Quasi-synchronization of drive–response systems with parameter mismatch via event-triggered impulsive control

Event‐triggered delayed impulsive control for quasi‐synchronization of complex dynamic systems with packet loss and parameter mismatch

“…\end{aligned} \right.} \end{equation}$$Remark The impulsive system (8) presented in this work is different from the general impulsive dynamic system proposed in [14]. In [14], instantaneous impulsive jumps are only dependent on the current state.…”

“…\end{equation}$$Remark The impulsive system (8) presented in this work is different from the general impulsive dynamic system proposed in [14]. In [14], instantaneous impulsive jumps are only dependent on the current state. However, in Equation (8), the instantaneous jump of impulses not only depends on the current state, but also takes into account the past state.…”

“…So far, there have been many control mechanisms to achieve dynamic system synchronization, such as event triggered control [8], adaptive control [9], pinning control [10], and impulsive control [11,12]. Event triggering mechanism and impulsive control methods have been widely used in synchronous control research because of their respective advantages, and have attracted a large number of scholars' attention [11,[13][14][15][16][17][18]. Event trigger time is generated only when the sampled information violates the established event trigger policy, which not only saves communication resources, but also reduces control costs.…”

“…In addition, time delay and packet loss will also weaken the synchronization performance of the system, so considering time delay and packet loss is more meaningful in the system control problem, which stimulates the motivation of this paper. In [14], the authors study parameter mismatch driving quasi‐synchronization of systems through event‐triggered impulsive control. However, most literature studies ignore the delay and packet loss caused by signal transmission, sampling, and other factors in real systems.…”