Comparative Analysis of Reliability for Single-Phase and Three-Phase Dual Active Bridge Converters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In most electrified vehicles, there is a high-voltage system to feed the powertrain and a low-voltage system for auxiliary loads. Single-phase and three-phase dual active bridge converters (1P-DAB and 3P-DAB) are two potential isolated bidirectional topologies that can be used to connect the two systems. While prior research has extensively compared the volume and efficiency aspects of these converters, their reliability has received limited scholarly attention. To fill this research gap, this paper presents a comprehensive analysis comparing the reliability of 1p-DAB and 3p-DAB converters over a wide range of power levels in two distinct temperature conditions. The reliability evaluation is based on a failure rate model developed from widely utilized handbooks and incorporates the Markov model to account for the fault-tolerant capabilities of each converter. The results show that, for the conditions considered, the 3p-DAB has a 3.24% to 44.92% higher reliability than the 1p-DAB considering the fault-tolerant capabilities, with the improvement increasing over time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".