MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904072867 · doi:10.1109/ecce.2018.8558407

Automatic Inductance Measurements of Synchronous Reluctance Machines Including Cross-Saturation Using Real-Time Systems

2018· article· en· W2904072867 on OpenAlexaff
Rajendra Thike, Pragasen Pillay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInductanceMagnetic reluctanceComputer scienceVoltageControl theory (sociology)Operating pointElectronic engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineeringMagnetControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new approach to the inductance measurement of a synchronous reluctance machine. Instead of an open loop pulsed voltage reference described in many references, a pulsed current reference is applied to the test machine in closed loop. The response of the machine is measured, and voltage and current samples are processed (integration) in real time to calculate the flux linkages and inductances. Since the measurement is done in current control mode, the time constant of the overall system can be modified in such a way that a sufficient number of samples are available during the transient even for machines with smaller time constants. This improves the accuracy of the measurement for low time constant machines compared to the voltage reference based measurement. Additionally, inductance at a desired operating point is obtained in a single trial; this reduces the duration of the measurement process. Unlike the pulsed voltage reference method that requires post processing of a huge data set to calculate the inductance map of the machine, the proposed method can be programmed in a real time processor to automate the generation of an inductance map of the test machine.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.293
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207