MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162797146 · doi:10.1109/61.905582

Multi converter approach to active power filtering using current source converters

2001· article· en· W2162797146 on OpenAlexaff
Ramadan El Shatshat, Mehrdad Kazerani, M.M.A. Salama

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Quality and Harmonics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectronic engineeringActive filterEngineeringTotal harmonic distortionPower factorComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)VoltageElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Active power filtering is performed by detecting the line current and voltage signals, generating a current equal-but-opposite to the distortion current using a power converter and injecting the compensating current into the power line. In such applications, it is desirable to combine high power and high switching frequency while minimizing the losses. This asks for special converter topologies and control techniques. In this paper, a multi-converter active power-line filter, based on current-source converter (CSC) modules, is proposed. The power rating and switching frequency of each CSC module is equal to those required for the filtering job divided by the number of modules. The control system utilizes two linear adaptive neurons (ADALINE's) to process the signals obtained from the line. The first ADALINE (the current ADALINE) extracts the harmonic components of the distorted line current signal and the second ADALINE (the voltage ADALINE) estimates the fundamental component of the line voltage signal. The outputs of both ADALINE's are used to construct the modulating signals of the filter modules. The proposed modular active filter offers the following advantage: (1) high efficiency due to low conduction and switching losses; (2) high reliability; and (3) high serviceability. The proposed active power-line filter treats the AC system on a per-phase basis, has fast response and adapts to the load variations. Theoretical expectations are verified by digital simulation using EMTDC simulation package.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations20
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicPower Quality and HarmonicsFrench-language works237,207