MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design and Implementation of Real-Time Simulation Solver for High Frequency Power

2022· article· en· W4284888553 on OpenAlexaff
Luc-André Grégoire, Sébastien Cense, Marnaud Ndungu, Jean Bélanger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsOpal-Rt Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvertersElectronic engineeringComputer sciencePower (physics)Real-time simulationSampling (signal processing)SolverPower densityPulse-width modulationDiscretizationTopology (electrical circuits)Electrical engineeringEngineeringVoltageSimulationTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In power electronic, the goal is often to increase the power density and improve efficiency of a converter. Although this can be achieved with newer technologies such as multilevel converters, industries are known to be very conservative and often prefers older converter topology with improved components. Silicon carbide switches can increase switching frequency of converters, making it possible to achieve a higher power density and efficiency of a converter. Increasing PWM frequency also raise new challenges during design and validation of the converter due to limitations of real-time simulator sampling. This paper presents a new real-time simulator implementation solving the issue of power switches gating signal sampling, as well as the discretization of extremely small time-constant for real-time applications. The proposed simulation tool is validated against an offline simulation of a three-phase interleaved-boost converter operated at 169.25 kHz.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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