1994
DOI: 10.1080/00207179408921496
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Frequency domain curve fitting with maximum amplitude criterion and guaranteed stability

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
14
0
1

Year Published

1995
1995
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, it is explicitly indicated in earlier overviews of the motion control field, e.g., already in Steinbuch and Norg (1998, Section 4.2, limitations of tools), that modeling tools are not readily available. Third, besides the fact that many system identification approaches with different criteria have been developed, a significant number of results addressing issues with the numerical implementation of these methods have been developed, including frequency scaling (Pintelon and Kollár, 2005), amplitude scaling (Hakvoort and Van den Hof, 1994), the use of classical orthonormal polynomials and orthogonal rational functions (Heuberger et al, 2005, Section 3.1), (Ninness et al, 2000), (Ninness and Hjalmarsson, 2001), and more recently the use of orthonormal basis functions with respect to a discrete databased inner product (Bultheel et al, 2005), (Van Herpen et al, 2014). Related numerical issues are also seen in subspace identification, see e.g., Verdult et al (2002) and Chiuso and Giorgio (2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, it is explicitly indicated in earlier overviews of the motion control field, e.g., already in Steinbuch and Norg (1998, Section 4.2, limitations of tools), that modeling tools are not readily available. Third, besides the fact that many system identification approaches with different criteria have been developed, a significant number of results addressing issues with the numerical implementation of these methods have been developed, including frequency scaling (Pintelon and Kollár, 2005), amplitude scaling (Hakvoort and Van den Hof, 1994), the use of classical orthonormal polynomials and orthogonal rational functions (Heuberger et al, 2005, Section 3.1), (Ninness et al, 2000), (Ninness and Hjalmarsson, 2001), and more recently the use of orthonormal basis functions with respect to a discrete databased inner product (Bultheel et al, 2005), (Van Herpen et al, 2014). Related numerical issues are also seen in subspace identification, see e.g., Verdult et al (2002) and Chiuso and Giorgio (2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The related theory, as presented in [12], shows that for any scalar stable all-pass transfer function with balanced realization the sequence of functions (7) generates an orthonormal basis for the space of stable systems , with the property that (8) As a result there exist unique and such that (9) Note that with the McMillan degree of (dimension of ), and . The advantage of this generalized basis is that if an appropriate choice of dynamics (set of poles) is incorporated into , and thus into the basis functions , then the series expansion (9) shows an increasing rate of convergence. Consequently, the accuracy of a finite expansion model will substantially increase; for more details on the use of these basis functions see [12], [34], and [25].…”
Section: Model Parameterization With Orthonormal Basis Functionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The estimated parameter vector is denoted by (11) IV. PARAMETER ESTIMATE Building upon (9) for the data generating system, we will write (12) with and (13) Using the system's equations, similar as in [17], we now can express the ETFE by (14) where (15) and where is a term due to the past of the input signal, . Written in vector notation we can rewrite this into…”
Section: Model Parameterization With Orthonormal Basis Functionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Established identification algorithms include [26], the SK-iteration [34], and the Gauss-Newton iteration [1], which (iteratively) compute the least-squares solution to a linear systems of equations, for polynomial models or rational parametrizations. Although conceptually straightforward, the associated numerical conditioning is often extremely poor, as is evidenced by the developments in [1], [18], [28], [41], [44], which provide partial solutions for ill-conditioning. In [30], [37], [21], a fundamentally different solution strategy is pursued.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%