With the rapid development of the electric vehicle (EV) industry, the importance of battery management systems (BMS) in ensuring the safety, reliability, and efficiency of batteries has significantly increased. This study explores the technological development trends and market layout of EV BMS through patent analysis, focusing on patent quantity, geographic distribution, and technical classification. By integrating the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and entropy weight method, a patent value evaluation model was constructed to identify key patents and assess their quality across four dimensions: technical, market, economic, and legal. The results reveal that BMS patents are primarily concentrated in China, the United States, and South Korea, with major contributors including LG Energy Solution, BYD, and Hyundai. While BMS patent applications grew rapidly from 2015 to 2020, the pace has slowed since 2021, indicating a possible shift in market focus. The analysis identified 14 high-quality patents, mainly focused on battery safety and compactness, while fewer patents addressed battery lifespan extension and anti-interference capabilities. The study suggests that although significant progress has been made in BMS technology, there is still substantial room for innovation, particularly in areas such as battery lifespan management, charging efficiency, and intelligent energy scheduling. This research provides valuable insights for future technological innovation and market decision-making in the EV BMS sector.

The trolley problem has long posed a complex ethical challenge in the field of autonomous driving technology. By constructing a general trolley problem model, this paper demonstrates that the default loss assumption is a necessary condition for the occurrence of trolley problems. However, an analysis of the differences between classical trolley problems and autonomous driving scenarios reveals that this assumption is not supported in the design of autonomous driving systems. This paper first provides a detailed definition of the trolley problem within the context of autonomous driving technology and establishes a general trolley problem model to better analyze the issue. We then discuss two solutions: the first solution acknowledges the existence of the trolley problem in the context of autonomous driving technology but does not recognize the existence of a “most acceptable decision”; the second solution denies that decision-makers are limited to a finite number of decisions, each resulting in a corresponding loss. Based on the second solution, we propose a “sufficient time” solution, illustrating that the interaction between planning and control systems in autonomous driving can avoid ethical dilemmas similar to the trolley problem. Finally, we analyze from a philosophical perspective why the trolley problem does not arise in the context of autonomous driving technology and discuss the ethical responsibilities associated with autonomous driving. The design goal of autonomous driving technology should be a zero-accident rate, which contradicts the unavoidable loss assumption in the traditional trolley problem. Therefore, the existence of the trolley problem is unrealistic in the practical application of autonomous driving technology.

One of the key expectations of AI product manufacturers for their products is the ability to scale to larger markets, especially across legal systems, with fewer prototypes and lower adaptation costs. This paper focuses on the increasingly dynamic legal compliance challenges faced by designers of AI products in achieving this goal. Based on non-monotonic reasoning, we design an automated reasoning tool to help them better understand the legal implications of their designs in a transnational context and, ultimately, adjust the design of AI products more flexibly. This tool supports the quantitative representation of the strength of legal significance to help designers better understand the reasons for their decisions from their own perspective. To illustrate this functionality, a case study on traffic regulations across the UK, France, and Japan demonstrates the system’s ability to resolve legal conflicts—such as driving-side mandates and speed radar detector prohibitions—through quantitative evaluation.

Analytic philosophy has been developing in China for over a century, and philosophers shaped by the analytic tradition have grown into an important philosophical community in China. The views of contemporary analytic philosophers in China on central philosophical issues and their similarities and differences with analytic philosophers in English-speaking countries have not been systematically investigated. Bourget and Chalmers have conducted two large-scale online questionnaire surveys on analytic philosophers in English-speaking countries. Inspired by their studies, a survey on analytic philosophers in China was performed. It is found that philosophers in China had no agreement on most issues. According to the comparative analysis with the results of Bourget and Chalmers’ second survey, there were significant differences in views as well as thinking styles between analytic philosophers in China and English-speaking countries. And these differences may be partially explained by cultural factors and academic environments.