MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735375376 · doi:10.1109/jas.2017.7510550

Design of second order sliding mode and sliding mode algorithms: a practical insight to DC-DC buck converter

2017· article· en· W2735375376 on OpenAlexaff
Seyed Mehdi Rakhtala, Monazzahalsadat Yasoubi, S. Hassan HosseinNia

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced DC-DC Converters
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Buck converterSliding mode controlRobustness (evolution)Settling timeParametric statisticsVoltageTransient responseConvertersComputer scienceAlgorithmEngineeringStep responseMathematicsControl engineeringPhysicsNonlinear systemControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a simple and systematic approach to design second order sliding mode controller for buck converters. The second order sliding mode control U+0028 SOSMC U+0029 based on twisting algorithm has been implemented to control buck switch mode converter. The idea behind this strategy is to suppress chattering and maintain robustness and finite time convergence properties of the output voltage error to the equilibrium point under the load variations and parametric uncertainties. In addition, the influence of the twisting algorithm on the performance of closed-loop system is investigated and compared with other algorithms of first order sliding mode control such as adaptive sliding mode control U+0028 ASMC U+0029, nonsingular terminal sliding mode control U+0028 NTSMC U+0029. In comparative evaluation, the transient response of the output voltage with the step change in the load and the start-up response of the output voltage with the step change in the input voltage of buck converter were compared. Experimental results were obtained from a hardware setup constructed in laboratory. Finally, for all of the surveyed control methods, the theoretical considerations, numerical simulations, and experimental measurements from a laboratory prototype are compared for different operating points. It is shown that the proposed twisting method presents an improvement in steady state error and settling time of output voltage during load changes.

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations56
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica SinicaSame topicAdvanced DC-DC ConvertersFrench-language works237,207