MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000053875 · doi:10.1109/pesgm.2014.6939340

Explicit formulations for constant-parameter voltage-behind-reactance interfacing of synchronous machine models

2014· article· en· W2000053875 on OpenAlexaff
Mehrdad Chapariha, Francis Therrien, Juri Jatskevich, H.W. Dommel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterfacingReactanceComputer scienceTransient (computer programming)Interface (matter)MATLABConstant (computer programming)Control theory (sociology)Simple (philosophy)VoltagePower (physics)Control engineeringElectric power systemElectronic engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringComputer hardwareParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary form only given. Interfacing of ac electrical machine models in power system transient simulation programs is receiving increasing attention in the literature, wherein models based on the voltage-behind-reactance (VBR) formulation have been recently proposed to achieve a direct interface with external power networks. However, synchronous machine dynamic saliency introduces time-dependent interfacing inductances in traditional VBR models, which increases the computational cost of the overall system solution. This paper presents several new explicit continuous- and discrete-time approximation techniques to eliminate dynamic saliency in VBR models and achieve a simple interfacing circuit with decoupled constant-parameter RL branches. The new models are implemented in MATLAB/Simulink and the PLECS toolbox, and are shown to offer simple and easy-to-use interface, high accuracy, and numerical efficiency as compared to the existing models. The proposed interfacing circuit and approximation techniques can find wide application in common state-variable-based transient simulation programs.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207