MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Machine Learning Based Modeling for Real-Time Inferencer-in-the-Loop Hardware Emulation of High-Speed Rail Microgrid

2024· article· en· W4403126960 on OpenAlexaff
Songyang Zhang, Tian Liang, Tianshi Cheng, Venkata Dinavahi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Energy Efficiency
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmulationMicrogridComputer scienceHardware emulationLoop (graph theory)Hardware-in-the-loop simulationEmbedded systemComputer hardwareComputer architectureField-programmable gate arrayControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of artificial intelligence (AI) technology in the field of power systems and power electronic devices is increasingly prevalent. With massive datasets generated by a wide range of equipment, AI-based modeling is promising in the future of hardware-in-the-loop emulation. This article studies and improves the machine learning based modeling approach for power electronic devices, and the inferencer-in-the-loop (IIL) system is proposed together with optimized neural network (NN) models. The high-speed rail microgrid, includes autotransformer rectifier unit subsystems, energy storage subsystems, two-level converter based permanent magnet synchronous motor propulsion subsystems, and modular multilevel converter based induction motor propulsion subsystems, serves as study cases to demonstrate the adaptability of this approach. Finally, to show high accuracy and versatility of the IIL real-time emulation system, the system-level (1 timestep) and device-level (50 timestep) results are compared in three domains: the referencer system (C code simulation program in NVIDIA Jetson and offline SaberRD datasets), offline inferencer emulation on Xilinx VCU118 board, and online refined inferencer emulation on Xilinx VCU118 board.

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 score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRailway Systems and Energy EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207