Dynamic self‐triggered output‐feedback control for nonlinear stochastic systems with time delays

Abstract

SummaryIn this paper, the dynamic self‐triggered output‐feedback control problem is investigated for a class of nonlinear stochastic systems with time delays. To reduce the network resource consumption, the dynamic event‐triggered mechanism is implemented in the sensor‐to‐controller channel. Criteria are first established for the closed‐loop system to be stochastically input‐to‐state stable under the event‐triggered mechanism. Furthermore, sufficient conditions are given under which the closed‐loop system with dynamic event‐triggered mechanism is almost surely stable, and the output‐feedback controller as well as the dynamic event‐triggered mechanism are co‐designed. Moreover, a dynamic self‐triggered mechanism is proposed such that the nonlinear stochastic system with the designed output‐feedback controller is stochastically input‐to‐state stable and the Zeno phenomenon is excluded. Finally, a numerical example is provided to illustrate the effectiveness of proposed dynamic self‐triggered output‐feedback control scheme.

Event‐triggered and self‐triggered gain scheduling control of input constrained systems with applications to the spacecraft rendezvous

“…which implies (12). By the definition of 0 , we have h (0) = 0.…”

“…Different from the designed ETGSC, the event generator of the designed STGSC avoids monitoring system states x(t). Compared to some previous STC methods (for example, References 5,7,9,12), the lower bound of IETs associated with the designed STGSC has a very clear value k that avoids the complex relationship with the system matrix and has a very clear relationship with the designed parameter (since max increases as increases and k increases as max decreases, k decreases as increases). Similar to the ETGSC, the STGSC algorithms also allow us to find easily a trade-off between the IETs and the convergence rate of the closed-loop system.…”

Finite‐horizon optimal tracking control for constrained‐input nonlinear interconnected system using aperiodic distributed nonzero‐sum games

“…Assumption 2. The optimal tracking strategy of every subsystem is Lipschitz continuous with respect to e ri (t ), that is, [16,18], the designed controllers under the mechanisms of the CTE and the ST may be occur Zeno behaviours (the occurrence of an infinite number of events in finite time), which will degrade system performance and destroy the system stability. Compared with the above schemes, triggering conditions only need to be verified periodically under the PET scheme as shown in Figure 1, which reduces the resource consumption during the detection process and avoids the Zeno phenomenon.…”

“…By and large, the timetriggered communication scheme used in literatures [14,15] will generate excessive redundant signals and even influence system stability. To reduce the consumption of communication resources, some aperiodic sampling schemes (ASSs), such as the continuous event-triggered (CET) scheme, the periodic event-triggered (PET) scheme, the self-triggered (ST) scheme and so on, were presented in [16][17][18]. Using these ASSs, the control strategies were updated only when the designed triggering conditions were breached, where the triggering condition was monitored continuously under the CET scheme [16], while the triggering condition was verified only periodically under the PET scheme [17].…”

Periodic event‐triggered control with multisource disturbances and quantized states

“…The basic concept of ETC is that the event-triggered condition can determine whether the sampled-data are transmitted, and the controller can be executed, if necessary. Some interesting results have been obtained for different kinds of complex system, such as nonlinear systems, 1,2 multi-agent systems, 3,4 fuzzy systems, 5,6 stochastic systems, 7,8 and so on. Meanwhile, various types of ETC strategies have been proposed, such as self-triggered control, 9,10 continuous-time event-triggered control, 11,12 discrete-time event-triggered control 13,14 and adaptive event-triggered control, 15,16 etc.…”