MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088864382 · doi:10.1109/ojpel.2020.3026896

Conceptual Design and Demonstration of an Automatic System for Extracting Switching Loss and Creating Data Library of Power Semiconductors

2020· article· en· W3088864382 on OpenAlexafffund
Avishek Ghosh, Carl Ngai Man Ho, Jared Prendergast, Yanming Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Open Journal of Power Electronics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon Carbide Semiconductor Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsModular designComputer scienceInterface (matter)Power (physics)USableProcess (computing)Characterization (materials science)Semiconductor deviceComputer hardwareElectronic engineeringSimulationEmbedded systemEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A switching characterization (SC) test of power semiconductor devices (PSDs) gives us significant insight into the dynamic switching behavior of the device under various operating conditions. A double pulse test (DPT) is a widely used method for evaluating switching performance parameters of a PSD such as its switching losses, switching speed (di/dt, dv/dt), turn-on and turn-off times etc. The scientific information obtained from analysis of DPT results of a PSD helps in predicting its thermo-electric performance in a target power electronic converter. With conventional DPT setups, it is a time-consuming and error-prone process to manually conduct these tests under several permutations of test parameters and thereafter analyze the experimental data manually. This work presents a newly developed automated SC test system, which can run tests one after another, once the desired test parameters are entered in a graphic user interface. The test-control system also enables recording and systematic processing of the experimental switching data to deliver usable characterization results. The automatic, compact and modular design allows the proposed SC test platform to stand out from the conventional DPT setups. The design principles are experimentally verified by implementing a hardware prototype capable of testing PSDs up to 1000 V, 60 A, 250 °C.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Open Journal of Power ElectronicsSame topicSilicon Carbide Semiconductor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207