MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166300105 · doi:10.1109/tie.2007.891663

A Comparative Study of Zero-Current-Transition PWM Converters

2007· article· en· W2166300105 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

VenueIEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced DC-DC Converters
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvertersPulse-width modulationElectronic engineeringElectronic circuitBoost converterPower (physics)Current (fluid)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)PhysicsEngineeringVoltageElectrical engineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zero-current-transition pulsewidth-modulation (ZCT-PWM) boost converters are conventional boost converters that use an active auxiliary circuit to turn off the main power switch with zero-current switching; the operation and properties of these converters are the focus of this paper. In this paper, the general operating principles behind all ZCT-PWM converters are reviewed, and the operation and properties of specific converters are discussed. The strengths and weaknesses of each converter are stated, and a new and improved ZCT-PWM boost converter is proposed and discussed. Experimental results obtained from an experimental ZCT-PWM boost converter prototype implemented with several of the auxiliary circuits discussed in this paper are presented, and the results confirm the superior performance of the proposed converter

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.244 · 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