A comparison of weighted DRT using weights derived from statistical analysis (Figure ) with weights generated via GPR (Figure ) using the same data produces very similar results. This does not only apply to the DRT itself, but also to the residuals. In both cases, no systematic features are apparent any more. Since DRT works similarly well with both weight determination methods, the GPR method is preferred, as it works on single measurements rather than larger sets of measurements. This approach was capable of automatically generating an estimated noise vector suitable for a stable DRT from a single EIS measurement of a battery. The low-frequency mode of the DRT varies considerably between measurements, consistent with the expected behavior of a Warburg element. Therefore this frequency range is excluded from the ZARC fits below, and no quantitative interpretation is attempted based on the DRT data.