MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099888812 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2020.3038947

Adaptive Contactor – A New Scheme to Improve Induction Motor Immunity to Voltage Sags

2020· article· en· W3099888812 on OpenAlexaff
Lingxiang Yao, Xianyong Xiao, Yang Wang, Wilsun Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContactorVoltage sagTrippingInduction motorControl theory (sociology)VoltageEngineeringScheme (mathematics)Computer scienceControl engineeringElectrical engineeringCircuit breakerPower (physics)Power qualityMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the consequences of voltage sags is unexpected motor trips or stalls. This is caused by the simple voltage-magnitude-based tripping logic used in the motor contactors. Since a motor has momentum during a voltage sag, a deep voltage sag with a short duration does not necessarily lead to motor misoperation. Based on this reasoning, a novel motor contactor operation scheme is proposed in this paper. The proposed scheme takes into account both the magnitude and duration of a voltage sag plus the momentum of the rotor, in real-time, to decide if a motor will be tripped. The core idea of the scheme is to utilize the critical clearance time (CCT) of motors as the tripping time of AC contactors. The proposed scheme combines an offline analysis and an online calculation to minimize the computation burden in real-time operation. An improved motor parameter estimation method is also proposed to ensure the accuracy of the calculated CCT. The performance of the proposed scheme is evaluated and demonstrated through comparative case studies. Moreover, some practical issues are discussed to facilitate the real implementation.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207