MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990949739 · doi:10.1109/pes.2007.386208

Frequency Coupling Matrix of a Voltage Source

2007· article· en· W1990949739 on OpenAlex
Peter W. Lehn, Ryan Kuo‐Lung Lian

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMagnetic Properties and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonicsFrequency domainControl theory (sociology)Modulation (music)Coupling (piping)LinearizationTruncation (statistics)HarmonicComputer scienceHarmonic analysisTime domainElectronic engineeringVoltageTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsPhysicsEngineeringNonlinear systemAcousticsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary form only given. When a power electronic converter is introduced into a linear network, voltage and current harmonics of differing orders become coupled (through the modulation effect of the converter). The inter-harmonic coupling introduced by the modulation effect of a converter may be mathematically represented through a frequency coupling matrix (FCM). Given that the source of the coupling is a modulation process, researchers have, in the past, focused on deriving the FCM in the frequency domain - a process that requires truncation of the harmonic representation of signals. This paper presents an alternate approach to evaluate the FCM based on a time domain derivation. In contrast to frequency domain based methods, it is shown that the time domain approach avoids truncation. Furthermore, the time domain approach does not require system linearization about an operating point; thus the FCM is not limited by small signal assumptions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it