Evidence Matrix

Evidence Matrix

Research questionContribution claimEvidence type and fileFigure/table/sectionStatusGap priority
RQ1: Does the chain reproduce the analytical operating point in switching simulation?C3Simulation: AIPE-Workflows results/circuit-sim-level1/, results/timestep-convergence-table.json (9,996.8 W against 10,000 W; series current 13.6779 A against 13.6775 A; phase shift 22.5000°)Table II, Fig. 3verified (analytical gate pass)none
RQ2: How closely do analytical models agree with FEM and CAD?C1Simulation: results/fem-transformer-window/ (leakage −4.4 %), results/fem-heatsink/ (thermal resistance +8.6 %), results/cad-heatsink/ (mass −1.3 %)Table III, Fig. 4verified (field-simulation gate pass)none
RQ3: Does feedback change upstream design quantities?C2Simulation: results/iteration-example-a/ (phase shift 22.50° → 21.26°, peak current +14 %), results/iteration-reconcile-it03/ (loss 131.7 → 127.2 W, hottest junction 63.0 → 61.7 °C)Table IVavailableimportant: no baseline flow for comparison
RQ4: Is the run reproducible from a clean checkout?C3Other: results/acceptance-2026-10-21/ (every engineering value identical)Table Vverifiednone
Gap statementC1Literature: none yetIntroduction, Related Workplannedblocking
Comparison with a conventional design flowC1, C2noneResultsplannedblocking for comparative claims
Hardware performancenone claimedExperiment: none (experimental and hardware_qualification gates not_run)Limitationsmissingblocking for any hardware claim
PCB completionC3Other: results/pcb-erc-drc/ (DRC errors 0 / 0 / 0, unconnected 26 / 23 / 24; gate fail)Table V, Limitationsavailable, gate failimportant

Keep 2–4 concrete contribution claims; distinguish planned evidence from results.