MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941210454 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2019.2913110

Implementation and Experimental Verification of a Novel Control Strategy for a UPFC-Based Interphase Power Controller

2019· article· en· W2941210454 on OpenAlexaff
Khalid Elamari, Luiz A. C. Lopes

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnified power flow controllerControl theory (sociology)Capacitive sensingTransmission lineEngineeringConvertersElectric power transmissionVoltage sourceController (irrigation)TransformerElectric power systemVoltageElectronic engineeringComputer sciencePower (physics)Electrical engineeringPower flowPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Replacing the phase shifting transformers of interphase power controller with a reduced rating dual unified power flow controller (UPFC) results in a unified interphase power controller (UIPC) with potential for enhanced performance. However, in most cases, the UPFC is controlled as a static phase shifter (SPS), producing marginal improvements. A control approach that allows the minimization of the power ratings of the series voltage source converters (VSCs) of the UIPC was recently proposed. For that, one has to define four control parameters, as opposed to only two in the SPS-based UIPC. This can be done off-line, by means of an optimization procedure that splits the desired transmission line current among the capacitive and inductive branches of the UIPC. In this paper, a control scheme is presented for the implementation of the novel technique. The current sharing factors obtained from the optimization are stored in a lookup table. The gating signals for the VSCs are generated using Park's transformation so as to synthesize the optimal UIPC inductive and capacitive branch currents with proportional resonant controllers and sinusoidal pulse width modulation. The transmission line angle, as well as the magnitude and phase of the desired transmission line current with respect to the voltage at the receiving end voltage, is assumed to be provided by a transmission system operator. Experimental results that include steady state and transient conditions are provided to prove its feasibility.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207