MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224304750 · doi:10.3390/electronics11081290

Optimal Pitch Angle Controller for DFIG-Based Wind Turbine System Using Computational Optimization Techniques

2022· article· en· W4224304750 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Turbine Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Khalid UniversityTrent UniversityNottingham Trent UniversityCentre International de Recherche sur le Cancer
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Particle swarm optimizationController (irrigation)PID controllerWind powerTurbinePitch angleGenetic algorithmMATLABComputer sciencePower (physics)EngineeringControl engineeringAlgorithmPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the advent of high-speed and parallel computing, the applicability of computational optimization in engineering problems has increased, with greater validation than conventional methods. Pitch angle is an effective variable in extracting maximum wind power in a wind turbine system (WTS). The pitch angle controller contributes to improve the output power at different wind speeds. In this paper, the pitch angle controller with proportional (P) and proportional-integral (PI) controllers is used. The parameters of the controllers are tuned by computational optimization techniques for a doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG)-based WTS. The study is carried out on a 9 MW DFIG based WTS model in MATLAB/SIMULINK. Two computational optimization techniques: particle swarm optimization (PSO), a swarm intelligence algorithm, and a genetic algorithm (GA), an evolutionary algorithm, are applied. A multi-objective, multi-dimensional error function is defined and minimized by selecting an appropriate error criterion for each objective of the function which depicts the relative magnitude of each objective in the error function. The results of the output power flow and the dynamic response of the optimized P and PI controllers are compared with the conventional P and PI controller in three different cases. It is revealed that the PSO-based controllers performed better in comparison with both the conventional controllers and the GA-based controllers.

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.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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