No abstract

No abstract

Differential flatness of buck, buck-boost, and boost converter models is shown. Its benefits if used for controlling the output voltage of these converters are revealed by comparing the flatness-based control with passivity-based and linear control. Two observers for the boost converter are suggested one of which requires only the measurement of the converters output voltage. Both observers can be used with minor changes for the buck-boost converter. Two flatness-based online trajectory planning algorithms are suggested. They exploit the parametrization of the trajectories in the energy. One of them is designed to achieve fast setpoint transitions during converter start-up or despite sudden load steps while simultaneously respecting the converters physical constraints. The other one is considered for applications in power factor correction. Different stabilization strategies are compared. The viability of the observers, the algorithm, and the stabilization strategies are verified by simulations of switched nonideal converter models.Index Terms-DC-DC converters, flatness-based control, observers, passivity-based control (PBC), trajectory planning.

No abstract

Background: Multiple lines of evidence suggest that the onset and course of bipolar disorder is influenced by environmental light condi tions. Increased suppression of melatonin by light (supersensitivity) in patients with bipolar disorder has been postulated as an endo phenotype by several studies. However, due to methodological shortcomings, the results of these studies remain inconclusive. This study investigated melatonin suppression in euthymic patients with bipolar I disorder using evening blue light specifically targeting the melanopsin system. Methods: Melatonin suppression was assessed in euthymic patients with bipolar I disorder and healthy controls by exposure to monochromatic blue light (λ max = 475 nm; photon density = 1.6 × 10 13 photons/cm 2 /s) for 30 minutes at 2300 h, administered via a ganzfeld dome for highly uniform light exposure. Serum melatonin concentrations were determined from serial blood sampling via radioimmunoassay. All participants received mydriatic eye drops and were genotyped for the PER3 VNTR polymorphism to avoid or adjust for potential confounding. As secondary outcomes, serum melatonin concentrations during dark conditions and after monochro matic red light exposure (λ max = 624 nm; photon density = 1.6 × 10 13 photons/cm 2 /s) were also investigated. Changes in subjective alert ness were investigated for all 3 lighting conditions. Results: A total of 90 participants (57 controls, 33 bipolar I disorder) completed the study. Melatonin suppression by monochromatic blue light did not differ between groups (F 1,80 = 0.56; p = 0.46). Moreover, there were no differences in melatonin suppression by monochromatic red light (F 1,82 = 1.80; p = 0.18) or differences in melatonin concentrations during dark conditions (F 1,74 = 1.16; p = 0.29). Healthy controls displayed a stronger increase in subjective alertness during exposure to blue light than patients with bipolar I disorder (t 85 = 2.28; p = 0.027). Limitations: Large interindividual differences in melatonin kinetics may have masked a true difference. Conclusion: Despite using a large cohort and highly controlled laboratory conditions, we found no differ ences in melatonin suppression between euthymic patients with bipolar I disorder and healthy controls. These findings do not support the notion that supersensitivity is a valid endophenotype in bipolar I disorder.