MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026542446 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2006.277835

Three-Level Hysteresis Power Control for Pulse-Density-Modulated Series Resonant Converters

2006· article· en· W2026542446 on OpenAlexaff
Demian Pimentel, A. Chériti, Mohammed Slima

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInduction Heating and Inverter Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower factorTotal harmonic distortionPulse-density modulationControl theory (sociology)ConvertersPower (physics)Electronic engineeringPower controlPulse-width modulationController (irrigation)Digital controlRange (aeronautics)EngineeringHysteresisComputer scienceElectrical engineeringDigital signalVoltageDigital signal processingPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern power conversion electronic devices must not pollute the power distribution system and keep a unit power factor. Furthermore, their design must be size and cost effective. It is also expected that all new designs should have an entirely digital control by 2008. We present a series resonant power converter that is driven by a pulse density modulation (PDM) strategy combined with a three level hysteresis controller to adjust output power. This approach is suitable for a fully digital control design. A single digital signal controller is used to monitor and control the whole system. By the means of simulations and experimental results, it has been shown that a traditional sixteen-level PDM approach helps to maintain a near unity power factor and a low total harmonic distortion. However, such converter can only deliver sixteen output power levels. Design parameters are such that a 25 kHz signal is delivered to the load. Research presented here shows that using the proposed hysteresis control the PDM series resonant converter is able to deliver a wide output power range with 1 W resolution (range from 5 to 360 W). The mean output power error is less than 0.3 %. This strategy can be combined to other PDM approaches to obtain a better power factor and an improved THD within desired power range

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInduction Heating and Inverter TechnologyFrench-language works237,207