MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

H-infinity Robust Control of a Transparent Power-Hardware-in-the-Loop System

2021· article· en· W3216105684 on OpenAlexaff
Zhaolin Liu, Marcello Colombino, Dmitry Rimorov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Robust controlHardware-in-the-loop simulationInterface (matter)Computer scienceSoftwareFlexibility (engineering)Control theory (sociology)Control engineeringStability (learning theory)Control systemController (irrigation)Embedded systemControl (management)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Power-Hardware-in-the-Loop system is a testing infrastructure capable of integrating real equipment and highly accurate real-time simulation models of power grids. The interface operating between the hardware and software is a complex hybrid control system tasked with ensuring that the both the hardware and simulation system are seamlessly integrated. As such, it may face stability, robustness and performance issues, for which different methods have been proposed in the literature. This paper proposes a novel method of designing the control interface using H-infinity robust control tools. We utilise a nominal model with parameter uncertainties, allowing the resulting controller to not only achieve robust stability within the uncertainty space but also improve performance and accuracy. Based on simulations containing a wide range of parameters, the H-infinity robust control method shows promising results compared with the state of the art in the literature. It offers the ability to synthesise a controller that is robust against uncertainties in time delay and impedance values, and at the same time, allows the designer to have more flexibility in characterising the performance and stability of the interface algorithm.

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 score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207