New Online Loss-Minimization-Based Control of an Induction Motor Drive
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a new loss-model-based controller for an induction motor drive. Among the many loss minimization algorithms (LMA) for an induction motor, a loss-model-based approach has the advantages of fast response and high accuracy. However, the performance of the loss-model controller (LMC) depends on the accuracy of the modeling of the motor drive and losses. In the development of the loss model, there is always a tradeoff between accuracy and complexity. This paper presents a new LMC to determine an optimum flux level for the efficiency optimization of the vector-controlled induction motor drive. An induction motor (IM) model in d-q coordinates is referenced to the rotor magnetizing current. This transformation results in no leakage inductance on the rotor side, thus the decomposition into d-q components in the steady-state motor model can be utilized in deriving the motor loss model. The suggested LMC is simple, but leakage inductances are not omitted. The complete closed loop vector control of the proposed LMC-based IM drive is successfully implemented in real-time using digital signal processor board DS 1104 for a laboratory 1/3 hp motor. The effectiveness of the proposed scheme is demonstrated through simulation and experimental results.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".