{"id":661,"date":"2025-03-25T11:50:06","date_gmt":"2025-03-25T03:50:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/?p=661"},"modified":"2025-03-25T11:53:14","modified_gmt":"2025-03-25T03:53:14","slug":"%e3%80%8cep17%c2%b7highlights-of-research-achievements%e3%80%8d-assessing-chinese-user-satisfaction-with-electric-vehicle-battery-performance-from-online-reviews","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/en\/2025\/03\/25\/%e3%80%8cep17%c2%b7highlights-of-research-achievements%e3%80%8d-assessing-chinese-user-satisfaction-with-electric-vehicle-battery-performance-from-online-reviews\/","title":{"rendered":"\u300cEP17\u00b7Highlights of Research Achievements\u300d \u2014 Assessing Chinese User Satisfaction with Electric Vehicle Battery Performance from Online Reviews"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In February 2025, the TRANS research group published its latest study, “Assessing Chinese user satisfaction with electric vehicle battery performance from online reviews<\/strong>” in Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment<\/strong><\/em>, a top-tier journal in the transportation field (Chinese Academy of Sciences, Q1, impact factor: 7.4).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first author of the paper is Lanxin Shi, a Ph.D. student of the TRANS research group. The corresponding authors are Professor Shiqi Ou, with co-authors including Dr. Xin He from Aramco Americas Research Center, Dr. Daniel J. De Castro Gomez from Saudi Aramco, Professor Zhenhong Lin from the School of Future Technology at South China University of Technology, and undergraduate students Yanzi Zhou, Yonglin Wu, and Xiaolu Tan from the TRANS research group.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This research was supported by Saudi Aramco and the Guangdong Provincial Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Economy (Guangzhou).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This study employs data-scraping and analysis of 11,525 Plug-in Electric Vehicle (PEV) user reviews from 2018 to 2024, focusing on users\u2019 battery performance satisfaction with electric range, battery degradation, and charging experience. Using SnowNLP, Multinomial Naive Bayes, and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), along with an explainable machine learning algorithm, the findings identify location and vehicle price as critical factors influencing PEV perceptions. Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) receive consistently more positive feedback than Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) across the Chinese Mainland, though satisfaction for both declines with vehicle age. PEVs with an all-electric range of under 100 km get predominantly negative reviews after over four years of use. To boost PEV adoption and satisfaction, targeted incentives for PHEVs with 150-200 km and BEVs with 550-600 km range in lower-tier cities are recommended. These findings offer valuable insights for manufacturers and policymakers promoting PEV market growth in China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Study workflow and framework<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Key Findings:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

(1) Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) Users Generally Exhibit Higher Satisfaction with Battery Performance Compared to Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) Users<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several factors may contribute to this phenomenon. First, BEV and PHEV differ in battery management strategies. Compared to BEVs, PHEVs, which generally have smaller batteries, may lack similarly advanced battery management systems. Second, the driving behavior of PHEV users plays a role: PHEV owners may prioritize electric driving, leading to frequent deep charge and discharge cycles, which can negatively impact battery health. Additionally, PHEV users may have overly high expectations regarding energy savings, resulting in relatively lower satisfaction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(2) Urban Characteristics and Regional Development Influence New Energy Vehicle User Satisfaction Across Different City Tiers in Mainland China<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Economically developed cities such as Beijing and Shanghai concentrate a large number of user reviews. These cities not only boast advanced charging infrastructure and high Plug-in Electric Vehicle (PEV) adoption rates but also have a highly skilled population actively engaging in online review platforms. In contrast, the PEV market penetration is slower in western and northern China, where charging station density remains lower. Furthermore, differences in regional temperature variations and GDP levels contribute to disparities in user satisfaction between southern and northern regions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Fig Hotspot Distribution of Online Reviews by PEV Users<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Users in third- and fourth-tier cities generally report higher satisfaction with PHEVs compared to those in first-tier cities. Several factors may contribute to this trend:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Better Suitability for Daily Commuting \u2013 Smaller city sizes align well with the all-electric driving range of PHEVs, making them convenient for everyday travel.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Lower Ownership and Operating Costs \u2013 Compared to conventional fuel vehicles, PHEVs offer greater economic advantages in terms of affordability and efficiency.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Reduced Traffic Congestion \u2013 Lower congestion levels enhance battery efficiency and reduce the strain on the vehicle\u2019s system.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Lower User Expectations \u2013 Users in these regions tend to have lower initial expectations, making it easier for PHEVs to meet or even exceed their satisfaction levels.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
    <\/td><\/td><\/tr>
    (a)<\/td>(b)<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Fig Geographic distribution of the (a) Battery Performance Evaluation Index – PHEV and (b) Battery Performance Evaluation Index – BEV<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    (3) Users of More Expensive PEVs Show Higher Satisfaction with Battery Performance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    As the price of PEVs increases, user satisfaction with battery performance rises significantly. PHEV satisfaction increases from 40% (under \u00a5150,000) to 43% (\u00a5150,000\u2013\u00a5300,000) and 49% (above \u00a5300,000). BEV satisfaction increases from 63% (under \u00a5150,000) to 67% (\u00a5150,000\u2013\u00a5300,000) and 71% (above \u00a5300,000). This trend may be attributed to higher-priced PEVs being equipped with more advanced technology, higher-quality battery components, and superior battery management systems, all of which contribute to better battery health and longevity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/td><\/tr>
    (a)<\/td><\/tr>
    <\/td><\/tr>
    (b)<\/td><\/tr>
    <\/td><\/tr>
    (c)<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Fig PEV users’ evaluation by price categories for Battery Performance Score for (a) prices less than 150K CNY, (b) prices between 150K and 300K CNY, and (c) prices over 300K CNY.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    (4) Positive Correlation Between Battery Performance and All-Electric Range in PEVs, with Local Optimal Values<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In the current Chinese market, PHEVs typically have an all-electric range of 50\u2013125 km, while BEVs exhibit a bimodal distribution, with ranges primarily concentrated in 0\u2013300 km and 400\u2013800 km. There is a positive correlation between battery performance and all-electric range, indicating that longer all-electric range is a key factor in enhancing user experience. For PHEVs, user satisfaction remains low (rating below 0.5) when the all-electric range is below 150 km, possibly due to higher user expectations for electric driving capability. When the all-electric range reaches 150\u2013200 km, user ratings achieve a local optimum, suggesting that this range sufficiently meets daily commuting needs. The highest satisfaction for PHEVs occurs in the 250\u2013300 km range (rating exceeding 0.6), approaching the range of entry-level BEVs. For BEVs, user satisfaction peaks at a local maximum in the 550\u2013600 km range, while models with an all-electric range exceeding 800 km receive exceptionally high satisfaction ratings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Fig Distribution of Battery Performance Scores by electric range categories<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Fig Battery Performance Score under the interaction of vehicle age and electric range<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    (5) Battery Satisfaction Declines with Vehicle Age, with a More Pronounced Effect in PHEVs<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    After 4\u20135 years of use, user ratings for PEV batteries generally turn negative, particularly for models with an all-electric range below 100 km. For PHEVs, positive reviews drop from 42% (under 1.5 years) to 43% (1.5\u20133 years) and significantly down to 20% (over 3 years). For BEVs, satisfaction remains relatively stable, with 68% (under 1.5 years), 59% (1.5\u20133 years), and 63% (over 3 years) giving positive ratings. The greater battery capacity and more advanced battery management systems in BEVs contribute to their superior long-term durability compared to PHEVs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/td><\/tr>
    (a)<\/td><\/tr>
    <\/td><\/tr>
    (b)<\/td><\/tr>
    <\/td><\/tr>
    (c)<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Fig PEV users’ evaluation by vehicle age<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    (5) Impact of Vehicle Age on Battery Performance Ratings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    After 4\u20135 years of use, user ratings for PEV batteries generally turn negative, particularly for models with an all-electric range below 100 km. For PHEVs, positive ratings drop from 42% (under 1.5 years) to 43% (1.5\u20133 years) and sharply decline to 20% (over 3 years). For BEVs, satisfaction remains relatively stable, with 68% (under 1.5 years), 59% (1.5\u20133 years), and 63% (over 3 years) giving positive ratings. The greater battery capacity and more advanced battery management systems in BEVs contribute to their superior long-term durability compared to PHEVs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    (6) Tesla Leads in Battery Performance Ratings, but the Gap with Chinese Domestic Brands is Narrowing<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Between 2020 and 2024, Tesla’s battery performance consistently received high user ratings, with an average score exceeding 0.6, underscoring its strong reputation in battery technology and innovation. However, since 2022, the gap between Chinese domestic PEV brands and Tesla has been gradually narrowing. The battery performance ratings of Chinese PEVs have significantly improved since 2015, with a notable surge after 2018, and stabilizing after 2022, with an overall satisfaction score exceeding 0.5. This progress has been driven by government policy support, increased battery R&D investments, and intensified market competition. Although user satisfaction with domestic PEV manufacturers still fluctuates, continued technological advancements are expected to further close the gap.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Fig Domestic and foreign brand (Tesla) PEVs’ Battery Performance Scores by model year<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Original article link<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/authors.elsevier.com\/a\/1kdce4rgZiycDb<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/389089290_Assessing_Chinese_user_satisfaction_with_electric_vehicle_battery_performance_from_online_reviews<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    CITAION:<\/strong> Lanxin Shi, Shiqi (Shawn) Ou, Yanzi Zhou, Yonglin Wu, Xiaolu Tan, Xin He, Daniel J. De Castro Gomez, Zhenhong Lin. Assessing Chinese user satisfaction with electric vehicle battery performance from online reviews. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2025 Volume 141, 104644, ISSN 1361-9209. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.trd.2025.104644.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    In February 2025, the TRANS research group published it […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":574,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[70],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-661","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-publications-en"],"blocksy_meta":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/image.gif","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/661","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=661"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/661\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":664,"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/661\/revisions\/664"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/574"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=661"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=661"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.translab.top\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=661"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}