MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Finite Control Set Model Predictive Control for Switched Reluctance Motor Drives with Reduced Torque Tracking Error

2021· article· en· W3213516164 on OpenAlexaff
Rasul Tarvirdilu-Asl, Shamsuddeen Nalakath, Diego F. Valencia, Berker Bilgin, Ali Emadi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMultilevel Inverters and Converters
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Switched reluctance motorTorqueModel predictive controlWeightingTracking errorDirect torque controlComputer scienceCompensation (psychology)EngineeringInduction motorControl (management)PhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a new method to reduce the steady state torque tracking error of finite control set model predictive torque control for switched reluctance motor drives is proposed. The steady state tracking error is considered as one of the main shortcomings of the conventional Finite Control Set Model Predictive Control (FCS-MPC). This can happen due to parameter uncertainties or when the multiple objectives are achieved by a single function with weighting factors. In the conventional model predictive torque control for SRM, the control action is obtained by a multi-objective cost function designed to track a reference torque while minimizing the phase currents over the prediction horizon. The optimal switching state which minimizes the cost function is selected and applied at each switching instant, which results in the steady state torque tracking error. In this paper, a compensation term is added to the reference torque at each sample instant to minimize the torque tracking error. The compensation term is calculated based on the estimated average torque tracking error in the previous sample times. Simulations on a three phase, 12/8, 2.3 kW SRM show promising results with the proposed method as compared to the conventional FCS-MPC.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMultilevel Inverters and ConvertersFrench-language works237,207