pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.15351 · v1 · pith:DOQIFMFBnew · submitted 2026-05-14 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Lie Generator Networks Extract EIS-Grade Battery Diagnostics from Pulse Relaxation Data

Shafayeth Jamil , Rehan Kapadia This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 15:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords Lie Generator Networkselectrochemical impedance spectroscopybattery diagnosticspulse relaxationdegradation trackingNyquist spectraArrhenius energieslithium-ion cells
0
0 comments X p. Extension
pith:DOQIFMFB Add to your LaTeX paper What is a Pith Number? 
\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{DOQIFMFB}

Prints a linked pith:DOQIFMFB badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more

The pith

Lie Generator Networks recover the same electrochemical time constants from 60-second pulse relaxation as from full EIS spectra.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that Lie Generator Networks identify a stable generator matrix from ordinary post-pulse voltage relaxation trajectories in lithium-ion batteries. This matrix directly supplies the electrochemical time constants that normally require minutes of dedicated frequency-domain testing. Because battery management systems already capture such relaxation data, the approach converts routine measurements into diagnostic information that resolves specific degradation mechanisms. The method achieves near-perfect rank correlation in tracking aging across hundreds of cells from multiple labs and chemistries, reconstructs complete Nyquist plots at low error, and extracts activation energies without any built-in physics model or cell-specific calibration.

Core claim

Lie Generator Networks learn the generator matrix of the linear time-invariant system that describes post-pulse voltage relaxation, with the matrix structure yielding the same electrochemical time constants that appear in EIS spectra, thereby delivering equivalent diagnostic and prognostic capability from data that existing hardware already records.

What carries the argument

Lie Generator Network that learns a stable generator matrix of the relaxation dynamics whose time constants match those extracted by EIS.

Load-bearing premise

The voltage relaxation after a current pulse can be represented as the output of a linear time-invariant system whose generator matrix directly encodes the same electrochemical time constants that appear in EIS.

What would settle it

Collecting both EIS spectra and pulse-relaxation data on the same cells and finding that LGN-derived time constants produce Nyquist reconstructions with median error well above 2 percent or fail to match known degradation trends would falsify the claimed equivalence.

read the original abstract

Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) is the most informative diagnostic for lithium-ion batteries: its frequency-resolved spectra decompose cell behavior into distinct electrochemical processes, revealing mechanism-specific degradation invisible to voltage and resistance measurements. Yet EIS requires dedicated hardware and minutes-long acquisitions incompatible with field deployment. Here we show that Lie Generator Networks (LGN), a structure-preserving identification framework, extract electrochemical time constants from 60 seconds of post-pulse voltage relaxation, data that battery management systems already collect, that encode the same diagnostic and prognostic information as impedance spectra. LGN learns the generator matrix of the relaxation dynamics with stability guaranteed by architecture, yielding time constants precise enough to resolve electrochemical variation that conventional curve fitting cannot detect from identical data. Across five datasets totaling over 850 cells, four institutions, and multiple chemistries, LGN tracks degradation with near-perfect rank correlation ($|\rho_s| = 0.999$), enables cross-validated reconstruction of full Nyquist spectra at 2% median error across 227 cells, predicts which capacity-matched cells fail first from three early diagnostics, and recovers Arrhenius activation energies with zero physics priors without retraining or cell-specific tuning. LGN requires no training data, no impedance hardware, and no chemistry-specific calibration, converting any existing relaxation pulse into an impedance-grade diagnostic. This enables real-time health monitoring, rapid second-life grading, production-line quality control, and physics-informed prognosis from minutes of measurement.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces Lie Generator Networks (LGN), a structure-preserving system identification method, to extract electrochemical time constants from 60 seconds of post-pulse voltage relaxation data in lithium-ion batteries. It claims these time constants encode the same diagnostic information as full EIS Nyquist spectra, achieving near-perfect rank correlation (|ρ_s| = 0.999) for degradation tracking, 2% median reconstruction error for cross-validated spectra across 227 cells, failure prediction among capacity-matched cells, and recovery of Arrhenius activation energies with no physics priors or retraining. Results are reported across five datasets totaling over 850 cells from multiple institutions and chemistries, with stability guaranteed by architecture and no training data or hardware required.

Significance. If the central correspondence holds, the work would enable EIS-grade diagnostics from routine BMS pulse tests, with clear implications for real-time monitoring, second-life grading, and production QC. Notable strengths include the architecture-enforced stability, large-scale multi-chemistry validation, zero-prior recovery of activation energies, and the absence of any training or cell-specific calibration. These elements support the claim of converting existing relaxation data into impedance-grade information.

major comments (3)
  1. [Introduction and §3 (method)] The central claim that the finite-order LTI generator matrix directly encodes the same mechanism-specific time constants appearing in EIS spectra rests on empirical matching rather than a derivation showing one-to-one correspondence. EIS routinely includes non-rational elements (Warburg impedance, constant-phase elements) arising from distributed diffusion that cannot be exactly realized by any finite pole-residue model; without an explicit argument that the 60 s data suffice to identify the relevant poles independently of basis choice or regularization, the reported 0.999 rank correlation and 2 % spectral error could be an artifact of the rational approximation rather than recovery of the underlying electrochemistry. This assumption is load-bearing for the 'EIS-grade' diagnostic claim.
  2. [Results and validation sections] No error bars, sensitivity analysis, or uniqueness proof is provided for the extracted time constants from the 60 s relaxation data. The architecture guarantees stability, yet it remains unclear whether the learned generator is uniquely determined by the pulse response or influenced by implicit regularization or the choice of Lie-algebra basis; this directly affects the reliability of the prognostic results (failure prediction among capacity-matched cells and Arrhenius recovery).
  3. [§4 (experimental results)] The cross-validated Nyquist reconstruction at 2 % median error is reported for 227 cells, but the manuscript does not detail how the LGN poles are mapped to specific EIS features (e.g., charge-transfer vs. diffusion arcs) or whether the mapping remains consistent when the underlying dynamics deviate from finite-order LTI (as is common in real cells). This mapping is essential to substantiate that the extracted constants are not merely those of a best-fit rational model.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§2] Notation for the generator matrix and its relation to the relaxation output should be clarified with an explicit state-space realization early in the methods section to aid readers unfamiliar with Lie-group formulations.
  2. [Figures 3-5] Figure captions for the Nyquist reconstructions and rank-correlation plots should explicitly state the number of cells, cross-validation folds, and any preprocessing applied to the 60 s traces.
  3. [Discussion] A short discussion of how the method behaves when the relaxation data contain significant nonlinear effects (e.g., large pulses) would strengthen the scope statement.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating planned revisions to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that the finite-order LTI generator matrix directly encodes the same mechanism-specific time constants appearing in EIS spectra rests on empirical matching rather than a derivation showing one-to-one correspondence. EIS routinely includes non-rational elements that cannot be exactly realized by any finite pole-residue model; without an explicit argument that the 60 s data suffice to identify the relevant poles independently of basis choice or regularization.

    Authors: We agree that a rigorous one-to-one derivation is not provided and that distributed diffusion leads to non-rational impedance terms. The LGN approach instead recovers the dominant poles of the relaxation dynamics, which empirically align with EIS-derived time constants for diagnostic purposes as shown by the rank correlation and reconstruction error. We will revise the introduction and §3 to discuss the rational approximation explicitly, reference equivalent-circuit modeling practices that use similar finite-order models, and explain the time-scale separation justifying the 60 s window. revision: partial

  2. Referee: No error bars, sensitivity analysis, or uniqueness proof is provided for the extracted time constants from the 60 s relaxation data. It remains unclear whether the learned generator is uniquely determined by the pulse response or influenced by implicit regularization or the choice of Lie-algebra basis.

    Authors: We acknowledge this gap. The revised manuscript will add bootstrap-derived error bars on the time constants, an ablation study on Lie-algebra basis choice, and sensitivity analysis to regularization. While a general uniqueness proof from finite data is not available in system identification without further assumptions, the architecture enforces stability and the consistency of prognostic results across independent datasets supports practical reliability; we will clarify this limitation and the supporting evidence. revision: yes

  3. Referee: The cross-validated Nyquist reconstruction at 2 % median error is reported for 227 cells, but the manuscript does not detail how the LGN poles are mapped to specific EIS features or whether the mapping remains consistent when the underlying dynamics deviate from finite-order LTI.

    Authors: We will expand §4 with an explicit mapping procedure: eigenvalues of the generator are converted to time constants and assigned to EIS arcs by characteristic frequency ranges (e.g., charge-transfer vs. diffusion). We will add representative examples across datasets and a discussion of the approximation's robustness to mild deviations from LTI, supported by the observed low reconstruction error. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; empirical matching independent of architectural guarantees

full rationale

The paper presents LGN as an identification framework that learns a generator matrix from post-pulse relaxation data, with stability enforced by architecture. The claimed equivalence to EIS time constants and Nyquist spectra is demonstrated via cross-validation on 227 cells and rank correlations across 850+ cells, not by re-deriving the input data or by renaming a fit. No equations reduce the extracted time constants to the relaxation curve by construction, and no self-citation chain is invoked to justify uniqueness or the LTI representation. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the existence of a low-dimensional linear generator matrix that captures all relevant electrochemical processes visible in EIS; this matrix is learned from relaxation data without explicit physics priors or training sets.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Post-pulse voltage relaxation obeys a linear time-invariant dynamical system whose generator matrix encodes the same time constants as frequency-domain impedance spectra.
    Invoked in the description of LGN learning the generator matrix from 60-second relaxation data.
invented entities (1)
  • Lie Generator Network no independent evidence
    purpose: Structure-preserving neural architecture that learns the generator matrix of relaxation dynamics with built-in stability.
    New identification framework introduced to extract EIS-grade information from pulse data.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5788 in / 1365 out tokens · 48382 ms · 2026-05-19T15:36:31.083255+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

18 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Global EV Outlook 2025,

    IEA, “Global EV Outlook 2025,” Paris, 2025. Accessed: Feb. 21, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2025

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    End-of-life or second-life options for retired electric vehicle batteries,

    J. Zhu et al., “End-of-life or second-life options for retired electric vehicle batteries,” Cell Reports Phys. Sci., vol. 2, no. 8, p. 100537, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.xcrp.2021.100537

    work page doi:10.1016/j.xcrp.2021.100537 2021

  3. [3]

    Driving the future: A comprehensive review of automotive battery management system technologies, and future trends,

    P. Rahmani et al., “Driving the future: A comprehensive review of automotive battery management system technologies, and future trends,” J. Power Sources, vol. 629, p. 235827, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2024.235827

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2024.235827 2025

  4. [4]

    Barsoukov and J

    E. Barsoukov and J. R. Macdonald, Eds., Impedance Spectroscopy. Wiley, 2005. doi: 10.1002/0471716243

    work page doi:10.1002/0471716243 2005

  5. [5]

    Analysis of Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy Data Using the Distribution of Relaxation Times: A Bayesian and Hierarchical Bayesian Approach,

    F. Ciucci and C. Chen, “Analysis of Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy Data Using the Distribution of Relaxation Times: A Bayesian and Hierarchical Bayesian Approach,” Electrochim. Acta, vol. 167, pp. 439–454, Jun. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2015.03.123

    work page doi:10.1016/j.electacta.2015.03.123 2015

  6. [6]

    A review on the distribution of relaxation times analysis: A powerful tool for process identification of electrochemical systems,

    C. Plank et al., “A review on the distribution of relaxation times analysis: A powerful tool for process identification of electrochemical systems,” J. Power Sources, vol. 594, p. 233845, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2023.233845

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2023.233845 2024

  7. [7]

    Identifying degradation patterns of lithium ion batteries from impedance spectroscopy using machine learning,

    Y. Zhang, Q. Tang, Y. Zhang, J. Wang, U. Stimming, and A. A. Lee, “Identifying degradation patterns of lithium ion batteries from impedance spectroscopy using machine learning,” Nat. Commun., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 1706, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15235-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-020-15235-7 2020

  8. [8]

    Challenges and needs for system-level electrochemical lithium-ion battery management and diagnostics,

    T. R. Tanim, E. J. Dufek, and S. V. Sazhin, “Challenges and needs for system-level electrochemical lithium-ion battery management and diagnostics,” MRS Bull., vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 420–428, May 2021, doi: 10.1557/s43577-021-00101-8

    work page doi:10.1557/s43577-021-00101-8 2021

  9. [9]

    Data-driven prediction of battery cycle life before capacity degradation

    K. A. Severson et al., “Data-driven prediction of battery cycle life before capacity degradation,” Nat. Energy, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 383–391, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1038/s41560-019-0356-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41560-019-0356-8 2019

  10. [10]

    Aging matrix visualizes complexity of battery aging across hundreds of cycling protocols,

    B. van Vlijmen et al., “Aging matrix visualizes complexity of battery aging across hundreds of cycling protocols,” Energy Environ. Sci., vol. 18, no. 13, pp. 6641–6654, 2025, doi: 10.1039/D4EE05609D

    work page doi:10.1039/d4ee05609d 2025

  11. [11]

    Predicting battery impedance spectra from 10-second pulse tests under 10 Hz sampling rate,

    X. Tang et al., “Predicting battery impedance spectra from 10-second pulse tests under 10 Hz sampling rate,” iScience, vol. 26, no. 6, p. 106821, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.106821

    work page doi:10.1016/j.isci.2023.106821 2023

  12. [12]

    Determination of the Distribution of Relaxation Times by Means of Pulse Evaluation for Offline and Online Diagnosis of Lithium-Ion Batteries,

    E. Goldammer and J. Kowal, “Determination of the Distribution of Relaxation Times by Means of Pulse Evaluation for Offline and Online Diagnosis of Lithium-Ion Batteries,” Batteries, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 36, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.3390/batteries7020036

    work page doi:10.3390/batteries7020036 2021

  13. [13]

    Advancements in parameter estimation techniques for 1RC and 2RC equivalent circuit models of lithium-ion batteries: A comprehensive review,

    M. A. A. Mohamed, T. F. Yu, G. Ramsden, J. Marco, and T. Grandjean, “Advancements in parameter estimation techniques for 1RC and 2RC equivalent circuit models of lithium-ion batteries: A comprehensive review,” J. Energy Storage, vol. 113, p. 115581, Mar. 2025

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Interpretable Physics Extraction from Data for Linear Dynamical Systems using Lie Generator Networks,

    S. Jamil and R. Kapadia, “Interpretable Physics Extraction from Data for Linear Dynamical Systems using Lie Generator Networks,” Mar. 2026, arXiv:2603.27442

    work page arXiv 2026

  15. [15]

    Comprehensive battery aging dataset: capacity and impedance fade measurements of a lithium-ion NMC/C-SiO cell,

    M. Luh and T. Blank, “Comprehensive battery aging dataset: capacity and impedance fade measurements of a lithium-ion NMC/C-SiO cell,” Sci. Data, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 1004, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41597-024-03831-x

    work page doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03831-x 2024

  16. [16]

    Samsung INR21700-50E Capacity and HPPC tests

    A. Popp, U. Spaeth, B. Schmuelling, “Samsung INR21700-50E Capacity and HPPC tests.”, Zenodo, doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10891871”

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.10891871

  17. [17]

    Panasonic 18650PF Li-ion Battery Data,

    P. Kollmeyer, “Panasonic 18650PF Li-ion Battery Data,” Mendeley Data, doi: 10.17632/wykht8y7tg.1

    work page doi:10.17632/wykht8y7tg.1

  18. [18]

    Lithium-ion battery aging dataset based on electric vehicle real-driving profiles,

    G. Pozzato, A. Allam, and S. Onori, “Lithium-ion battery aging dataset based on electric vehicle real-driving profiles,” Data Br., vol. 41, p. 107995, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2022.107995. Acknowledgements This work was partially supported by the Department of Energy Grant No. DE-SC0022248, Office of Naval Research Grant No. N00014-21-1-2634, and Air...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.dib.2022.107995 2022