Evolution of single-phase power converter topologies underlining power decoupling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single-phase power converters are widely used in electric distribution systems under 10 kilowatts, where the second-order power imbalance between the AC side and DC side is an inherent issue. The pulsating power is decoupled from the desired constant DC power, through an auxiliary circuit using energy storage components. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the evolution of single-phase converter topologies underlining power decoupling techniques. Passive power decoupling techniques were commonly used in single-phase power converters before active power decoupling techniques were developed. Since then, active power decoupling topologies have generally evolved based on three streams of concepts: 1) current-reference active power decoupling; 2) DC voltage-reference active power decoupling; and 3) AC voltage-reference active power decoupling. The benefits and drawbacks of each topology have been presented and compared with its predecessor, revealing underlying logic in the evolution of the topologies. In addition, a general comparison has also been made in terms of decoupling capacitance/inductance, additional cost, efficiency and complexity of control, providing a benchmark for future power decoupling topologies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".