Public evidence

electrical.battery.aging

Machine-checked verification for calculation version 1.0.2 · tier internally_reviewed

Open calculator API Capability Download JSON CVP Manifest MCP Review policy

CVP status

Empirical linear model — not chemistry-specific calendar/cycle physics

Declared partition coverage: PASS · 4/4 declared partitions (cycle-calendar, cycle-dominant, zero-aging, invalid-domain)
Versions: Calculation 1.0.2 · CVP protocol 1.0.0-proposed · Evidence 2026-10-28.meta-metrics-v2
Verification revision: 2026-10-28.meta-metrics-v2 · 5/5 property · digest a10dac0e12c8

Verification

Legacy regression suite: 14/14 calculation tests · Production surface contract 6/6

Three distinct suites: educational examples on the calculator page, this legacy regression count (14/14 golden + boundary), and the CVP verification suite below. They are not the same number. Property, metamorphic, round-trip, O3, and interface statuses/checks are recorded in the CVP Manifest . SKIP (0/0) means that suite has no published vectors.

This calculator CURRENT · Public schema 1.0.2 matches · Semantic contract ✓ · Production attested · Public/cache ✓ · Origin ✓

CVP verification suite

Protocol checks from the Evidence Manifest. Distinct from the legacy regression suite above. Verification revision 2026-10-28.meta-metrics-v2. Calculation version 1.0.2. CVP 1.0.0-proposed. 3/3 golden · 6/6 CVP boundary · 5/5 invalid · 5/5 property · 2/2 metamorphic · 1/1 cross-interface · 6/6 CVP contract. digest a10dac0e12c8.

Golden (oracle-backed) 3 / 3
CVP boundary 6 / 6
Invalid input 5 / 5
Property 5 / 5
Metamorphic 2 / 2
Cross-interface 1 / 1
CVP contract 6 / 6
Interfaces PASS · UI (SSR) / REST / MCP
Interface claim ui-ssr is query-result HTML, not a live browser session.
Assurance Engineering

release artifacts aligned PASS
schema output required declared PASS
schema valid input executes PASS
engine success output validates schema PASS
schema rejects incomplete input PASS
rest success payload validates schema PASS

Fingerprint sha256:665eac2d2a81eb2215b2a1834aa96235cda400f92218f4362d905e8536c25471

Input schema sha256:530a01f1f22d5c7d69bfd54543b215b1d53999fc6d19102e02a920f8be4f32cb · Output schema sha256:e003d668697e01cb9d53db19b3bff48e2afe6529c26da8af007393f2acc076ff · Build-time SHA-256 digests prove published artifacts agree with each other (release_integrity.scope=workspace). Production attestation GETs canonical URLs twice (public/cached view and origin), including Capability HTML, via npm run attest:production --write (published at /.well-known/calculatorx-production-attestation.json) and fails if the public Capability page advertises a different calculation_version. This is artifact consistency, not an independent immutable release log.

Build & scope

Engine identity and declared limitations.

Tool: battery-aging
Engine: battery-aging
Engine build: 2026-09-10
Evidence core: 2026-09-05T10:20:02.590Z
Rendered: 2026-11-10T05:18:41.894Z
Last reviewed: 2026-09-05

Assumptions

Independent linear cycle + calendar fade
Default k_cycle=0.0002/cycle and k_cal=0.02/year are illustrative
N should match the cycle definition used to calibrate k_cycle; EFC recommended
Not temperature, SOC, DoD, C-rate, or chemistry aware

Limitations

Linear independent cycle+calendar fade — not temperature, SOC, DoD, C-rate, or chemistry aware
Default k_cycle=0.0002/cycle and k_cal=0.02/year are illustrative
fade_frac is unclamped exposure and may exceed 1; SOH and capacity_Ah are clamped at 0

Sources

Standards and references supporting this tool specification. Methods are listed separately — they are algorithms, not bibliographic sources.

Smith, K.; Neubauer, J.; Wood, E.; Jun, M.; Pesaran, A. — Models for Battery Reliability and Lifetime: Applications in Design and Health Management — NREL/PR-5400-58550 · 2013
Supports: Institutional evidence that battery lifetime models combine cycle and calendar degradation, with coefficients that depend on temperature, DOD, voltage/SOC, and other stress factors — not a single universal linear law. CalculatorX uses a deliberately simplified linear approximation, not the NREL life model. (Distinct from NREL/CP-5400-57746, which has a different author list.)
Saldaña, G.; San Martín, J. I.; Zamora, I.; Asensio, F. J.; Oñederra, O.; González-Pérez, M. — Empirical calendar ageing model for electric vehicles and energy storage systems batteries — Calendar fade vs storage time, temperature, and SOC · 2022 · DOI
Supports: Shows calendar ageing is commonly modeled with a power of time (often near t^1/2) and is strongly sensitive to storage temperature and SOC. Documents why CalculatorX linear-in-years k_cal is an illustrative first-order stand-in, not the complete empirical model.
NREL — Battery lifespan modeling (BLAST / life-model overview) — Calendar and cycle aging, operating windows, and stress factors
Supports: Public institutional overview that lifetime prediction must consider temperature, operating windows, charge/discharge rates, storage environment, and cycling patterns. Used here to bound the scope of the linear model — not as a coefficient source.

Verification disclosure

Aggregate outcomes, scope and artifact commitments are public. Complete test inputs, expected values, execution records and oracle infrastructure are retained privately. This summary does not independently reproduce the full verification run.