest epochs but shows a very negative gap that suggests test-split favorability; BR-NAR-FNN with 30 neurons is more costly yet consistently strong. For NARX, LM-NARX-FNN with 20 neurons yields the best test accuracy and robust convergence. Overall, BR delivers the most reliable accuracy–robustness trade-off as networks widen, LM often achieves the best raw accuracy with careful split validation, and SCG offers the lowest training cost when resources are limited. These results provide practical guidance for selecting SoC estimators to match accuracy targets, computing budgets, and deployment constraints in battery management systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammed Almubarak & Md Ismail Hossain & Md Shafiullah, 2025. "Comparative Battery State of Charge (SoC) Estimation Using Shallow and Deep Machine Learning Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-34, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2025:i:1:p:209-:d:1825763
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/1/209/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/1/209/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2025:i:1:p:209-:d:1825763. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.