MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PSO-based Sliding Mode Current Control of Grid-Forming Inverter in Rotating Frame

2025· article· W4416136892 on OpenAlexaff
Quang-Manh Hoang, Guilherme Vieira Hollweg, Akhtar Hussain, Sina Zarrabian, Wencong Su

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersUniversity of Michigan-Dearborn
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Robustness (evolution)Particle swarm optimizationSimulated annealingOvershoot (microwave communication)InverterTracking errorSliding mode control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Grid-Forming Inverter (GFMI) is an emerging topic that is attracting significant attention from both academic and industrial communities, particularly in the area of control design. The Decoupled Average Model-based Sliding Mode Current Controller (DAM-SMC) has been used to address the need such as fast response, fixed switching frequency, and no overshoot to avoid exceeding current limits. Typically, the control parameters for DAM-SMC are chosen based on expert knowledge and certain assumptions. However, these parameters may not achieve optimized performance due to system dynamics and uncertainties. To address this, this paper proposes a Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)-based DAM-SMC controller, which inherits the control laws from DAM-SMC but optimizes the control parameters offline using PSO. The main goal is to reduce chattering and achieve smaller tracking errors. The proposed method is compared with other metaheuristic optimization algorithms, such as Genetic Algorithm (GA) and Simulated Annealing (SA). Simulations are performed in MATLAB/Simulink across various scenarios to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed controller. The proposed approach achieves a substantial reduction in convergence time, decreasing it by 86.36% compared to the GA and by 88.89% compared to SA. Furthermore, the tracking error is reduced by 11.61% compared to the conventional DAM-SMC algorithm. The robustness of the proposed method is validated under critical conditions, where plant and control model parameters varied by up to 40%.

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 score0.004
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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207