MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586654079 · doi:10.1109/tencon.2016.7848105

Current-fed full-bridge and half-bridge topologies with CCL transmitter and LC receiver tanks for wireless inductive power transfer application

2016· article· en· W2586654079 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Power Transfer Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaximum power transfer theoremNetwork topologyTopology (electrical circuits)Wireless power transferTransmitterBridge (graph theory)Electrical engineeringInverterPower (physics)VoltageElectronic engineeringEngineeringWireless sensor networkComputer scienceElectromagnetic coilComputer networkChannel (broadcasting)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a performance comparison between inductive power transfer (IPT) with current fed full bridge and half bridge converter topologies. Generally current-fed IPT topology with parallel LC tank is not suitable for medium power application due to higher voltage stress on inverter switches. In this comparison a modified CCL tank network at transmitter is selected for both the half and full bridge topologies. Mathematical analysis of both converter is presented to perform the comparison. The full bridge topology provides slightly better efficiency compare with half bridge whereas the overall component cost for full bridge is higher due to higher component count. To verify the analysis numerical simulation is performed in PowerSIM 10 for 2.0kW power transfer.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Power Transfer SystemsFrench-language works237,207