A Comparative Study of Two PWM Techniques for Single-Phase Shunt Active Power Filters Employing Direct Current Control Strategy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an experimental evaluation of two pulse-width-modulation (PWM) control techniques applied to a single phase shunt active power filter (SPSAPF). A direct current control strategy is implemented using a standard PWM (S-PWM) and a modified PWM (M-PWM) in order to compensate the current harmonics and the reactive power generated by a nonlinear load. The M-PWM control technique is based on two comparisons of a triangular high frequency carrier signal with a low frequency modulating signal (that represents the load current harmonics) and its opposite. The M-PWM shifts the first significant harmonics rays towards twice the switching frequency, and eliminates the spectral rays that are centered on the odd multiples of the switching frequency. Furthermore, it is shown that, for a M-PWM, the losses of the active filter are four times smaller than when using a S-PWM. Simulation and experimental results are presented to verify the better performance of the M-PWM over the S-PWM in terms of the total harmonic distortion (THD) of the source current and the reactive power compensation
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".