Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 89 references

This paper gives the Generalized Bilinear Transformation's design parameter α a concrete physical meaning — the backward-rectangular ratio of a hexagonal area — and shows how to choose α optimally to minimize discretization error in magnitu

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

The Generalized Bilinear Transformation's shape parameter α is shown to be the backward-rectangular fraction in a hexagonal integration approximation, with an optimization procedure for choosing α to reduce discretization distortion.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-03 challenge →

load-bearing objection The claimed 'physical meaning' of α is wrong as stated—the area fraction isn't α for time-varying signals—but the paper still offers a clean geometric derivation of a known transformation and a workable optimization method. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.03403 v3 pith:OSP2K5EH submitted 2025-11-05 eess.SY cs.SY

Optimized Design of the Generalized Bilinear Transformation for Discretizing Analog Systems

Shen Chen , Yanlong Li , Jiamin Cui , Wei Yao , Jisong Wang , Yixin Tian , Chaohou Liu , Yang Yang
show 3 more authors
Jiaxi Ying Zeng Liu Jinjun Liu
This is my paper
classification eess.SY cs.SY
keywords generalized bilinear transformationdiscretizationnumerical integrationhexagonal approximationshape factormagnitude distortionphase distortionoptimal design
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper aims to explain and optimally choose the parameter α in the Generalized Bilinear Transformation (GBT), a first-order s-to-z mapping that unifies the Euler and Tustin discretization methods as special cases. It re-derives the GBT from a hexagonal approximation of the area under the error function and identifies α as the shape factor: the fraction of that hexagon contributed by the backward rectangle. It proves, via domain mapping, that the stable range of α is [0.5, 1], and shows that α selects between magnitude and phase distortion modes. It then proposes choosing α by minimizing a normalized magnitude- or phase-error objective function, and validates this on a discretized low-pass filter running on a microcontroller. If correct, engineers gain a principled, tunable knob for reducing discretization distortion in digital control loops.

Core claim

The central claim is that the parameter α in the GBT — s = (1/T)(z−1)/(αz+1−α) — is not an abstract interpolation weight but a shape factor with a concrete geometric meaning: the ratio of the backward rectangular area to the total area in a hexagonal approximation of the integral of the error function. The paper further claims that this α can be optimized for a given frequency range by minimizing a normalized magnitude or phase error, that the stability constraint α∈[0.5,1] follows rigorously from mapping the left half of the s-plane into the unit circle, and that two distinct distortion modes — magnitude and phase — can be traded off by picking α. The endpoints α=0.5 and α=1 reproduce the T

What carries the argument

The central object is the hexagonal approximation of the error function's enclosed area, from which the GBT is re-derived. The parameter α is defined as the backward rectangular ratio of that hexagon — the share of the hexagon's area occupied by the backward rectangle. The domain-mapping argument (requiring the left half of the s-plane to land inside the unit circle) yields the stability bound α∈[0.5,1]. The optimization machinery is a five-step procedure (scenario, initialization, constraints, objective, computation) that minimizes a MaxAbs-normalized magnitude or phase error over the stable α range.

Load-bearing premise

The experimental validation rests on the assumption that the measured output obeys the paper's ZOH model with a separately measured 470 ns processing delay; if the reversal of 'theoretical' error values for complementary α in Tables IV and V is not a typo, that model is wrong and the claimed agreement is unsupported.

What would settle it

Recompute the 'theoretical error' columns of Tables IV and V directly from Eq. (35)/(45) for each listed α: if the values match what the formula yields for 1.5−α (the complementary parameter) rather than for the stated α, then the reported experimental agreement is an artifact of the table-reversal and the validation collapses. A simpler check: measure phase error at f=fc for α=0.5 and α=1.0; the paper's model predicts the α=1.0 error (95.45°) to be far larger, and any ordering violation would falsify the model.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • α=0.5 and α=1 recover the Tustin and Euler methods exactly, so GBT is a single framework covering the two most common industrial discretization choices.
  • For any operating frequency or frequency set, an optimal α can be computed by minimizing a normalized magnitude or phase error, and a trade-off α exists where the two normalized errors balance.
  • The stability bound α∈[0.5,1] is a rigorous consequence of mapping the left half-plane into the unit circle; outside this range the discrete system can become unstable.
  • Raising the sampling rate remains the practical cure for distortion near Nyquist: at the cutoff, increasing fs from 12 kHz to 48 kHz cut magnitude error from 7.9 dB to 0.19 dB and phase error from 94.87° to 18.21°.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The hexagonal-area derivation invites natural extensions: higher-order polygonal approximations of the error integral would yield a family of generalized transformations, each with its own stability range and bias toward magnitude or phase accuracy.
  • The normalized-error objective could be applied to controllers (e.g., resonant or PLL loops) where phase accuracy near the crossover frequency matters more than raw magnitude fit; the paper only demonstrates a first-order low-pass filter.
  • A joint optimization over α and sampling frequency could replace the 'raise fs when distortion is bad' recommendation with a single cost-aware design step.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a derivation of the Generalized Bilinear Transformation (GBT) from a piecewise-constant integration rule represented by a hexagonal shape, defines the GBT parameter α as a 'shape factor' and claims, for the first time, that α is the percentage of the backward rectangular area of that hexagon. It then derives the stable range [0.5, 1] by domain mapping, identifies magnitude and phase distortion modes, and proposes an optimal design method for α by minimizing normalized magnitude or phase error objectives. The method is applied to a low-pass filter and validated experimentally with a DSP implementation.

Significance. If correct, the paper would give control engineers a physically motivated interpretation of the GBT parameter and a principled rule for tuning it to reduce discretization distortion. The algebraic derivation of the GBT from a simple integration rule is clean and correctly reproduces the known unifying relation between Euler, Tustin, and Al-Alaoui methods; the stability-range derivation is also sound, and the authors provide reproducible code and a detailed experimental setup. However, the central claimed contribution—the physical meaning of α as an area ratio—is mathematically inconsistent with the paper's own geometry, and the experimental tables are inconsistent with the paper's own frequency-response model. These are load-bearing flaws that invalidate the headline novelty and the reported experimental verification.

major comments (3)
  1. [II.B, Eq. (21)] The central claim that α is 'the percentage of the backward rectangular area' is false as stated. From Eqs. (17)–(18), the two rectangular areas are S_bwrec = αT·e(n) and S_fwrec = (1−α)T·e(n−1). Therefore S_bwrec/(S_bwrec+S_fwrec) = α·e(n)/[(1−α)e(n−1)+α·e(n)], which equals α only when e(n)=e(n−1) or α=1. For a concrete counterexample with T=1, α=0.5, e(n−1)=0, e(n)=1, the ratio is 1, not 0.5. Thus α is at most the time-width fraction assigned to e(n) in Eq. (17); this is a tautology, not a physical meaning. Since this 'first physical meaning' is the paper's headline novelty, the abstract and Section II claim must be withdrawn or fundamentally reframed.
  2. [V.A, Tables IV and V] The theoretical errors in Tables IV and V are not those produced by Eq. (35)/(45) for the stated α; the rows are reversed with respect to the complementary parameter 1.5−α. For example, at f=fc, direct evaluation of Eq. (35) gives ≈7.98 dB for α=0.5 and ≈4.22 dB for α=1.0, whereas Table IV lists 4.22 dB for α=0.5 and 8.02 dB for α=1.0. The same reversal is visible at f=75%fc: the ≈2.85 dB value for α=0.5 appears in the α=1.0 row. The phase rows show the same pattern. Consequently, the reported 'agreement' does not validate Eq. (35); either the tables are mislabeled or the model used to generate them differs from the paper's model. This undermines the experimental verification of both the frequency-response model and the optimal-design method.
  3. [IV.A, Eqs. (40)–(44)] The normalization by |Lerr_max| and |φerr_max| is a constant scaling with respect to α for any fixed frequency set, so it does not change the minimizing α; the optimization is a one-dimensional search over [0.5,1] of an unnormalized error. This is not a logical contradiction, but it makes the claimed 'normalized' objective vacuous as a design principle. More importantly, Table VI uses the same Eq. (35) to generate the theoretical errors that define the objective, so the validation in Section V-B is not independent of the model being proposed. An independent validation would require directly measuring the discrete frequency response or comparing against a method not derived from Eq. (35).
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section I] The abstract contains a typo: 'the stable range of is rigorously established' is missing a variable. The same issue appears in the Introduction where the stable range of α is stated without the parameter.
  2. [V.A, last paragraph] There is a duplicated phrase: 'by subtracting the measured phase error by subtracting the measured phase error' should be corrected.
  3. [IV.A, Step 2, Eq. (36)] The random initialization α_init = random(0.5,1) is not reproducible unless a seed is specified. Since the paper emphasizes reproducibility and provides a GitHub source, please specify the random seed or use a deterministic initialization.
  4. [Fig. 2 and Eq. (21)] The hexagon in Fig. 2(e)/(f) is difficult to interpret. Labeling the forward and backward rectangles directly in the figure would make the geometric construction and the area-ratio definition in Eq. (21) clearer—and would also reveal the inconsistency discussed in Major Comment 1.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

The claimed 'physical meaning' of α as a backward-rectangular area ratio is self-definitional: Eq. (21) merely restates the time-weight α from Eqs. (17)-(18), and that ratio is not α unless e(n)=e(n−1).

specific steps
  1. self definitional [Section II-B, Eqs. (17)-(21)]
    "e(t)= { e(n−1), t∈[(n−1)T,(n−α)T]; e(n), t∈((n−α)T,nT] } ... u(n)=(1−α)·e(n−1)T+α·e(n)T+u(n−1) ... The physical meaning of the parameter α is the percentage of the backward rectangular area as defined in equation (21). α= S_bwrec/(S_bwrec+S_fwrec)"

    Under the paper's own geometry, S_fwrec=(1−α)T e(n−1) and S_bwrec=αT e(n), so the ratio in Eq. (21) is α e(n)/[(1−α)e(n−1)+α e(n)], which equals α only when e(n)=e(n−1). Thus 'the physical meaning' is not derived from the hexagon; it is the same α that was already inserted as a time-allocating weight in Eqs. (17)-(18), and Eq. (21) merely re-labels that weight as an area ratio. For genuinely time-varying signals the asserted equality fails (e.g., with α=0.5, e(n−1)=0, e(n)=1, the ratio is 1, not 0.5), so the paper's headline novelty reduces to a definition it has not established.

full rationale

The core GBT algebra (Eqs. (7)-(9)) is a standard first-order approximation, and the hexagonal construction in Eqs. (17)-(20) is a legitimate geometric re-derivation of the known GBT; the stable range [0.5,1] and the distortion analysis are independent mathematical consequences. The optimal design method minimizes a genuine error objective and is checked against external measurements, so it is not circular. I find no load-bearing self-citation; the prior-work citations are historical and equivalence mappings. The only circular step is the central novelty claim about α's physical meaning, which is a self-definitional relabeling and is actually inconsistent with the paper's own geometry unless the error signal is constant between samples. As a separate correctness issue (not circularity), Tables IV/V appear to list theoretical errors for the complementary parameter (e.g., at f=fc, the α=0.5 row shows 4.22 dB, which Eq. (35) gives for α=1.0), so the experimental validation as reported does not support the model; this is an internal data-model inconsistency, not an equivalence by construction. The appended 'significant limitation' passage about Nyquist-frequency distortion is a standard limitation and does not affect circularity. Overall: one central 'revelation' reduces by definition; the remaining contributions are self-contained. Score 6.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the definition of α as a geometric fraction, on the standard first-order Taylor derivation, on a modeling assumption about the error function's shape, and on a ZOH-plus-delay model used for the experimental comparison. The delay constant and the CEC weights are fitted or hand-chosen inputs.

free parameters (3)
  • α (shape factor) = 0.5 / 0.549 / 0.575 / 0.593 / 1.0 depending on scenario
    The central design parameter; in the optimal design method it is tuned by numerical minimization to minimize magnitude or phase error for each application type.
  • T_delay (digital processing delay) = 470 ns
    Measured in the experimental setup (300 ns ADC + 100 ns computation + 70 ns DAC) and used to calibrate phase-error comparisons; it is a fitted experimental constant.
  • Type-B weighting factors K_L/K_ϕ = Table II (0.04–0.53)
    Chosen by hand from 'CEC Efficiency' weights to emphasize frequency points; arbitrary choice affecting the optimized α.
axioms (5)
  • standard math First-order Taylor expansion of e^{sT} defines the GBT
    Used in Section II-A, Eq. (7)–(9), to derive s=(1/T)(z−1)/(1+α(z−1)).
  • domain assumption e(t) is piecewise-constant over each sampling interval with one switch at t=(n−α)T
    The hexagonal approximation in Section II-B, Eq. (17); this modeling choice makes α the backward-rectangular fraction.
  • domain assumption The measured DAC output is modeled by the ZOH transfer function sin(ωT/2)/(ωT/2)e^{−jωT/2}
    Used in Eq. (32)–(35); the experimental validation depends on this standard assumption.
  • domain assumption Minimizing normalized |magnitude error| or |phase error| is the appropriate design objective
    Section IV-A, Eqs. (38)–(44); no independent justification for the objective beyond engineering preference.
  • ad hoc to paper Delay compensation via T_delay is separable and correct
    Section V-A; the 470 ns constant is calibrated for this experiment and used to adjust the phase comparison.

reviewed 2026-08-03 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Optimized Design of the Generalized Bilinear Transformation for Discretizing Analog Systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OSP2K5EH

@misc{pith2026251103403,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Optimized Design of the Generalized Bilinear Transformation for Discretizing Analog Systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OSP2K5EH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.03403}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

A common approach to digital system design involves transforming a continuous-time (s-domain) transfer function into the discrete-time (z-domain) using methods such as Euler or Tustin. These transformations are shown to be specific cases of the Generalized Bilinear Transformation (GBT), characterized by a design parameter, $\alpha$, whose physical interpretation and optimal selection remain inadequately explored. In this paper, we propose an alternative derivation of the GBT derived by employing a new hexagonal shape to approximate the enclosed area of the error function, and we define the parameter $\alpha$ as a shape factor. We reveal, for the first time, the physical meaning of $\alpha$ as the backward rectangular ratio of the proposed hexagonal shape. Through domain mapping, the stable range of is rigorously established to be [0.5, 1]. Depending on the operating frequency and the chosen $\alpha$, we observe two distinct distortion modes, i.e., the magnitude and phase distortion. We further develop an optimal design method for $\alpha$ by minimizing a normalized magnitude or phase error objective function. The effectiveness of the proposed method is validated through the design and testing of a low-pass filter (LPF), demonstrating strong agreement between theoretical predictions and experimental results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.03403 by Chaohou Liu, Jiamin Cui, Jiaxi Ying, Jinjun Liu, Jisong Wang, Shen Chen, Wei Yao, Yang Yang, Yanlong Li, Yixin Tian, Zeng Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Distribution graph of discretization methods based on 81 papers( [3] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Mathematical interpretation. (a) Euler method. (b) Rectangular [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Mapping of s-plane to z-plane Let s = σs +jωs and z = γz +j · ζz, we have the following expression by substituting these into equation (4): s = σs + jωs = 1 T [γz + j · ζz] − 1 α(γz + j · ζz) + (1 − α) = 1 T [(γz − 1) + j · ζz][(αγz + 1 − α) − jα · ζz] [αγz + 1 − α] 2 + [α · ζz] 2 = 1 T [α(γz − 1)2 + γz − 1 + α · ζ 2 z ] + jα · ζz [αγz + 1 − α] 2 + [α · ζz] 2 (22) Therefore, σs and ωs can be derived as fol… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Magnitude and phase distortion of discrete LPF with different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Magnitude and phase error vs. α constraints, the objective function, and computation. Step 1: Application Scenario. Generally, there are three types of application scenarios based on the magnitude or phase optimization with frequency selection requirement. 1) Type A: single frequency point. For this type, minimiz￾ing the normalized global error (defined as QA(q, α)) consisting of the magnitude and phase er… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Normalized Global Error vs. α V. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION To validate the effectiveness of the proposed discrete fre￾quency response and the optimal design method, a discrete LPF is built as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Block diagram of the discrete LPF. Samp.: Sampling, Comm.: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Experimental waveforms with different input frequency. CH1, ISR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison of magnitude between the theoretical calculations and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Experimental waveform of the time delay ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of the phase error between with and without delay [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Comparison of magnitude and phase error under different sampling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Experimental waveforms with different sampling frequency. CH1, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_15.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references

  1. [1]

    M. S. Fadali and Antonio Visioli,Digital Control Engineering, 2nd ed. Boston, MA, USA: Academic Press, 2013. IEEETRAN LATEX TEMPLATE V1.8B, VOL. X, NO. X, OCTOBER 2025 11

    2013

  2. [2]

    Athalye,Real-time Benchmarks Showcasing C2000™ Control MCU’s Optimized Signal Chain,Texas Instruments Incorporated [On- line]

    A. Athalye,Real-time Benchmarks Showcasing C2000™ Control MCU’s Optimized Signal Chain,Texas Instruments Incorporated [On- line]. Available: https://www.ti.com/lit/an/spracw5a/spracw5a.pdf

  3. [3]

    Using IIR Filter in Fractional Order Phase Lead Compensation PIMR-RC for Grid-Tied Inverters,

    S. N. Chen, et al., “Using IIR Filter in Fractional Order Phase Lead Compensation PIMR-RC for Grid-Tied Inverters,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 9399-9409, 2023

    2023

  4. [4]

    Discrete-Time Frequency-Domain Disturbance Ob- server to Mitigate Harmonic Current in PMSM Drives and the Imple- mentation With Reduced Delay,

    M. J. Hu, et al., “Discrete-Time Frequency-Domain Disturbance Ob- server to Mitigate Harmonic Current in PMSM Drives and the Imple- mentation With Reduced Delay,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 9482-9493, 2023

    2023

  5. [5]

    Enhanced Position Estimation Based on Frequency Adaptive Generalized Comb Filter for Interior Permanent Magnet Syn- chronous Motor Drives,

    X. Wu, et al., “Enhanced Position Estimation Based on Frequency Adaptive Generalized Comb Filter for Interior Permanent Magnet Syn- chronous Motor Drives,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 11, pp. 11044-11054, 2023

    2023

  6. [6]

    Sensorless Control Strategy for SRM Based on Flux Linkage in Medium to High-Speed Range,

    X. D. Sun, et al., “Sensorless Control Strategy for SRM Based on Flux Linkage in Medium to High-Speed Range,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 10, pp. 9922-9930, 2025

    2025

  7. [7]

    Generalized Discretization of State-Space Model for Discrete-Time Small-Signal Analysis of Inverters With Arbitrary Control Delay,

    Q. Qian, et al., “Generalized Discretization of State-Space Model for Discrete-Time Small-Signal Analysis of Inverters With Arbitrary Control Delay,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 10, pp. 10071-10084, 2025

    2025

  8. [8]

    Semi-Implicit Euler Digital Implementation of Con- ditioned Super-Twisting Algorithm With Actuation Saturation,

    X. S. Yang, et al., “Semi-Implicit Euler Digital Implementation of Con- ditioned Super-Twisting Algorithm With Actuation Saturation,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 8388-8397, 2023

    2023

  9. [9]

    High-Order Sliding-Mode Observer With Adaptive Gain for Sensorless Induction Motor Drives in the Wide-Speed Range,

    T. Q. Wang, et al., “High-Order Sliding-Mode Observer With Adaptive Gain for Sensorless Induction Motor Drives in the Wide-Speed Range,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 11, pp. 11055-11066, 2023

    2023

  10. [10]

    Research on Open Circuit Fault Diagnosis Strategy for DFPMM Drive System Based on Grey Prediction Theory With the Introduction of Euler Algorithm,

    X. F. Jiang, et al., “Research on Open Circuit Fault Diagnosis Strategy for DFPMM Drive System Based on Grey Prediction Theory With the Introduction of Euler Algorithm,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 2169-2179, 2025

    2025

  11. [11]

    Modeling of a Soft Actuator With a Semicircular Cross Section Under Gravity and External Load,

    S. K. Liu, et al., “Modeling of a Soft Actuator With a Semicircular Cross Section Under Gravity and External Load,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 4952-4961, 2023

    2023

  12. [12]

    Model Predictive Control-Based Dual-Mode Operation of an Energy-Stored Quasi-Z-Source Photovoltaic Power System,

    Y . S. Liu, et al., “Model Predictive Control-Based Dual-Mode Operation of an Energy-Stored Quasi-Z-Source Photovoltaic Power System,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 9169-9180, 2023

    2023

  13. [13]

    A FEA-Based Fast AC Steady-State Algorithm for a V oltage-Driven PMSM by a Novel V oltage-Flux-Driven Model,

    C. Di and X. H. Bao, “A FEA-Based Fast AC Steady-State Algorithm for a V oltage-Driven PMSM by a Novel V oltage-Flux-Driven Model,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 3935-3943, 2024

    2024

  14. [14]

    On-Manifold Model Predictive Control for Trajectory Tracking on Robotic Systems,

    G. Z. Lu, W. Xu, and F. Zhang, “On-Manifold Model Predictive Control for Trajectory Tracking on Robotic Systems,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 9192-9202, 2023

    2023

  15. [15]

    Modeling Method for the Real-Time Simulation of Bridge-Based High-Switching-Frequency Power Electronic Converters,

    Z. H. Sun, et al., “Modeling Method for the Real-Time Simulation of Bridge-Based High-Switching-Frequency Power Electronic Converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 11723-11731, 2024

    2024

  16. [16]

    Low Complexity Digital Quadrature Oscillators for Variable Frequency Applications,

    A. Sengupta, et al., “Low Complexity Digital Quadrature Oscillators for Variable Frequency Applications,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 9, pp. 10475-10485, 2024

    2024

  17. [17]

    Model Predictive Control of Switched Reluctance Machines for Suppressing Torque and Source Current Ripples Under Bus V oltage Fluctuation,

    L. F. Ge, et al., “Model Predictive Control of Switched Reluctance Machines for Suppressing Torque and Source Current Ripples Under Bus V oltage Fluctuation,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 11, pp. 11013-11021, 2023

    2023

  18. [18]

    Feedback Gain Design of Induction Machine Full- Order Flux Observer,

    J. H. Choi, et al., “Feedback Gain Design of Induction Machine Full- Order Flux Observer,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 10, pp. 9870-9881, 2023

    2023

  19. [19]

    Parallel Nonlinear Model Predictive Controller for Real-Time Path Tracking of Autonomous Vehicle,

    F. Xu, et al., “Parallel Nonlinear Model Predictive Controller for Real-Time Path Tracking of Autonomous Vehicle,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 12, pp. 16503-16513, 2024

    2024

  20. [20]

    Accelerated Model Predictive Control Based on a Greedy Algorithm With Round-Robin Priority for N-Level Single- Phase Flying Capacitor Converter in Solid-State Transformer,

    D.-H. Park and R.-Y . Kim, “Accelerated Model Predictive Control Based on a Greedy Algorithm With Round-Robin Priority for N-Level Single- Phase Flying Capacitor Converter in Solid-State Transformer,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 7, pp. 6735-6743, 2023

    2023

  21. [21]

    Oversampling Techniques to Improve the Accuracy of Hardware-in-the-Loop Switching Models,

    M. Yushkova, A. Sanchez, and A. de Castro, “Oversampling Techniques to Improve the Accuracy of Hardware-in-the-Loop Switching Models,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 6024-6035, 2023

    2023

  22. [22]

    Low-Speed Sensorless Control Based on Improved Finite Position Set-Observer for Interior Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motors,

    Z. B. Yang, et al., “Low-Speed Sensorless Control Based on Improved Finite Position Set-Observer for Interior Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motors,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 6024-6035, 2024

    2024

  23. [23]

    Dynamic Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Common HFAC Bus Lightweight MMC-SST,

    Z. M. Bu, et al., “Dynamic Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Common HFAC Bus Lightweight MMC-SST,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 2035-2050, 2024

    2035

  24. [24]

    An Improved Robust Model Predictive Speed Control With Inertia Identification for PMSM Drives in the Electro- hydrostatic Actuator,

    T. M. Wang, et al., “An Improved Robust Model Predictive Speed Control With Inertia Identification for PMSM Drives in the Electro- hydrostatic Actuator,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 13825-13841, 2023

    2023

  25. [25]

    A Thermal Network Model for Multichip Power Modules Enabling to Characterize the Thermal Coupling Effects,

    H. M. Wang, et al., “A Thermal Network Model for Multichip Power Modules Enabling to Characterize the Thermal Coupling Effects,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 6225-6245, 2024

    2024

  26. [26]

    General Linearized Model of V oltage Source Converter With Fixed Nodal Admittance Matrix,

    F. Zhang, et al., “General Linearized Model of V oltage Source Converter With Fixed Nodal Admittance Matrix,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 12143-12148, 2024

    2024

  27. [27]

    Predictive Control Scheme With Adaptive Overmod- ulation for a Five-Leg VSI Driving Dual PMSMs,

    Y . Chen, et al., “Predictive Control Scheme With Adaptive Overmod- ulation for a Five-Leg VSI Driving Dual PMSMs,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 71-81, 2024

    2024

  28. [28]

    A Unified Framework for Adaptive and Flexible Phase Angle Regulation in Single-Phase UPQC,

    Z. Y . Li, et al., “A Unified Framework for Adaptive and Flexible Phase Angle Regulation in Single-Phase UPQC,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 12779-12793, 2025

    2025

  29. [29]

    Passivity Fractional-Order Sliding-Mode Control of Grid-Connected Converter With LCL Filter,

    B. Long, et al., “Passivity Fractional-Order Sliding-Mode Control of Grid-Connected Converter With LCL Filter,”IEEE Trans. Power Elec- tron., vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 12143-12148, 2023

    2023

  30. [30]

    Nonlinear-Disturbance-Observer-Based Model- Predictive Control for Servo Press Drive,

    L. F. Ge, et al., “Nonlinear-Disturbance-Observer-Based Model- Predictive Control for Servo Press Drive,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 8, pp. 8448-8458, 2023

    2023

  31. [31]

    A BEMF Harmonic-Extended State γσ-Axes Observer for PMSM Sensorless Control Reducing Structural Redundancy,

    P. C. Du, B. Wang, D. G. Xu, “A BEMF Harmonic-Extended State γσ-Axes Observer for PMSM Sensorless Control Reducing Structural Redundancy,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 5, pp. 4623-4638, 2025

    2025

  32. [32]

    Rotor-Switching-Signal Based Sensorless Control Method for Electrically Excited Synchronous Machines,

    Y . B. Pang, et al., “Rotor-Switching-Signal Based Sensorless Control Method for Electrically Excited Synchronous Machines,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 145-154, 2025

    2025

  33. [33]

    Nonlinear Optimal Control With Control Constraints Based on FBDEs and Its Application to AGV ,

    C. Z. Lv, et al., “Nonlinear Optimal Control With Control Constraints Based on FBDEs and Its Application to AGV ,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 6, pp. 6402-6411, 2025

    2025

  34. [34]

    Dual-Loop Continuous Control Set Model Predictive Control for a High-V oltage and High-Power Energy Storage System,

    Z. H. Meng, et al., “Dual-Loop Continuous Control Set Model Predictive Control for a High-V oltage and High-Power Energy Storage System,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 1661-1672, 2025

    2025

  35. [35]

    Adaptive Position Estimation Error Suppression Method Based on Limit Cycle Oscillator for Sensorless PMSM Drives,

    S. Q. Wang, et al., “Adaptive Position Estimation Error Suppression Method Based on Limit Cycle Oscillator for Sensorless PMSM Drives,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 11, pp. 14939-14950, 2024

    2024

  36. [36]

    Three-Vector Model Predictive Suspension Force Control for Bearingless Permanent Magnet Slice Motor,

    Y . C. Li, and H. Q. Zhu, “Three-Vector Model Predictive Suspension Force Control for Bearingless Permanent Magnet Slice Motor,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 8282-8290, 2023

    2023

  37. [37]

    Wide-Speed Range Stability Improvement of Speed- Sensorless Induction Motor Drives Based on Orthogonality V oltage- Model Observer,

    T. Q. Wang, et al., “Wide-Speed Range Stability Improvement of Speed- Sensorless Induction Motor Drives Based on Orthogonality V oltage- Model Observer,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 16521-16539, 2024

    2024

  38. [38]

    Low-Speed Control of Arc Motor Using Kalman Observer via Acceleration-Based Disturbance Observer,

    S. H. Fang, et al., “Low-Speed Control of Arc Motor Using Kalman Observer via Acceleration-Based Disturbance Observer,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 1254-1268, 2024

    2024

  39. [39]

    Optimal Switching Sequence MPC of a Three- Port- Converter for Variable-Speed PMSM With Hybrid Energy Storage,

    F. Rubio, et al., “Optimal Switching Sequence MPC of a Three- Port- Converter for Variable-Speed PMSM With Hybrid Energy Storage,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 5069-5079, 2025

    2025

  40. [40]

    Full-Speed-Range Sensorless Control of High-Speed Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Based on the Prediction Method- ology,

    M. T. Ye, et al., “Full-Speed-Range Sensorless Control of High-Speed Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Based on the Prediction Method- ology,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 3405-3418, 2025

    2025

  41. [41]

    Discrete Quad Neural Dynamics for Inverse-Free Control of Model-Unavailable Continuum Robots,

    N. Tan, et al., “Discrete Quad Neural Dynamics for Inverse-Free Control of Model-Unavailable Continuum Robots,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 12601-12611, 2024

    2024

  42. [42]

    An Improved Inertia Disturbance Suppression Method for PMSM Based on Disturbance Observer and Two-Degree-of-Freedom PI Controller,

    Y . Fan, et al., “An Improved Inertia Disturbance Suppression Method for PMSM Based on Disturbance Observer and Two-Degree-of-Freedom PI Controller,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 3590-3599, 2023

    2023

  43. [43]

    Real-Time FPGA Simulation of High- V oltage Silicon Carbide MOSFETs,

    G. L. Rødal and D. Peftitsis, “Real-Time FPGA Simulation of High- V oltage Silicon Carbide MOSFETs,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 3213-3234, 2023

    2023

  44. [44]

    Passivity-Based Partial Sequential Model Predictive Control of T-Type Grid-Connected Converters With Dynamic Damping Injection,

    B. Long, et al., “Passivity-Based Partial Sequential Model Predictive Control of T-Type Grid-Connected Converters With Dynamic Damping Injection,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 8262-8281, 2023

    2023

  45. [45]

    State Quadrant Modeling Approach: Simplifying High-Precision Modeling of DC-DC Converters for Model-Based Con- trol Strategies,

    R. H. Guo, et al., “State Quadrant Modeling Approach: Simplifying High-Precision Modeling of DC-DC Converters for Model-Based Con- trol Strategies,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., pp. 1-18, 2025 (Early Access)

    2025

  46. [46]

    Real-Time Simulation Method for High-Frequency Power Electronic Converters With Blocking Mode,

    Z. H. Sun, Y . Zhang, and Z. L. Li, “Real-Time Simulation Method for High-Frequency Power Electronic Converters With Blocking Mode,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., pp. 1-11, 2025 (Early Access)

    2025

  47. [47]

    A Novel Model-Free DZNN-QN Algorithm for Redundant Manipulator Control,

    M. Yang, et al., “A Novel Model-Free DZNN-QN Algorithm for Redundant Manipulator Control,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., pp. 1-12, 2025 (Early Access). IEEETRAN LATEX TEMPLATE V1.8B, VOL. X, NO. X, OCTOBER 2025 12

    2025

  48. [48]

    A Robust Harmonic Programmed Predictive Control for Medium V oltage Energy Conversion,

    G. Z. Chen, et al., “A Robust Harmonic Programmed Predictive Control for Medium V oltage Energy Conversion,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., pp. 1-12, 2025 (Early Access)

    2025

  49. [49]

    Acceleration-Layer Robotic Control Based on Neural Dynamics,

    M. U. Goher, et al., “Acceleration-Layer Robotic Control Based on Neural Dynamics,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., pp. 1-11, 2025 (Early Access)

    2025

  50. [50]

    A Novel DZNN Controller for End- Actuator Tracking and Multiobstacle Avoidance of Joint-Constrained Redundant Manipulators,

    Y . Han, C. Zhong, and B. B. Qiu, “A Novel DZNN Controller for End- Actuator Tracking and Multiobstacle Avoidance of Joint-Constrained Redundant Manipulators,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., pp. 1-10, 2025 (Early Access)

    2025

  51. [51]

    Discrete-Time Modeling of Interturn Short Circuits in Interior PMSMs,

    L. Zezula, et al., “Discrete-Time Modeling of Interturn Short Circuits in Interior PMSMs,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., pp. 1-12, 2025 (Early Access)

    2025

  52. [52]

    Parameter-Free Predictive Torque and Flux Control for PMSM Based on Incremental Stator Flux Predictive Model,

    X. Wu, et al., “Parameter-Free Predictive Torque and Flux Control for PMSM Based on Incremental Stator Flux Predictive Model,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 2715-2726, 2024

    2024

  53. [53]

    An Optimal-Subdomain Generalization Method for Remaining Useful Life Prediction of Machinery Under Time-Varying Operation Conditions,

    X.F. Liu, et al., “An Optimal-Subdomain Generalization Method for Remaining Useful Life Prediction of Machinery Under Time-Varying Operation Conditions,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 6177-6186, 2024

    2024

  54. [54]

    eural Differential Equation-Based Two-Stage Ap- proach for Generalization of Beam Dynamics,

    T. Kapoor, et al., “eural Differential Equation-Based Two-Stage Ap- proach for Generalization of Beam Dynamics,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 2481-2490, 2025

    2025

  55. [55]

    FPGA Implementation of a Multi-PRNG Based on a Multiscroll Chaotic Hopfield Neural Network,

    G. Garzon, et al., “FPGA Implementation of a Multi-PRNG Based on a Multiscroll Chaotic Hopfield Neural Network,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 3097-3106, 2025

    2025

  56. [56]

    Low-Complexity Heun’s Method-Based FCS-MPC With Reduced Common-Mode V oltage for a Five-Level Inverter,

    D. Prajapati, et al., “Low-Complexity Heun’s Method-Based FCS-MPC With Reduced Common-Mode V oltage for a Five-Level Inverter,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 3329-3338, 2024

    2024

  57. [57]

    A New Predictive Current Control With Reduced Current Tracking Error and Switching Frequency for Multilevel Inverters,

    H. Le, et al., “A New Predictive Current Control With Reduced Current Tracking Error and Switching Frequency for Multilevel Inverters,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 10798-10809, 2023

    2023

  58. [58]

    Passivity-Based Nonsingular Terminal Sliding-Mode Control for LC-Filtered Current Source Converter,

    H. Ding. et al., “Passivity-Based Nonsingular Terminal Sliding-Mode Control for LC-Filtered Current Source Converter,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 9367-9381, 2024

    2024

  59. [59]

    Optimal V oltage Level-Based Sequential Predic- tive Current Control With Reduced Complexity for Multilevel Inverters,

    H. Le, and A. Dekka, “Optimal V oltage Level-Based Sequential Predic- tive Current Control With Reduced Complexity for Multilevel Inverters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 1272-1288, 2025

    2025

  60. [60]

    A Novel Reduced-Order Generalized Differentiator With Zero-Phase Lag and Improved Noise Attenuation,

    R. Z. Huang, et al., “A Novel Reduced-Order Generalized Differentiator With Zero-Phase Lag and Improved Noise Attenuation,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 1406-1411, 2023

    2023

  61. [61]

    Discrete Sliding-Mode-Based MRAS for Speed- Sensorless Induction Motor Drives in the High-Speed Range,

    T. Q. Wang, et al., “Discrete Sliding-Mode-Based MRAS for Speed- Sensorless Induction Motor Drives in the High-Speed Range,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 5777-5790, 2023

    2023

  62. [62]

    Reconfigurable Fractional-Order Operator and Bandwidth Expansion Suitable for PIαController,

    P. Prommee, and P. Pienpichayapong, “Reconfigurable Fractional-Order Operator and Bandwidth Expansion Suitable for PIαController,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 5, pp. 5126-5136, 2024

    2024

  63. [63]

    Precise Position Control in Air-Bearing PMLSM System Using an Improved Anticipatory Fractional-Order Iterative Learning Control,

    M. Y . Wang, et al. “Precise Position Control in Air-Bearing PMLSM System Using an Improved Anticipatory Fractional-Order Iterative Learning Control,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 6, pp. 6073- 6083, 2024

    2024

  64. [64]

    Six-Step Operation With Multistep Predictive Control Using the Trapezoidal Method for Traction PMSM Drives,

    Z. Y . Sun, et al., “Six-Step Operation With Multistep Predictive Control Using the Trapezoidal Method for Traction PMSM Drives,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 3486-3497, 2024

    2024

  65. [65]

    Time-Step-Adaptive Filter Discretiza- tion for Variable Sampling Frequency Control of Power Converters,

    I. Hwang, J. Lee, and S. H. Cui, “Time-Step-Adaptive Filter Discretiza- tion for Variable Sampling Frequency Control of Power Converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 574-587, 2025

    2025

  66. [66]

    Multifrequency Small-Signal Modeling for Three-Phase Grid-Tied Converter Considering Digital Control and PWM Effect,

    H. Li, et al., “Multifrequency Small-Signal Modeling for Three-Phase Grid-Tied Converter Considering Digital Control and PWM Effect,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 3670-3683, 2025

    2025

  67. [67]

    An SOGI-Based Cross-Coupled Filtering Method for Speed and Position Estimation in Low-Cost PMSM Drives Using Hall- Effect Sensors,

    K. Dang, et al., “An SOGI-Based Cross-Coupled Filtering Method for Speed and Position Estimation in Low-Cost PMSM Drives Using Hall- Effect Sensors,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., pp. 1-13, 2025 (Early Access)

    2025

  68. [68]

    A Series Impedance Reshaping Control Method Con- sidering PLL Dynamics for Grid-Connected Inverters Under Weak Grid Conditions,

    B. Guo, et al., “A Series Impedance Reshaping Control Method Con- sidering PLL Dynamics for Grid-Connected Inverters Under Weak Grid Conditions,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 5, pp. 4896-4910, 2024

    2024

  69. [69]

    Simplified Discrete-Time Modeling for Convenient Stability Prediction of DAB Converter in Energy Storage System,

    Z. X. Xiao, W. J. Lei, G. Q. Gao, H. X. Wang, and W. Mu, “Simplified Discrete-Time Modeling for Convenient Stability Prediction of DAB Converter in Energy Storage System,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 12636-12651, 2024

    2024

  70. [70]

    Sensorless Control Design and Stability Analysis of High-Speed Dual Three-Phase Permanent Motor Drive for Future Aircraft Applications,

    G. D. Bi, Y . Z. Chen, K. X. Wang, S. Y . Cao, and T. Yang, “Sensorless Control Design and Stability Analysis of High-Speed Dual Three-Phase Permanent Motor Drive for Future Aircraft Applications,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 16169-16183, 2025

    2025

  71. [71]

    Tracking Control of Cable-Driven Planar Robot Based on Discrete-Time Recurrent Neural Network With Immediate Discretization Method,

    Y . Shi, et al., “Tracking Control of Cable-Driven Planar Robot Based on Discrete-Time Recurrent Neural Network With Immediate Discretization Method,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform., vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 7414-7423, 2023

    2023

  72. [72]

    Discrete-Time Current Control of Salient Machines With a Simplified Model,

    M. J. Hu, W. Hua, Z. Wu, and Y . F. Hu, “Discrete-Time Current Control of Salient Machines With a Simplified Model,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 7, pp. 6686-6698, 2023

    2023

  73. [73]

    Solving Future Nonlinear Equation System via ZNN and Novel General ILR3S Formula With Multitype Manipulator Applications,

    Z. S. Fu, Y . N. Zhang, and W. B. Li, “Solving Future Nonlinear Equation System via ZNN and Novel General ILR3S Formula With Multitype Manipulator Applications,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 12623-12633, 2024

    2024

  74. [74]

    Inverse-Free Discrete ZNN Models for Solving Future Nonlinear Equality and Inequality System With Robot Manipulator Control,

    J. Li, et al., “Inverse-Free Discrete ZNN Models for Solving Future Nonlinear Equality and Inequality System With Robot Manipulator Control,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., pp. 1-11, 2025 (Early Access)

    2025

  75. [75]

    High-Order Robust Discrete-Time Neural Dynamics for Time-Varying Multilinear Tensor Equation WithM-Tensor,

    M. Liu, et al., “High-Order Robust Discrete-Time Neural Dynamics for Time-Varying Multilinear Tensor Equation WithM-Tensor,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform., vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 9457-9467, 2023

    2023

  76. [76]

    Improved Single Current Sensor Based PMSM Control under Low Frequency Ratio Using Discrete-Time Adaptive Luenberger Observer,

    Y . Zuo, C. Y . Lai, and L. V . Iyer, “Improved Single Current Sensor Based PMSM Control under Low Frequency Ratio Using Discrete-Time Adaptive Luenberger Observer,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 9, pp. 10297-10308, 2024

    2024

  77. [77]

    Sensorless Control Based on Discrete Fractional-Order Terminal Sliding Mode Observer for High-Speed PMSM With LCL Filter,

    Z. X. Cheng, L. Y . Li, X. W. Liu, X. Bai, and J. X. Liu, “Sensorless Control Based on Discrete Fractional-Order Terminal Sliding Mode Observer for High-Speed PMSM With LCL Filter,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 1654-1668, 2025

    2025

  78. [78]

    Mod- elling Axial Nonuniformity in Induction Machines Using a Multislice Magnetic Equivalent Circuit,

    Z. F. Gong, P. Desenfans, D. Pissoort, H. Hallez, and D. Vanoost, “Mod- elling Axial Nonuniformity in Induction Machines Using a Multislice Magnetic Equivalent Circuit,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 72, no. 6, pp. 5613-5624, 2025

    2025

  79. [79]

    Multiple Discrete Adaptive Filter Based Position Error Reduction for Sensorless IPMSM Drives,

    X. Wu. et al., “Multiple Discrete Adaptive Filter Based Position Error Reduction for Sensorless IPMSM Drives,”IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 3342-3350, 2024

    2024

  80. [80]

    Error Analysis and Design of Sliding-Mode- Observer-Based Sensorless PMSM Drives Under a Low Sampling Ratio,

    H. T. Yang, et al., “Error Analysis and Design of Sliding-Mode- Observer-Based Sensorless PMSM Drives Under a Low Sampling Ratio,”IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 7783-7792, 2024

    2024

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 3, 2026.