I'll literally repeat myself, since I think the point was abundantly clear:
>> That only makes sense if there's strong correlation between the first 50% of a charge and the second 50% of a charge, but NOT an equally strong correlation between the previous charge cycle and the current charge cycle.
But "That", I mean using optimistic estimates at the beginning of a charge cycle but a model based on historical driving about half way through a charge cycle.
There's no reason, prime facie, that future discharge rate should be better-correlated intra-charge than inter-charge, especially for recent charges, and especially if you have lots of historical charge/discharge cycle data for both the machine, the geographic area, and the individual driver.
The question is not "why not be perfect". The question is "why not do inter-charge forecasting the same way you do intra-charge forecasting".
Yes the sensors on the car are now time machines that can figure out what the cars future conditions are going to be.
Why would you want your previous driving habits to affect the base level estimation? Your driving today could be vastly different, and then you would be here complaining about how wrong it was and the range anxiety you got when the car vastly underestimated your range because it assumed you were in 40 mph traffic when today you were late and speeding 80 mpg down the highway.
>Why would you want your previous driving habits to affect the base level estimation?
Because I could still just look at how much charge I had, the same way I look at how much gas I have left in the tank of my car. My old Mazda 2 gives estimated miles left in the tank based on a dead simple math calculation of average mpg for the previous X number of miles driven with only two inputs; gas consumption rate and miles driven. No time machine needed because it is an estimate and I am an adult with a functioning brain. I already know how big my gas tank is. I already know what my "EPA" mileage is. Telling me those things is not giving me an estimate, its just reminding me of what's printed in the owners manual. It is pathetic that my old cheap car gives me an actual estimate using actual data from my actual car and Tesla doesn't...until its under 50% and then suddenly its ok.
Funny, my ICE car doesn't have to look into the future to know that I've been driving like a grandma for the past 100 miles and I have four gallons of gas left so I can probably go another hundred miles at my driving style.
Which is how it calculates it's range, and also how my 2004 toyota calculated range. The maximum range figures consistently lowered over the course of time I owned it as the engine got old and less efficient! It went from consistently having a max range of 420ish miles to consistently having a max range of 380 miles over twenty years!
Funny that old stuffy mid 2000s toyota could manage that on a car that cost $25k, but legendary tech luxury car maker Tesla can't
Navigation data may include altitude changes. Weather data along the route gives you temperature. The driver’s history tells you how likely they are to speed versus drive the speed limit.
