MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947309294 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2019.2919252

Stability of Algorithms for Electro-Magnetic-Transient Simulation of Networks With Switches and Non-Linear Inductors

2019· article· en· W2947309294 on OpenAlexaff
Huanfeng Zhao, Shengtao Fan, A.M. Gole

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl and Stability of Dynamical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInductorPassivityPiecewise linear functionTrapezoidal ruleControl theory (sociology)Transient (computer programming)Lyapunov functionQuadratic equationStability (learning theory)Linear systemMathematicsAlgorithmComputer scienceNonlinear systemVoltageNumerical integrationMathematical analysisEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper extends the analysis of the stability of electromagnetic transient simulation algorithms to non-linear systems with switching elements and non-linear inductor branches. A theoretical analysis based on common quadratic Lyapunov function theory is used to investigate the stability of numerical algorithms for the simulation of lumped strictly passive switched circuits (LSPSC). It is proved that only when certain fundamental physical properties, i.e., passivity and invariance of Lyapunov energy function, are satisfied, the widely used trapezoidal method results in stable simulations of such networks for any time-step size. This is different from the simulation of linear time invariant systems where any real-world stable system has a stable simulation if an A-stable integration method (e.g., trapezoidal rule) is used. Subsequently, it is shown that the problem of simulating a piecewise linear inductor can be equivalent to simulating a LSPSC; and ergo its simulation with the trapezoidal rule is also stable.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicControl and Stability of Dynamical SystemsFrench-language works237,207