MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990367676 · doi:10.1109/ecce.2019.8912847

Prediction of Drive-Fed Induction Machine Efficiency Using Sine Wave Efficiency Results

2019· article· en· W2990367676 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmud Ghasemi Bijan, Pragasen Pillay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSensorless Control of Electric Motors
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonicsTorqueDirect torque controlMachine controlSine waveControl theory (sociology)VoltageNon-sinusoidal waveformInduction motorComputer scienceSineMode (computer interface)Harmonic analysisReduction (mathematics)Simple (philosophy)Direct currentControl (management)EngineeringElectronic engineeringControl engineeringWaveformMathematicsElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite their prominent capabilities and features to control the speed and torque of electrical machines, adjustable-speed drives (ASDs) reduce the efficiency of machine compared to sine-fed machines. This reduction is due to additional losses generated by harmonics in the output voltage and current of ASDs. Due to the complex nature of these losses, accurate calculation of these losses is very difficult. This paper intends to present a simple and straightforward way to predict an induction machine (IM) efficiency in drive-fed mode by using its direct-fed mode results. For this purpose, four IMs are tested in three modes: Direct-fed, Scaler drive-fed and Direct Torque Control (DTC) drive-fed. The results are compared with each other and a simple and straightforward method is proposed to predict the efficiency of a drive-fed IM using direct-fed results.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSensorless Control of Electric MotorsFrench-language works237,207