MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113640554 · doi:10.1109/pes.2007.385819

Starting Performance of Saturated Induction Motors

2007· article· en· W2113640554 on OpenAlexaff
Hany M. Jabr, Narayan C. Kar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduction motorSaturation (graph theory)Magnetic flux leakageStatorControl theory (sociology)Leakage (economics)Magnetic fluxLeakage inductanceFlux (metallurgy)Computer scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceInductanceMagnetPhysicsMagnetic fieldMechanical engineeringMathematicsVoltageElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The determination of the induction machine starting performance has traditionally been based on the constant parameter models. Magnetic saturation is unavoidable in most electrical machines and induction motors are no exception. So, an accurate study of their performance should necessarily consider the magnetic saturation effects. In this paper, a simple experimental procedures to determine the machine's main flux saturation characteristic and both stator and rotor leakage flux saturation characteristics are adopted. Three models of saturated induction motors are developed to predict the starting performance of a laboratory wound-rotor induction motor. The results calculated by the proposed models considering and ignoring the main and the leakage flux saturation are compared with the experimental results. The model that considers saturation both in the main and the leakage flux paths produces the most accurate starting responses.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Power Engineering Society General MeetingSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207