MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385062602 · doi:10.1109/jestpe.2023.3297191

Weighting-Factor-Less Model Predictive Control With Multiobjectives for Three-Level Hybrid ANPC Inverter Drives

2023· article· en· W4385062602 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenyao Sun, Shuai Xu, Guanzhou Ren, Chunxing Yao, Guangtong Ma, Juri Jatskevich

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMultilevel Inverters and Converters
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNatural Science Foundation of Sichuan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Model predictive controlInverterWeightingComputer scienceEngineeringControl (management)Voltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid active neutral point clamped (HANPC) inverter has been recently considered in motor drive applications, while its control with multiple objectives remains quite complicated. The finite set model predictive control (MPC) is very attractive for multilevel inverter (MLI) drives due to its powerful ability to handle multiobjective optimization. However, tuning the weighting factors (WFs) with multiple objectives in MPC is quite challenging and time costing. In this article, a WF-less MPC method for HANPC inverter-fed permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) drives is proposed. The new control strategy achieves precise current tracking, neutral point potential balance, switching frequency reduction, and switching loss minimization. The algorithm works as a three-stage procedure to achieve the best decision at each stage, and a current extrapolation method is introduced to enhance the control performance. The effectiveness of the proposed method is validated experimentally on a three-level HANPC-inverter-fed PMSM drive.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power ElectronicsSame topicMultilevel Inverters and ConvertersFrench-language works237,207