A comparison of parallel resonant converters operating in lagging power factory mode
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three different parallel resonant converter (PRC) configurations are compared for their performance and analyzed for operation in the discontinuous capacitor voltage mode (DCVM). DCVM operation is shown not to exist in the case of a PRC with the resonating capacitor of the primary side of the high-frequency (HF) transformer. The conditions for DCVM in the case of PRCs with an ideal HF transformer and PRCs with secondary-side resonance differ only in terms of the ratio M/(M+L+L/sub p/), which is equal to 1.0 for a PRC with an ideal HF transformer. The comparison shows that the PRC with the capacitor on the primary side of the nonideal HF transformer is more suited for low-voltage, high-current applications; the PRC with secondary-side resonance is useful for feeding high-voltage, low-current loads; and the PRC with an ideal transformer or with no transformer is more appropriate for low-power, low-output voltage application or where isolation is not required. Experimental results obtained from three phototype units are presented to support the theory.>
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".