MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332952192 · doi:10.3166/ejee.15.633-657

Sur la commande tolérante aux défauts des machines asynchrones. Une approche implicite

2012· article· fr· W2332952192 on OpenAlex
Omar Benzineb, Mohamed Tadjine, Mohamed EH Benbouzid, Demba Diallo

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Electrical Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicSensorless Control of Electric Motors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, deux approches de commande tolérante aux défauts (FTC Fault-Tolerant Control) sont étudiées et appliquées à la machine asynchrone.Dans ce contexte, la phase de détection et d'isolation du défaut est décalée par rapport à la phase de reconfiguration de la commande.Celle-ci est réalisée en testant l'état d'un modèle interne qui s'active automatiquement dès l'apparition d'un défaut pour compenser son effet.Cet effet peut être convenablement modélisé par un signal exogène issu d'un système autonome stable appelé exosystème.Une commande additive est ainsi ajoutée à la commande nominale.Issue du modèle interne, cette commande sert à compenser l'effet du défaut.La première approche FTC exploite un modèle interne basé sur l'équation de Sylvester qui entraîne une divergence lorsque la machine est affectée par deux défaut ou plus.La seconde approche, quant à elle, élimine le problème de divergence par un réglage adapté des matrices du système.ABSTRACT.This paper deals with the application of implicit fault-tolerant control techniques to induction motor drives using a Backstepping approach.For that purpose, the induction motor, the disturbances as well as the faults signals have been modeled.A Backstepping control strategy (nominal control) is then synthesized and applied to the induction motor drive for robust control purposes.For fault-tolerant control purposes, an additive control term is generated from an internal state model in order to compensate for the fault effects.Simulations carried-out on a 1.1-kW induction motor drive clearly show the effectiveness of the proposed approaches.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.203 · 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