Apparent Power, Power Factor, and Current Factor in Single-phase Circuits with Non-negligible Line Impedances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first part of this article reviews the concepts of apparent power and power factor in single-phase circuits with non-negligible line impedances. The study is based on the well-known definition that the apparent power is the maximum load power subject to constant line losses and constant load voltage. In reality, however, all transmission/distribution lines have some finite impedance, and thus, the constant voltage condition cannot be maintained at the load terminals. In this article, the constant load voltage condition is relaxed and allowed to change, as long as it remains within acceptable range of application. This is a scenario that better reflects the realistic situations. Modified expressions for the apparent power and power factor are derived and discussed. The second part of the article presents a new concept called the current factor as the ratio of the minimal current to the actual current while keeping the load power constant. The current factor coincides with the power factor when the line impedances are neglected. The article explains how the current factor can be superior to the power factor when the line impedances are not negligible. The current factor is then extended to non-sinusoidal current factor for a non-linear load and is examined.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".