MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003937844 · doi:10.1109/itec.2012.6243462

A novel approach towards electrical loss minimization in vector controlled induction machine drive for EV/HEV

2012· article· en· W2003937844 on OpenAlexaff
Debarshi Biswas, Kaushik Mukherjee, Narayan C. Kar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduction motorMinificationElectric vehicleRotor (electric)Vector controlComputer scienceElectric motorControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringAutomotive engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceVoltageElectrical engineeringPhysicsControl (management)Power (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The usage of niche copper-rotor induction motor (CRIM) in all the variants of the Tesla Roadster electric vehicle has bolstered the technology of using induction motor for electrified transportation. Understanding the merits, demerits and state of art technology of induction motor and its drive in electric and hybrid electric vehicle (EV/HEV) application, this research manuscript proposes a novel approach towards electrical loss minimization in vector controlled induction machine drives for the aforementioned application. This paper serves as a good theoretical study of the developed loss minimization scheme which would be later incorporated into an overall vector controlled induction machine drive for enhancing the efficiency of the electrified vehicle. Firstly, an insight is provided on the state or art induction motor technology in EV/HEV and the significance of incorporating core loss in an induction machine. Secondly, the conventional two-axis model of an induction motor incorporating core loss has been used to propose a novel loss minimization algorithm. Rotor flux has been used as the control variable for this purpose.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.225
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207