2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2022.05.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dixon resultant theory for stability analysis of distributed delay systems and enhancement of delay robustness

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Time delay phenomenon is widespread in practical engineering systems, such as the chemical reactors, 2 the pendulum systems, 3 and so on. 31,32 In this section, we extend the above result to nonlinear MASs with both state and input delay. In particular, the following nonlinear time-delay MASs are considered…”
Section: Extension To System (1) With Both State and Input Delaymentioning
confidence: 66%
“…Time delay phenomenon is widespread in practical engineering systems, such as the chemical reactors, 2 the pendulum systems, 3 and so on. 31,32 In this section, we extend the above result to nonlinear MASs with both state and input delay. In particular, the following nonlinear time-delay MASs are considered…”
Section: Extension To System (1) With Both State and Input Delaymentioning
confidence: 66%
“…are also used to convert quasi-polynomial (1) into an equivalent characteristic polynomial. In spite of the fact that the resultant-based approaches have been extended to dynamic systems with two or multiple time delays, including neutral systems [56], distributed delay systems [38,57], and fractional-order systems [58], an exact determination of crossing frequency set is still lack. Hence, it may waste time in sweeping frequencies that lie between the lower and upper bounds but not actually belong to the crossing frequency set.…”
Section:  Andmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also noteworthy that the resultant-based methods presented in the literature for determining the stability crossing frequency set still suffer from two major inadequacies. First, the existing methods provide only the lower and upper bounds [28,[ 44], [46] (or just the upper bound [18], [42], [43]) rather than the exact ranges of the stability crossing frequency set. This limitation can lead to an incorrect set of crossing frequencies, as demonstrated in Example 2.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%