MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169363480 · doi:10.1109/tec.2021.3084124

Average-Value Modeling of Line-Commutated AC–DC Converters With Unbalanced AC Network

2021· article· en· W3169363480 on OpenAlexaff
Seyyedmilad Ebrahimi, Navid Amiri, Juri Jatskevich

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHVDC Systems and Fault Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonicsConvertersWaveformParametric statisticsTransient (computer programming)Control theory (sociology)Power (physics)Computer scienceElectric power systemLine (geometry)Electronic engineeringVoltageEngineeringElectrical engineeringPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AC–DC line-commutated converters (LCCs) are widely utilized in existing and emerging ac–dc power systems. Analysis of such systems under balanced and unbalanced conditions is often carried out using electromagnetic transient (EMT) simulation programs. Therein, the detailed switching models of LCCs are often the computational bottlenecks for system-level studies. Recently, the parametric average-value models (PAVMs) have been developed to achieve fast and efficient simulations of switching converters. In this paper, the PAVM methodology is extended to consider operation of LCCs under unbalanced conditions in the ac network. This is done in the extended PAVM by formulating the ac-side harmonics in positive and negative sequences as well as the dc-side harmonics (i.e., ripples) with respect to the ac network imbalance. The new PAVM is validated experimentally and by simulations, and is demonstrated to be accurate in reconstructing the ac and dc waveforms under unbalanced conditions in the ac network. Meanwhile, the proposed PAVM is computationally much faster than its detailed switching model counterpart.

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 score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Energy ConversionSame topicHVDC Systems and Fault ProtectionFrench-language works237,207