MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Over Temperature Protection During Hill-hold and Low-Speed Conditions for Electric Vehicle Traction Inverter

2022· article· en· W4312096574 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Korta, K. Lakshmi Varaha Iyer, Animesh Kundu, Narayan C. Kar, Cameron Pickersgill

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 25th International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon Carbide Semiconductor Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeratingJunction temperatureTraction (geology)InverterTraction motorAutomotive engineeringControl theory (sociology)Electric vehicleTorquePower (physics)Rotor (electric)Computer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineeringVoltageMechanical engineeringPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thermal characterization and control of the semiconductor devices in an electric vehicle traction inverter is crucial for achieving optimal performance in a safe and reliable manner during hill-hold and low-speed conditions. This paper presents a comprehensive electrothermal traction drive model to analyze power module temperature characteristics during hill-hold and low-speed operating conditions. Furthermore, this paper proposes an optimal thermal control methodology to maintain junction temperatures under the maximum limitations while minimizing the torque derating requirement. The semiconductor temperature effects with respect to rotor position at stand-still are analyzed and an innovative vehicle displacement solution is provided to reduce the maximum junction temperature across the three-phases of the inverter. Furthermore, a variable switching frequency strategy is proposed to maintain peak junction temperatures below the maximum limitations using the analysis of temperature oscillations in the power module at low fundamental frequencies.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.869

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designSimulation or modeling · Bench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 25th International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS)Same topicSilicon Carbide Semiconductor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207