Simulation of a closed-loop dc-dc converter using a physics-informed neural network-based model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growing reliance on power electronics introduces new challenges requiring detailed time-domain analyses with fast and accurate circuit simulation tools. Currently, commercial time-domain simulation software are mainly relying on physics-based methods to simulate power electronics. Recent work showed that data-driven and physics-informed learning methods can increase simulation speed with limited compromise on accuracy, but many challenges remain before deployment in commercial tools can be possible. In this paper, we propose a physics-informed bidirectional long-short term memory neural network (BiLSTM-PINN) model to simulate the time-domain response of a closed-loop dc-dc boost converter for various operating points, parameters, and perturbations. A physics-informed fully-connected neural network (FCNN) and a BiLSTM are also trained to establish a comparison. The three methods are then compared using step-response tests to assess their performance and limitations in terms of accuracy. The results show that the BiLSTM-PINN and BiLSTM models outperform the FCNN model by more than 9 and 4.5 times, respectively, in terms of median RMSE. Their standard deviation values are more than 2.6 and 1.7 smaller than the FCNN’s, making them also more consistent. Those results illustrate that the proposed BiLSTM-PINN is a potential alternative to other physics-based or data-driven methods for power electronics simulations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".