MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Artificial neural network based auto-tuned PI compensator to enhance the dynamic response of the DC-link voltage in a grid-connected voltage source converter

2022· article· en· W4377972180 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed M. Ismail, R. Chibani, Mahmoud Hamouda, Kamal Al‐Haddad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Overshoot (microwave communication)Settling timeRectifier (neural networks)VoltagePID controllerComputer scienceJacobian matrix and determinantArtificial neural networkGridVoltage referenceStep responseEngineeringControl engineeringMathematicsRecurrent neural networkArtificial intelligenceTemperature control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an artificial neural network (ANN) based auto-tuned PI compensator to enhance the dynamic response of the DC-link voltage in a grid-connected voltage source converter (GVSC). The converter's model is linearized using the Jacobian method and the optimized parameters of the PI compensator for many local operation regions are determined. The collected data are thereafter used as features and target for the learning process of an ANN. Two ANN structures are designed; first only one input is used, that is, the reference of the DC-link voltage. In the second case, an additional input is added, that, is the active component of the grid current. The auto-tuned PI compensator with optimized parameters provided by the ANN is tested with numerical simulations conducted on a GVSC operating as an active rectifier. The results show that the ANN based auto-tuned PI compensator provides a better dynamic response of the DC-link voltage than the conventional PI controller, that is a lower settling time with practically no overshoot.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207