## 7 Results and Discussion  
After performing the HiL implementations over the NEDC, real-time results for the inner and outer rotor actuations including the torque and speed dataset were achieved and stored. These results were compared with the corresponding ones acquired from the MiL simulations. The MiL vs. HiL results were plotted to observe the response performances and agreement accuracies for the studied cases. Accordingly, the statistical performance indices were applied over those dataset pairs, and calculated results are provided for long-term verification as follows. For the LPF-based EMS case, Figure 15 illustrates the results of the outer rotor torques. The speed results for the same rotor are plotted in Figure 16. With regard to the inner rotor, the achieved speed and torque results of the same case are presented in Figures 17 and 18, respectively. Figure 19 illustrates the obtained SoC for this case. For the ECMS-based case study, Figure 20 illustrates the results for the outer rotor torques, while the speed results for the same rotor are plotted in Figure 21. Consequently, the speed and torque results of the inner rotor for this case are presented in Figures 22 and 23, respectively. Figure 24 illustrates the obtained SoC for this case. Considering Figures 15-18, Figures 20-23, an investigation of the results through the cycle indicates that the actual torque and speed values obtained from the HiL implementations could closely follow the MiL simulations with well-matched responses for both of the studied EMSs. Along the same line, Figure 25 provides the error histogram for the investigated MiL vs. HiL occurrences where normal distributions around zero error values were favorably observed. The allowable SoC range considered 75% for the minimum and 80% for the maximum thresholds. As can be seen in Figures 19 and 24, both employed strategies could well-maintain the SoC by achieving close enough initial and final values as desired. Regarding the MiL vs. HiL results, some inevitable mismatches related to noises were observed. These inevitable deviations could be expected, as has also been widely observed in the results of similar studies performed previously such as in [8; 25; 26; 62]. This can be interpreted as mismeasurements imposed on the sensors by the laboratory's environmental conditions, machine vibrations, or abrupt accelerations of the induction machines. Regarding the minor noises, they can be more readily recognized where the measured HiL data exhibited values slightly greater/smaller than zero whereas the MiL dataset appropriately followed zero values for the same instants. From what was physically observed in the lab through multiple similar examinations, there were no rotational actuations for those moments in the HiL tests, making them indeed comply with the MiL results. Hence, for the mismeasurements, it can be seen that vibrations coming from a rotating rotor (e.g., outer) would slightly affect the measuring quality of a standstill rotor's sensor (e.g., inner). Furthermore, noises from the lab environment, the testing conditions, and the air quality (e.g., dust, temperature, humidity, etc.) might cause these types of inevitable noises to be recorded. On the other hand, other mismatches were observed where