MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2277864197 · doi:10.1109/iecon.2015.7392744

Maximum power point tracking for thermoelectric generators with high frequency injection

2015· article· en· W2277864197 on OpenAlexafffund
Romina Rodriguez, Matthias Preindl, Ali Emadi, James S. Cotton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDuty cycleSetpointMaximum power point trackingControl theory (sociology)Power (physics)Thermoelectric generatorOperating pointNoise (video)VoltageMaximum power principleController (irrigation)SIGNAL (programming language)Computer scienceEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineeringThermoelectric effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thermoelectric Generators (TEG) can harvest a part of the thermal energy otherwise lost in the exhaust gases of vehicles and are combined with Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) schemes to maximize the power output. This paper proposes a novel TEG MPPT scheme named High Frequency Injection (HFI) method. The method injects a high frequency voltage to the TEG and yields a power with a high frequency component. This component is demodulated and yields a signal proportional to the distance from the optimal operation point. The duty cycle setpoint is adjusted with a proportional-integral (PI) controller. The method is compared to the Perturb & Observe method using a drive cycle. Both show good results in terms of dynamic tracking of the optimal operation point. However, the HFI method is shown to be significantly more robust against sensor noise.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207