MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399494398 · doi:10.3390/en17122828

Skin and Proximity Effect Calculation of a System of Rectangular Conductors Using the Proper Generalized Decomposition Technique

2024· article· en· W4399494398 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinite element methodElectrical conductorSkin effectBusbarTransformerFinite difference methodApplied mathematicsComputer scienceMathematicsMathematical analysisEngineeringStructural engineeringElectrical engineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the application of a numerical approach known as proper generalized decomposition (PGD) to calculate the per-unit length (PUL) ac resistance of rectangular conductors. PGD has been successfully used in areas such as fluid mechanics and biomedical applications. It solves a partial differential equation (PDE) by decomposing the answer into a set of unknown one-dimensional (1D) functions in an iterative approach until it reaches a predetermined convergence. In this paper, a frequency-dependent meshing scheme is employed in the PGD technique at each frequency to properly take skin and proximity effects into account. One of the main advantages of PGD over traditional numerical approaches such as finite element or finite difference methods is that it confines the answers within a set of one-dimensional functions, which require fewer computational resources. Different examples of single and multiple rectangular conductors are considered to study skin and proximity effects. The PGD results are compared with those obtained using a commercial finite element method (FEM) software to verify the accuracy of the model. This approach can be used in applications such as white box modeling of transformers, EMC analysis, hairpin winding design used in electric vehicles, and busbar simulation.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.274 · 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