MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406607372 · doi:10.1088/2631-8695/adac2c

Fast and Smooth Control of Converter’s DC-Link Voltage Using Optimal Fractional-Order Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Controller

2025· article· en· W4406607372 on OpenAlexaff
Aghil Asakereh

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Research Express · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Design
Canadian institutionsCollège Shawinigan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Link (geometry)Interval (graph theory)MathematicsType (biology)Order (exchange)Fuzzy logicVoltageControl (management)Computer scienceEngineeringCombinatoricsElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligenceFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The need to use fully controlled AC/DC converters for DC-based power supply systems has led to structural development and improved performance. Due to existence of various distribution network loads sensitive to noise and fluctuation, PWM-based converters cannot provide accurate and fast performance. In this regard, this paper suggests a novel robust control strategy based on FOIT2FC for this distribution power system to enhance the tracking accuracy and smooth the DC voltage of converter’s DC-link with presence of system uncertainties and disturbances. To strengthen the proposed control strategy, MOMSA has been utilized to optimally tune the FOIT2FC’s parameters. Precise and robust tracking performance of the proposed MOMSA-based FOIT2FC has been thoroughly compared with PSO-based FOIT2FC, PSO-based IT2FC and PSO-based Fuzzy controllers under DC reference variation, resistive load variation, unbalanced three-phase voltage and reproductive operation. The simulation results show that the proposed MOMSA-based FOIT2FC almost gives 1.53% overshoot, 1.25% undershoot and 0.023% fluctuation, while PSO-based FOIT2FC gives 1.95% overshoot, 1.89% undershoot and 0.14% fluctuation, PSO-based IT2FC gives 2.46% overshoot, 2.38% undershoot and 0.19% fluctuation and PSO-based Fuzzy controller gives 2.74% overshoot, 2.95% undershoot and 0.22% fluctuation. To more certify the simulation model, its prototype structure has been provided and tested in laboratory.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering Research ExpressSame topicAdvanced Control Systems DesignFrench-language works237,207