MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400284956 · doi:10.3390/vibration7030035

Modeling and Evaluation of a Multi-Stable Hybrid Energy Harvester

2024· article· en· W4400284956 on OpenAlexaff
Haining Li, Kefu Liu, Jian Deng

Bibliographic record

VenueVibration · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Energy Harvesting Technologies
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEnergy (signal processing)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article develops a multi-stable hybrid energy harvester (MSHEH) which consists of a piezoelectric energy harvester (PEH) and an electromagnetic energy harvester (EMEH). By tuning two parameters, the MSHEH can achieve a mono-stable, bi-stable, and tri-stable state, respectively. A numerical procedure is developed to compute the EMEH’s transduction factor. The obtained result is validated experimentally. Using the equivalent magnetic 2-point dipole theory, the restoring force model of the magnetic spring is established. The obtained model is verified experimentally. The energy harvesting performances of the MSHEH under the four different configurations (linear, mono-stable, bi-stable and tri-stable) subjected to frequency sweep excitations are evaluated by simulation and validated by experiment. The comparative analysis focuses on power output, accumulated harvested energy, and effective energy-harvesting bandwidth. The optimum load resistances are investigated by Pareto front optimizations. The following key findings are obtained. When subjected to high-level frequency sweep excitation, the tri-stable configuration exhibits the widest frequency bandwidth and the highest total accumulated harvested energy. When subjected to low-level frequency sweep excitation, the bi-stable configuration is more efficient in energy harvesting. The best performance trade-off between the PEH and EMEH can be achieved by selecting the optimum load resistances properly.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVibrationSame topicInnovative Energy Harvesting TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207