MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051706606 · doi:10.1109/apex.2007.357577

Balancing Hall-Effect Signals in Low-Precision Brushless DC Motors

2007· article· en· W2051706606 on OpenAlex

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

VenueConference proceedings/Conference proceedings - IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSensorless Control of Electric Motors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDC motorHall effect sensorTorque rippleHarmonicsNoise (video)Computer scienceRippleTorqueBrushed DC electric motorInverterElectrical engineeringElectronic engineeringControl theory (sociology)AC motorEngineeringElectric motorPhysicsDirect torque controlInduction motorMagnetVoltageControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brushless dc motors with Hall sensors are widely used in various electromechanical applications. These machines have been often considered in the literature, under one common assumption - ideal placement of the sensors, which is often not true, especially for the low-precision motors. The misalignment of Hall sensors leads to unbalanced operation of the inverter and motor phases, which in turn results in increased low-frequency harmonics in torque ripple and possible acoustic noise. This paper describes a straightforward technique to mitigate the influence of unbalanced sensors on the performance of the brushless dc motor drive system. The proposed method uses moving-average filtering of the Hall sensor signals to achieve performance characteristics very close to those of a motor with perfectly balanced Hall sensors. A verification study is performed to validate the analysis.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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