A Review of Reinforcement Learning-Based Powertrain Controllers: Effects of Agent Selection for Mixed-Continuity Control and Reward Formulation

Daniel Egan, Qilun Zhu () and Robert Prucka
Additional contact information
Daniel Egan: Department of Automotive Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA
Qilun Zhu: Department of Automotive Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA
Robert Prucka: Department of Automotive Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA

Energies, 2023, vol. 16, issue 8, 1-31

Abstract: One major cost of improving the automotive fuel economy while simultaneously reducing tailpipe emissions is increased powertrain complexity. This complexity has consequently increased the resources (both time and money) needed to develop such powertrains. Powertrain performance is heavily influenced by the quality of the controller/calibration. Since traditional control development processes are becoming resource-intensive, better alternate methods are worth pursuing. Recently, reinforcement learning (RL), a machine learning technique, has proven capable of creating optimal controllers for complex systems. The model-free nature of RL has the potential to streamline the control development process, possibly reducing the time and money required. This article reviews the impact of choices in two areas on the performance of RL-based powertrain controllers to provide a better awareness of their benefits and consequences. First, we examine how RL algorithm action continuities and control–actuator continuities are matched, via native operation or conversion. Secondly, we discuss the formulation of the reward function. RL is able to optimize control policies defined by a wide spectrum of reward functions, including some functions that are difficult to implement with other techniques. RL action and control–actuator continuity matching affects the ability of the RL-based controller to understand and operate the powertrain while the reward function defines optimal behavior. Finally, opportunities for future RL-based powertrain control development are identified and discussed.

Keywords: reinforcement learning; powertrain control; review (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/8/3450/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/8/3450/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:8:p:3450-:d:1123720

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().