MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SiC High Power Devices – Challenges for Assembly and Thermal Management

2013· article· en· W2044434837 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Friedrichs, Reinhold Bayerer

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon Carbide Semiconductor Technologies
Canadian institutionsInfineon Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilicon carbidePower moduleElectronicsPower (physics)Power electronicsPower semiconductor deviceMaterials scienceSiliconPower densityElectrical engineeringChipEngineering physicsElectronic engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringOptoelectronicsVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon carbide power devices are intended and to enter new application regimes in power electronics, in fact, they are enabling components mainly if higher switching frequencies in power electronics are considered. This trend can be clearly observed since power density can be increased and efforts towards passive components and other mechanical contributions to the system can be reduced. However, this trend imposes new challenges towards the surrounding of the chips in form of the package itself and the whole system around. Stray components like inductances and impedance elements become crucial elements in the whole circuit what results in the fact that a simple exchange of silicon chips by silicon carbide in a given package can be ruled out. In addition different considerations regarding the thermal design especially in power modules arise when SiC chips are considered, triggered by the fact that the cost balance between assembly and chip is shifted compared to silicon based solutions. Thus, different optimization criteria can be used, leading to new design approaches for power modules. The following paper will give a first inside how those boundary conditions can be implemented in innovative solutions using SiC components.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.218
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicSilicon Carbide Semiconductor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207