Findeisen, Rolf | Engineering Papers

DOE OSTI2025

Safe Physics-Informed Machine Learning for Dynamics and Control

This tutorial paper focuses on safe physics-informed machine learning in the context of dynamics and control, providing a comprehensive overview of how to integrate physical models and safety guarantees. As machine learning techniques enhance the modeling and control of complex dynamical systems, ensuring safety and stability remains a critical challenge, especially in safety-critical applications like autonomous vehicles, robotics, medical decision-making, and energy systems. We explore various approaches for embedding and ensuring safety constraints, including structural priors, Lyapunov and Control Barrier Functions, predictive control, projections, and robust optimization techniques. Additionally, we delve into methods for uncertainty quantification and safety verification, including reachability analysis and neural network verification tools, which help validate that control policies remain within safe operating bounds even in uncertain environments. The paper includes illustrative examples demonstrating the implementation aspects of safe learning frameworks that combine the strengths of data-driven approaches with the rigor of physical principles, offering a path toward the safe control of complex dynamical systems.

Drgona, Jan↗

DOE OSTI2025

Physical Interpretation of Early Battery Life Prediction Models

Early battery life prediction models are most useful for R&D if they help us understand the early changes in battery electrochemical response that correspond with long-term degradation and failure. Linear regression models such as Fused lasso and Partial Least Squares can fit coefficients directly to high-dimensional electrochemical data like capacity-voltage and ΔV–state-of-charge, i.e., Q(V) and ΔV(SOC) curves, learning coefficients that can be physically interpreted. We leverage the ISU-ILCC battery aging data set to learn high-dimensional coefficients for early battery life prediction from traditional slow-rate capacity check data, demonstrating learning on Q(V), d Q· d V −1 , and ΔV(SOC) curves. A thorough study on the dependence of coefficient values on train/test size and data preprocessing methods is made, demonstrating the reliability of high-dimensional regression approaches unless very small amounts of data are used for model training. For this data set, coefficients from Q(V) and d Q· d V −1 models highlight changes in electrode stoichiometry due to lithium loss, while ΔV(SOC) coefficients highlight changes in positive electrode diffusivity due to particle cracking as well as electrode stoichiometry shifts. By directly interpreting the coefficients of a regression model, we make physical insights into battery degradation mechanisms without requiring the assumptions of traditional battery data analysis methods.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗