Jrl Syst Sci & Complexity (2009) 22: 683–696

STABILIZATION OF NONLINEAR TIME-VARYING
SYSTEMS: A CONTROL LYAPUNOV FUNCTION
APPROACH∗
Zhongping JIANG · Yuandan LIN · Yuan WANG

Received: 18 June 2009
c
2009 Springer Science + Business Media, LLC

Abstract This paper presents a control Lyapunov function approach to the global stabilization
problem for general nonlinear and time-varying systems. Explicit stabilizing feedback control laws are
proposed based on the method of control Lyapunov functions and Sontag’s universal formula.
Key words Control Lyapunov functions (clf), global stabilization, nonlinear time-varying systems.

1 Introduction
The last two decades have witnessed tremendous progress in the field of nonlinear control.
One of the most powerful tools is the approach of control Lyapunov functions (clf)[1−2] which
has been employed to address various issues tied to nonlinear control systems, such as nonlinear
stabilization[3] and adaptive control[4−5]. However, most of the past work by the clf approach
focused on time-invariant systems. The main purpose of this paper is to develop some tools
based on control Lyapunov functions for stabilizing nonlinear time varying systems.
The problem of stabilization of time varying systems has attracted much attention; see for
instance, [6–10], and other work cited therein, where some recursive designs such as backstep-
ping approach were adopted. Our work will be based on the clf approach. Essentially, we will
generalize the well-known universal formula[2] to provide explicit feedback control laws that sta-
bilize a general time-varying nonlinear system, under the assumption that a control Lyapunov
function is known. It should be mentioned that, when applying the control Lyapunov function
approach to time-varying systems, new challenging issues arise, mainly due to the presence of
the time parameter t in the Lyapunov functions. In contrast to the time invariant case, a feed-
back law resulted from the universal formula may fail to stabilize the system even if a uniform
control Lyapunov function is given. In this preliminary work, we will define uniform control
Lyapunov functions and the associated concept of small control property for time varying sys-
tems. We will then provide several sufficient conditions under which the feedback laws given by
the universal formula render the closed-loop system uniformly globally asymptotically stable.
Zhongping JIANG
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Polytechnic Institute of New York University, Brooklyn,
NY 11201, USA. Email: zjiang@control.poly.edu.
Yuandan LIN · Yuan WANG
Department of Mathematical Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA.
Email: lin@math.fau.edu; ywang@math.fau.edu.
∗ This work has been supported in part by National Science Foundation under Grants Nos. ECS-0093176, DMS-

0906659, and DMS-0504296, and in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos.
60228003 and 60628302.

but the function is allowed to take negative values. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. KL stands for the class of functions R+ × R+ → R+ which are of class K on the first argument and decreases to zero on the second argument. Several new results on time-varying stabilization will be developed in this section. For some related work based on the condition of persistent excitation. it holds that |x(t + t0 . (1) where f : R≥0 × Rn → Rn is locally Lipschitz. t ∈ R≥0 . The general form of the problems proposed in [8] was that if a system x˙ = f (x) + g(x)u is stabilizable by a feedback law k(x). the method by the combination of universal formula and weakly persistently exciting functions may lead to more applications. Throughout the paper. x ∈ Rn .2. In Section 4 we close the paper with brief concluding remarks. we recall the concept of control Lyapunov function and Sontag’s universal formula for time-invariant control systems. We first show by a simple example that not every stabilizing feedback law for a system x˙ = f (x) + g(x)u will stabilize the system x˙ = f (x) + p(t)g(x)u when a persistently exciting p(t) is presented. t). A natural tool in our method is the so called weakly persistently exciting functions introduced in [12]. In Section 3 we present some extension of control Lyapunov functions to deal with nonlinear time-varying systems. we also consider a problem related to some open questions raised in [8]. which may lead to a solution to the more general type of systems in strict feedback forms. Our main concern is then whether the feedback law derived from the universal formula for a system is still stabilizing when p(t) multiplicatively appears in the control channel. the problem was discussed and solved for several classes of systems. 2. Because of the uncertainty of the sign of such functions involved. 2 Preliminaries Before tackling the stabilization problem for general nonlinear time-varying systems. K∞ is a subset of the class-K functions which are unbounded. In Section 2 we review the notion and properties of uniform global asymptotic stability and Sontag’s universal formula. Such a system is uniformly globally asymp- totically stable (UGAS) at the origin if there exists some β ∈ KL such that for every solution x(·. t0 . We refer the interested reader to some recent contributions[6−8. x(t)). please also see [7] and [11]. ∀ t ≥ 0. the proofs of the results are more complicated than one would expect. Then. we first review the notion and properties of uniform global asymptotic stability that will be needed for the development of our stabilizing control schemes. . K is the class of continuous functions R+ → R+ which is zero at zero and strictly increasing. in Subsection 2. especially when it involves with manipulations of inequalities. On the other hand.684 ZHONGPING JIANG · YUANDAN LIN · YUAN WANG By the control Lyapunov function approach. A weakly persistently exciting function still has the main feature that the energy of the function over any time interval of a given length maintains at least a certain level. The results we obtained are still preliminary.1 Uniform Global Asymptotic Stability Consider a nonlinear time-varying system of the form: x(t) ˙ = f (t. x0 )| ≤ β(|x0 | .12−17] for additional tools and results on stability and stabilization for nonlinear time-varying systems. t0 . We will consider in this work the problem from the clf point of view. can the system x˙ = f (x) + p(t)g(x)u be stabilized when p(·) possesses some persistent excitation property? In [8]. x0 ) of (1) with the initial condition x(t0 ) = x0 .

condition (3) can be replaced by a weaker condition. (2) • for some positive definite function α. For τ > 0 and σ > 0. ∀ t ≥ 0. Theorem 49. ξ) ≤ −α(|ξ|). locally essentially bounded functions p : R → R≥0 such that Z t+τ p(s) ds ≥ σ. ξ)). ∀ t ≥ 0. see. ξ) + f (t. ∀ ξ. it holds that α(|ξ|) ≤ V (t. [18. and positive definite function ρ such that ρ′ (V )α ◦α−1 (V ) ≥ ρ(V ). let Pτ. ∀ t0 . ξ) + f (t. ∀ t ≥ 0. ∀ x0 . ξ) ≤ −e α(V (t. the following holds: ∂V ∂V (t. α ∈ K∞ . ξ) ≤ −p(t)W (t. ∂t ∂ξ In recent work [12] and [16]. (3) ∂t ∂ξ Note that to get the existence of a C ∞ function for system (1). ∀t ≥ 0. By Proposition 13 in [20].σ denote the collection of measurable. Observe that for a function V satisfying (2). x0 )) ≤ W (t0 . one sees that there exists some C 1 . x(t + t0 .σ . ∀ ξ ∈ Rn . ξ) ≤ α(|ξ|). as shown below. Proposition 16]. proper.1 A system as in (1) is UGAS if and only if there exists a C ∞ Lyapunov function V : R≥0 × Rn → R≥0 such that • for some α. ξ) + f (t. ∀ t ≥ 0. t0 . this result was stated for periodic systems and was proved by establishing equivalence among different types of Lyapunov functions. ξ) is locally Lipschitz on R≥0 ×(Rn \ {0}) and is continuous everywhere[19]. ∀ t ≥ 0. In [16]. property (3) is equivalent to the existence of a positive definite function α e(·) such that ∂V ∂V (t. Suppose there is some Lyapunov function V satisfying properties (2) and (5). for the Lyapunov function W given by W := ρ ◦ V . STABILIZATION OF NONLINEAR TIME-VARYING SYSTEMS 685 The following result provides an equivalent Lyapunov characterization of UGAS. ∀ ξ ∈ Rn . it holds that ∂V ∂V (t. it holds that ∂W ∂W (t. ξ). ξ) + f (t. (6) ∂t ∂ξ It then follows that (see also [7]) R t+t0 p(s) ds W (t + t0 . ∀ ξ ∈ Rn . ξ) ≤ −p(t)α(|ξ|) (5) ∂t ∂ξ for all t ≥ 0 and all ξ ∈ Rn . (4) t Proposition 2. it was shown that.3] and [19. for the sufficiency part. and hence. one may relax the Lipschitz condition of f by assuming that f (t. x0 )e− t0 .2[16] A system as in (1) is UGAS if there exists a C 1 Lyapunov function satisfying (2) such that for some p ∈ Pτ. Below we provide a more direct proof. Proposition 2. for in- stance. .

and satisfies the following implication  inf a(ξ) + b(ξ)u < 0. t Observe that wP is a larger class than P since a function in wP is not required to be nonnegative.σ for any τ.3 A system as in (1) is UGAS if there exists a C 1 Lyapunov function V satisfying (2) such that for some p ∈ wPτ. sin2 t − 14 6∈ Pτ. ξ) ≤ −p(t)V (t.686 ZHONGPING JIANG · YUANDAN LIN · YUAN WANG Let k denote the largest integer such that kτ ≤ t. the following holds: ∂V ∂V (t. xo )) ≤ V (t0 . σ > 0. Since the function takes negative values in some intervals. For instance.σ . let wPτ.σ yields a function p(t) − c in wPτ.. t0 . x(t + t0 . t0 . except one needs to note that for p ∈ wPτ.σ′ for any given 0 ≤ c < σ/τ and σ ′ = σ − cτ . The next result is a variant of [12. t W (t + t0 .σ . Proposition 2. For a Lyapunov function V satisfying such an exponential decay estimation. one has used the linear property of W in the decay estimation (6). where M1 = eσ+cτ . x0 )M e−σt/τ .e. a.3 follows essentially the same lines as the proof from (6) to (8). x(t + t0 .σ denote the set of all measurable.2 Control Lyapunov Functions Recall that a C ∞ function V (x) is said to be a (global) clf for a time-invariant affine-in- control system x˙ = f (x) + g(x)u. Z t+τ • p(s) ds ≥ σ for all t ≥ 0. By (4). The desired UGAS property follows directly readily. x0 )e−( τ −1)σ ≤ W (t0 . (8) where M = eσ . ξ) + f (t. ξ) (9) ∂t ∂ξ for all t ≥ 0 and all ξ ∈ Rn . x0 )) ≤ W (t0 . the decay property (9) implies that V (t + t0 . if V (x) is positive definite and proper. ∀ξ 6= 0 u . Theorem 10]. locally essentially bounded functions p such that • for some c > 0. it holds that p(t) ≥ −c. (7) t0 t0 τ Therefore. t0 t0 t0 +kτ τ where k still has the same meaning as in (7). The proof of Proposition 2. xo )M1 e−σt/τ . Z t0 +t Z t0 +kτ Z t0 +t t  p(s) ds = p(s) ds + p(s) ds ≥ kσ − cτ ≥ − 1 σ − cτ. For τ > 0 and σ > 0. sin2 t − 14 ∈ wPτ. In the above discussions. 2. Also notice that any p ∈ Pτ. one sees that Z t0 +t Z t0 +kτ t  p(s) ds ≥ p(s) ds ≥ kσ ≥ − 1 σ. Hence. the condition of p being nonnegative can be further relaxed as shown in [12].σ with τ = π and σ = π/4.

for any ε > 0. Furthermore. V is said to be a uniform control Lyapunov function (uniform-clf) for (11). A function ψ : R+ × Rn → R is said to be almost smooth if it is continuous everywhere and is smooth on R+ × (Rn \ {0}).e. x(t)) + g(t. Definiton 3. ∀ ξ 6= 0. if the clf function V satisfies the small control property. x(t)) + g(t. ξ). if b 6= 0. ∂t ∂x 3 Control Lyapunov Functions for Time-Varying Systems To simplify the presentation. x(t)) is UGAS at the origin. it satisfies a stronger property  inf a(t. x(t)) along the solution x(t). it is shown that the feedback law u = κ(a(ξ). if it satisfies property (2) and the following: inf {a(t. (12) u ∂V ∂V where a(t. We refer the interested reader to [3] for a tutorial on control Lyapunov functions. b(ξ)) is almost smooth. x(t)) + (t.. In the seminal work [2]. x(t)) denote dt d V (t. x(t)). x(t))k(t. (11) where f and g are smooth maps from R+ × Rn to Rn . if b = 0. that is. x(t)) = (t. In the next section. For a system given by x(t) ˙ = F (t. where an almost smooth function means a function defined on Rn which is smooth away from 0 and continuous everywhere. where the function κ is defined by  √  a + a2 + b 4 − . we only consider a single-input time-varying control system: x(t) ˙ = f (t.1 System (11) is said to be uniformly stabilizable if there exists some feedback law k : R+ × Rn → R which is smooth on R+ × (Rn \ {0}) such that the resulted closed-loop system x(t) ˙ = f (t. ξ) and b(t. a universal formula was established for the design of feedback stabilizers when a clf is given. x(t))u(t). locally essentially bounded functions. there exists some δ > 0 such that whenever 0 < |ξ| < δ. κ(a. ξ)u} < 0. we let V˙ (t.2 A C ∞ function V is said to be a clf for (11). ξ) = ∂t (t. then the feedback given by u = κ(a(ξ). instead of (12). More precisely. there exists some |u| < ε such that a(ξ) + b(ξ)u < 0. b(ξ)) given by the universal formula is of class C ∞ on Rn \ {0} and stabilizes the system. x(t)) and a C 1 function V : R≥0 × Rn → Rn . (13) u where α is a positive definite function. b) = b (10)  0. ξ) + b(t. . x(t))F (t. Moreover. we generalize this method to general time-varying systems. ξ) + b(t. ξ) +∂ξ f (t. ξ)u ≤ −α(|ξ|). Definiton 3. STABILIZATION OF NONLINEAR TIME-VARYING SYSTEMS 687 with a(ξ) = ∂V∂ξ(ξ) f (ξ) and b(ξ) = ∂V∂ξ(ξ) g(ξ). i. if. ξ) = ∂V ∂ξ g(t. ∂V ∂V V˙ (t. The admissible class of input functions is composed of measurable.

Instead of saying V satisfies the small control property. ξ) := κ(a(t. x2 ) = x21 + x22 is a clf. the choice of δ is not required to be uniform in t0 ). ξ). Indeed.688 ZHONGPING JIANG · YUANDAN LIN · YUAN WANG Remark 3. for the simple system x+u x˙ = √ . Note that in Definition 3. (15) Without knowing if the function a2 (t. x(t)) + b4 (t. For instance.6 will be given in Appendix A. Even if a system admits a uniform-clf. the following holds for the closed-loop solutions: p V˙ (t. x(t)) = − a2 (t.1. every t0 > 0. But the system cannot be uniformly stabilized. Proposition 2. ξ). Lemma 3. ξ)µ < 0. For instance. we will sometimes say that the pair (a(t.6 Let V be a clf for a system as in (11). As a preparation. the existence of a uniform-clf is a necessary condition for a system as in (11) to be uniformly stabilizable. t0 + δ). ξ) + b(t. 1 + t2 V (x1 . Definition 3. ξ)) is almost smooth. for a general system with the feedback given by the universal formula. the choice of δ is allowed to be dependent on t0 (i. then the system admits a uniform-clf. If V satisfies the small control property. the x1 -component of the trajectory with the initial condition x(t0 ) = (x1o . x1 (t0 ) = x1o which is not a UGAS system. there exists some |µ| < ε such that a(t.2. 1 + t2 2 the function V (x) = x2 /2 is a uniform-clf satisfying that V˙ (x(t)) = x (t)+x(t)u(t) √ 1+t2 . ∀ ξ 6= 0. The universal formula leads to 2 r r x (t) 1 2V (x(t)) 1 V˙ (x(t)) = − √ 1+ =−√ 1+ . Lemma 3. we first extend the result regarding the small control property to time varying systems. and Equation (15). ξ) = 0 ⇒ a(t.5 A clf V is said to satisfy the small control property (SCP) if for every ε > 0. It is interesting to point out that the existence of a clf does not necessarily imply that the system can be uniformly stabilized. Namely. x(t)). ξ)) satisfies the small control property.. x˙ 2 = x2 u. . for the planar system x1 x˙ 1 = − + x2 . Indeed. The next result follows directly from Lemma 3.4 If a system as in (11) is uniformly stabilizable. ξ). (14) Clearly. there exists some δ > 0 such that for all 0 < |ξ| < δ and all t ∈ (t0 − δ. ξ) dominates a positive definite function of V . by means of Proposition 2. then the feedback function given by the universal formula u = k(t. In this work we will investigate sufficient conditions under which the feedback laws given by the universal formula render the closed-loop system the UGAS property. ξ) + b4 (t.6. b(t. for any feedback law u = k(t. 0) is a solution of the one-dimensional system x˙ 1 = −x1 /(1 + t2 ). ξ) < 0.5. The proof of Lemma 3.3 It is of interest to note that the condition (12) is equivalent to requiring b(t. the universal formula does not necessarily yield a feedback law that guarantees the UGAS property of the closed-loop system.e. one cannot determine if the closed-loop system is uniformly asymptotically stable. b(t. 1 + t2 1 + t2 1 + t2 1 + t2 It can be verified that the closed-loop system is not UGAS.

the solutions of the closed-loop system satisfy q V˙ (t. Then. ξ)) satisfies the small control property.σ for some τ > 0 and σ > 0. and (d) there is some continuous. x(t)) + b40 (t. ξ) = p(t)a0 (t. Proposition 3. b0 (t. (b) b0 (t. Assume further that (16) holds for some positive definite functions α and p satisfying (17). x). x)) is UGAS. then the closed-loop system under the almost smooth feedback u = κ(a(t. b(t. ∀ξ ∈ Rn . Proof As it can be directly checked. . ξ) (18) with the conditions (a) a1 (t. Often. ξ) − a1 (t. b(t. Proposition 3. Namely. that is. x). the following holds. ∀ ξ 6= 0. Proposition 3. instead of (14): b(t.8 Suppose a system as in (11) admits a clf V that satisfies the small control property. ξ)| + b20 (t. Assume further that p a2 (t. Suppose that there exists a C ∞ function V satisfying (2) and the following: a(t. one has the following (see [14.σ is relaxed into the following weaker property Z ∞ p(s) ds = ∞. ∀ t ≥ 0. b(t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) = 0 ⇒ a(t. ξ) ≥ 0. ξ) ≤ −p(t)e a(ξ). STABILIZATION OF NONLINEAR TIME-VARYING SYSTEMS 689 Proposition 3. (c) p ∈ Pτ. Then. ξ) < 0 for all ξ 6= 0. ξ) ≥ p(t)α(|ξ|).3]). for some β ∈ KL and some nonnegative function ρ. the feedback law by the universal formula u = κ(a0 (t. x(t)) ≤ −p(t) a20 (t. ξ). (17) 0 then one will achieve a weaker stability. we would like to point out that if the property p ∈ Pτ. 1 + ρ(t0 ) 3. As a side remark. ξ). a clf satisfying condition (14) can be hard to find. x)) is semi-uniformly GAS (see [14]). where e a is positive definite and p ∈ Pτ. ξ) = p(t)b0 (t. x(t)))/2 . x(t)) ≤ −p(t)α3 (V (t. b0 (t.σ and some positive definite function α. ∀ t ≥ 0 (16) for some p ∈ Pτ. it holds that   t |x(t + t0 )| ≤ β |x0 | . ξ) ≥ α3 (V (t. Such a clf is called a p-clf. ξ)). x).1 Controller Design with p-CLF In applications. ξ) = 0 ⇒ a0 (t. the closed-loop system under the almost smooth feedback u = κ(a(t. x)) is almost smooth.9 Consider a system as in (11). (19) Assume further that (a0 (t. positive definite function α3 such that |a0 (t.σ .7 Suppose a system as in (11) admits a clf V that satisfies the small control property. and the corresponding closed-loop system is UGAS.

x(t)) + b40 (t. x(t))v(t). ξ)) satisfies the small control property. ξ) and b0 (t. (b) there exists some smooth function q0 (t) such that p0 (t)q0 (t) = p(t). ξ). x).6. ξ). A direct application of Corollary 3. ξ) M p(t) α3 (V (t. b(t. x) that uniformly stabilizes the system x˙ = f (t. ξ) q  p(t) ≤− a20 (t.11 For a system as in (11). ξ) − a1 (t. Then. then condition (19) can be relaxed into |a0 (t. Corollary 3. that is. An interesting question is whether or not there is a feedback law u = k1 (t.11 yields the time-varying feedback law u = −x sin t for the closed-loop system to be UGAS. x(t)) + b40 (t. ξ) = p0 (t)b0 (t. ξ) < 0 for all ξ 6= 0. 3. ξ)). x) + p(t)g(t. a common function p(t) ∈ Pτ.9 can be modified as follows. x)u. (c) b0 (t. x)) is almost smooth.2 Stabilization with Persistently Exciting Functions in Control Channels Suppose a system as in (11) is uniformly stabilizable. To see this. Let p ∈ Pτ. and (e) there is some continuous.σ function).12 The function V (ξ) = ξ 2 /2 is a clf for the system x˙ = u sin t as in Corollary 3. x). the feedback law by the modified universal formula u = q0 (t)κ(a0 (t. b(t. ξ) with the conditions: (a) a1 (t. ξ)|) ≤ −p(t) . x(t)) ≤ −p(t) a20 (t.σ . one has q V˙ (t.2 and Lemma 3. x(t)) − a1 (t. ξ) + a1 (t. ξ) = a1 (t. This can be made slightly more flexible as in what follows. a system as in (11) is changed to x(t) ˙ = f (t. a0 (t. Proposition 3. ξ) + |a1 (t. and the corresponding closed-loop system is UGAS.10 Suppose that the function p in property (c) of Proposition 3.9 follows readily.σ is required for the pair (a(t. b0 (t. 0 ≤ p(t) ≤ M for some constant M < ∞.690 ZHONGPING JIANG · YUANDAN LIN · YUAN WANG With the help of Proposition 2. ξ) = 0 (Note that p0 (t) = sin t alone is not a class Pτ. note that with u = κ(a0 (t. ξ)| + b20 (t. ξ)). b0 (t. ξ). ξ) = 0 ⇒ a0 (t. (20) . ξ)| + b20 (t. By using transformations on the input variable u of the form u = q0 (t)v. In Proposition 3. ξ). σ > 0.11 with p0 (t) = q0 (t) = sin t. Suppose that there exists a C ∞ function V satisfying (2) and the following: a(t.σ for some τ > 0. ξ) ≥ 0. Remark 3. ξ)) ≤− (|a0 (t. positive definite function α3 such that (19) holds for a0 (t. b0 (t.9. x(t)) + a1 (t. Example 3.9. (d) p ∈ Pτ. ξ) ≥ α3 (V (t. Assume further that (a0 (t. x)). ξ) = p(t)a0 (t. Proposition 3.9 is bounded. x(t)) + q0 (t)g(t. 2M 2M The stability property then follows as in the proof of Proposition 3.

ξ)) ≥ µρ(V (t. smooth on R≥0 × (Rn \ {0}). Assume further that the feedback law given by the universal formula u = κ(a(t. ξ) ≥ α b(V (t. ξ) + eb(t. ξ). ξ)u} < 0. for which (22) holds. Lemma 3. because of property (2). ξ))b α(V (t. ξ)f (t. it holds that a(t. that is. ∀ t ≥ 0. b(t. there exists a C 1 clf W .14 Suppose a system as in (11) admits a smooth clf V satisfying (2).σ . the latter system cannot be stabilized by any linear feedback u = −kx for any k > 0.σ . (23) √ √ where c = max 2 M.σ for a system as in (20). Then. ∀ ξ 6= 0. u ∂ ∂ ∂ where a(t. ξ) and b(t. However. one may assume the following condition on the function p: Z t+τ (p(s) − 1) ds ≥ σ. can the universal formula be used to find a stabilizing feedback law for (20)? Example 3. ξ) = ∂t V (t. 2 + 2 . ξ) ≥ α(|ξ|). x). ξ)g(t. smooth on R+ × (Rn \ {0}). (b) the system (11) admits a C 1 clf V . By Lemmas 11 and 12 in [20]. Assume further that (21) holds for the function V . In fact. x)) stabilizes the system (11) uniformly. ξ) = ∂ξ ∂ W (t. ξ)u} ≤ −µW (t. ξ) + b(t. ξ) + ∂ξ W (t. ξ) ≥ cV (t. but not the system x˙ = x3 + (sin2 t)x2 u. (21) can be re-formulated as p a2 (t. inf {e (22) u where e ∂ a(t. we get the following lemma. there exists a proper. We are now ready to state the following theorem. ξ)) for some positive definite function α b. and hence. whose proof is postponed to Appendix B. t that is. Theorem 1 Consider the problem of stabilizing a system as in (20).13 It is easily seen that u = −4x stabilizes both systems x˙ = x + u and x˙ = x3 + x2 u. ξ). for any µ > 0. ξ) + ∂ξ V (t. Replacing p by M p and u by v := u/M for some M > 0 if necessary. ξ) = ∂t ∂ W (t. Hence. ξ). (p − 1) ∈ wPτ. we consider the specific question that if a system as in (11) admits a clf. ξ) = ∂ξ V (t. for each µ > 0. with W = ρ ◦ V . ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) + b4 (t. satisfying (2) and p a2 (t. positive definite function ρ which is smooth on R \ {0} and C 1 everywhere such that ρ′ (V (t. (21) Without loss of generality. one sees that. p a2 (t. Assume the following: (a) the function p satisfies that 0 ≤ p(t) ≤ M for all t ≥ 0 and some M > 0 and that p − 1 ∈ wPτ. ξ)g(t. ξ)f (t. for some positive definite function α. STABILIZATION OF NONLINEAR TIME-VARYING SYSTEMS 691 In this section. ξ)). ξ) + b4 (t. ξ). and . ξ) and eb(t. We now assume that (11) admits a clf V satisfying (2) and the following: inf {a(t. Consider p ∈ Pτ. the same feedback stabilizes uniformly the system x˙ = x + (sin2 t)u.

ξ) should be imposed to guarantee the stabilizability. then the feedback law u = κ(a(t. ξ). The proof of the following proposition will be postponed to Appendix C.17 Let p ∈ Pτ.13. As one can see. the feedback law given by the universal formula for the system x˙ = f (x) + g(x)u also stabilizes the system x˙ = f (x) + p(t)g(x)u.692 ZHONGPING JIANG · YUANDAN LIN · YUAN WANG (c) a(t. b) satisfies the small control property. ξ. It is readily seen that the first system x˙ = x + (sin2 t)u satisfies all conditions of Proposition 3. ξ) is always nonnegative.17. In the special case when f and g are both time invariant. ξ)) globally and uniformly stabilizes the corresponding system (20). ξ).13. Furthermore. Assume that 0 ≤ p(t) ≤ M for some M > 0. ξ) ≤ cV (t.16 means that if the term a(t. Remark 3. The next result deals with the case when a(t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) ≥ V (t. . Lemma 3. b(t.σ for some τ > 0 and σ > 0. ξ) does not change sign. Theorem 1 states that under condition (a)–(c). In the special case when (11) admits a clf V for which a(t.σ . and 4) condition (c) requires that for the new clf for which (23) holds. ξ) fails for the second system x˙ = x3 + (sin2 t)x2 u. Then. the feedback law u = M κ(a(t. ξ) for some c ≥ 0. and • a(t. Its proof can be found in Appendix D. Let M > 0 be such that (M p(·) − c) ∈ wPτ. condition (c) is the only real restriction required for Theorem 1.16 Let p ∈ Pτ.f. as suggested by Example 3. ξ). and • 0 ≤ a(t. as stated below. x) is bounded above by V . some conditions on the upper bound of the term a(t. One of the technical issues in the proof of Theorem 1 is that when working with a function q(·) of class wP. Then. Note that Proposition 3. If system (11) admits a smooth clf V such that • for some positive definite function α. ξ) ≤ 0 for all t. the uncertainty of the sign of q(·) makes it hard to manipulate with inequalities. the feedback law given by the universal formula u = κ(a(t. Proposition 3.14). ξ) ≤ cV (t. we note the following: 1) condition (a) amounts to requiring the function p appeared in (20) to be bounded. while the property a(t. ξ) ≤ V (t. ξ). ξ). 3) one may always modify the clf V so that (23) holds (c. 2) condition (b) amounts to requiring system (11) to admit a clf satisfying (21) for some positive definite function α (which is always the case when f and g are time invariant). let V (x) = x2 /2. b(t. then the feedback law is almost smooth. For the two systems in Example 3. then the system (20) can be stabilized by the universal formula.15 For the conditions in Theorem 1. b(t. ξ)) is smooth away from 0 and it globally and uniformly stabilizes the system (20). the term a(t. Assume that system (11) admits an almost smooth clf V such that p • a2 (t. (21) holds. ξ)) globally and uniformly stabilizes the system. ξ) is nonpositive and if the persistently excited function p(·) is bounded. Notice that. if the pair (a. the conditions of Theorem 1 can be significantly simplified. Proposition 3.σ for some τ > 0 and σ > 0.

We will show that there exists some δ > 0 such that |k(t. b) given by (10) is analytic on the set S := {(a. we have proposed a control Lyapunov function approach to the global sta- bilization problem for general nonlinear time-varying systems. b) ∈ R2 : b 6= 0 or a < 0}. the function p in (20) is required to be a class Pτ. STABILIZATION OF NONLINEAR TIME-VARYING SYSTEMS 693 Remark 3. 4 Concluding Remarks In this paper. Suppose system (24) satisfies the requirements of Theorem 1 or Proposition 3. ξ) + b(t. By the small control property. x)v (24) with p1 (t) = p(t)q0 (t) and u = q0 (t)v. ξ)| ≤ 3 for all |t − t0 | < δ and all |ξ| < δ for which a(t. it is enough to find δ such that (25) holds at the points (t. Let t0 ≥ 0 and ε > 0 be given. x) + p1 (t)g(t. ξ) = 0 whenever b(t. ∀ |t − t0 | < δ. ξ) ∈ B1 . one has . b(t. ∀ |ξ| < δ. ξ).σ function. ξ) is continuous on the set R+ × {0}. for every |t − t0 | < δ and every |ξ| < δ for which (t.6 Let V be a clf for system (11) that satisfies the small control property. ξ)) is smooth on the set R+ × (Rn \ {0}). ξ) ≥ 0. among many others.17. ξ) ≥ 0. 3 Observe that (26) implies that ε |b(t. ξ). (25) Let B1 = {(t. Appendix A Proof of Lemma 3. b(t. ξ) := κ(a(t. ξ) ∈ B1 and a(t. The proof of Theorem 1 in [2] shows that the function κ(a. one may relax this requirement slightly by converting the system to x˙ = f (t. ξ)µ < 0. Consequently. ξ) 6= 0}.18 In Theorem 1 and Propositions 3. ξ) : b(t. ∀ |ξ| < δ. then the modified feedback u = q0 (t)κ(a(t. ∀ |t − t0 | < δ. As in the discussion for Corollary 3. ξ)| < ε. (26) Without loss of generality. there is some |µ| < ε/3 such that a(t. Topics for future research include. and adaptive control of nonlinear time-varying systems with unknown parameters. Sufficient conditions are given under which explicit feedback laws generated by the universal formula can be found to stabi- lize globally and uniformly the system in question.16 and 3. feedback stabilization of time-varying systems with restricted inputs. the feedback function k(t.11. 0) = 0) that δ > 0 is chosen so that ε |b(t. ξ)) globally uniformly stabilizes the system (20). Below we show that the function k(t. Since k(t. there is some δ > 0 such that for every |ξ| < δ and every t ∈ (t0 − δ. ξ) = 0. one may also assume (by continuity and the fact that b(t0 . ξ)| |a(t.16. ξ)| < . t0 + δ). Hence.

694 ZHONGPING JIANG · YUANDAN LIN · YUAN WANG .

ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) + pa2 (t. ξ) . a(t.

.

.

ξ). b(t. ξ))| = . |κ(a(t.

.

ξ) = a+ (t. ξ) ≤ 0. ξ) ≥ √ ≥ M V (t. we consider the case when a(t. It then follows that 1 p 2 cV (t. ξ) ≥ √ a (t. ξ) − p(t) a+ (t. and it follows that |κ(a(t. ξ) = a+ (t. Appendix B Proof of Theorem 1 Let V be a clf for (11) that satisfies all assumptions as in Theorem 1. ξ). ξ)| + b2 (t. ξ)| 2ε ε < + = ε. ξ). In this case one has 1 p 2 a− (t. ξ) ≤ |b(t. a− (t. ξ) ≤ −(p(t) − 1)V (t. consider first the case when a− (t. it holds that p 0 < a(t. ξ) p ≤ a(t. 3 3 There remains the case when a(t. 0}.6 is thus completed. For this case. ξ) ≤ √ a (t. ξ) + (a− )2 (t. ξ) + a2 (t. ξ))| ≤ |b(t. ξ) < 0. Then a(t. ξ) ≥ p(t)V (t. a(t. ξ) − p(t) · cV (t. ξ). We next consider the case when a(t. The proof of Lemma 3. ξ) + p(t)b(t. ξ) + p(t)b(t. ξ) < 0. 0}. ξ) = max{−a(t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) ≤ −p(t)V (t. ξ) − a− (t. ξ) = max{a(t. ξ) + p(t)b(t. ξ)u = −a− (t. that is. ξ). ξ) + a2 (t. ξ) − p(t) −a− (t. ξ) ≤ b2 (t. ξ) − p(t) a2 (t. ξ) − p(t) a(t. that is. ξ). In this case. ξ)u = a(t. ξ). ξ) = −a− (t. ξ) = −a− (t. ξ) ≥ b2 (t. b(t. ξ). ξ)u = a+ (t. ξ). p  a(t. ξ). when a(t. p  a(t. b(t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) + b4 (t. 2 2 Hence. ξ) ≤ V (t. ξ)). With the feedback law u = κ(a(t. ξ) a− (t. all |ξ| < δ for which a(t. ξ) + (a+ )2 (t. ξ). ξ) ≤ b2 (t. ξ) ≥ 0. 2 . ξ) ≤ 0 and a− (t. For this case. b(t. Consider the case when a(t. ξ)| < ε for all |t − t0 | < δ. ξ). Let a+ (t. it holds that p  a(t. ξ) . ξ). ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) 2 |a(t. ξ) ≤ −a− (t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ). ξ). ξ) + b4 (t. Finally.

ξ) ≤ 0. ξ) ≤ −p(t)V (t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) + a2 (t. p  a(t. ξ) = −a− (t.3. the closed-loop system is UGAS. ξ) + (a− )2 (t. ξ)|. ξ) − p(t) p M a− (t. a(t. ∂t ∂ξ 2M By Proposition 2. ξ) ≤− a (t. Without loss of generality. ξ) + a2 (t. ξ)κ(a(t. The proof of Proposition 3. ξ) + a2 (t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) ≥ V (t. ξ) + p M a− (t. ξ) − p(t) −a− (t. STABILIZATION OF NONLINEAR TIME-VARYING SYSTEMS 695 and therefore. ∂V ∂V (t. ξ) 2  1  ≤ −p(t) 1 − √ cV (t. ξ)) ≤ −(p(t) − 1)V (t. ξ) − p(t) −a− (t. the following holds for the closed-loop system of (20): ∂V ∂V α(|ξ|) (t. ξ) and a2 (t. b(t. ξ) ∂t ∂ξ for the closed-loop system of (20). ξ) + p(t)b(t. Appendix D Proof of Proposition 3. ξ)) ≤ −p(t) . we assume that M ≥ 1. ξ)) given by the universal formula. ξ).16 is thus completed. ξ)u = −a− (t. ξ)). ξ) p ≤ cV (t. ξ) + p(t)g(t. By Proposition 2. ξ) + a2 (t. ξ) ≤− · p M a− (t. ξ). b(t. the following holds: p  a(t. ξ)κ(a(t. ξ) − M p(t) a(t. b(t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) + p(t)b(t. b(t.2. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) + b4 (t.16 When a(t. ξ))2 + b4 (t. ξ) ≤ cV (t. ξ) + b4 (t. 2 We have thus shown that in all cases. ξ) p(t) − b4 (t. ξ)κ(t. ξ) − M p(t) a2 (t. ξ)  1 p − 2 ≤ −a− (t. ξ) p(t) (a− (t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) + a2 (t. ξ)  p(t) − b4 (t. Let M > 0 be a constant as stated in Proposition 3. ξ) + (f (t. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ). with u = κ(a(t. ξ) + (f (t. The proof of Theorem 1 is thus completed. ξ). With u = M κ(a(t. ξ) p p(t) a2 (t. one has p  a(t. . ξ) = − |a(t. 2M Hence. ξ)κ(t. Appendix C Proof of Proposition 3. ξ) ≤ −(M p(t) − c)V (t.17 p Suppose that 0 ≤ a(t. ξ)) ≤ −a− (t.17. With u = κ(a(t. the closed-loop system is UGAS. ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) ≤− · M 2 α(|ξ|) ≤ −p(t) . ξ). ξ)  ≤− a (t. ξ). ξ) + p(t)g(t. ξ) + p(t)b(t. b(t. ξ)). ξ). ξ) + b4 (t. ξ) for all (t. ξ) − p(t) 1 − √ (a ) (t. ξ). ξ)) = a(t. it holds that.

J. Springer-Verlag. Chaillet. 11: 1–27. Control. in Proc. D. [4] M. I. Springer-Verlag. 2002. volume E. and Y. D. V.. Further remarks on strict input-to-state stable Lyapunov functions for time-varying systems.. ξ) + (f (t. R. [18] W. Aeyels. IEEE Trans. 45(12): 2203–2217. Besancon. 39: 219–227. 2007.. Loria. ∂t ∂ξ By assumption. [11] F. Chitour. Contr. 13th IFAC World Congress. A converse Lyapunov theorem for nonuniform in time global asymptotic stability and its application to feedback stabilization. Springer-Verlag. Uniform exponential stability of linear time-varying systems: Revisited. Mazenc and M. Stabilization in spite of matched unmodelled dynamics and an equivalent definition of input-to-state stability. Mazenc and D. New York. Automatica. L. Lin.. Teel. Signals Syst. 7: 1163–1173. 41: 1973–1978. Sontag. Control. Automat. Stabilization with relaxed controls. and the European Control Conference 2005. [5] L. Jiang. the following holds for the closed-loop system of (20): ∂V ∂V (t. [16] F. 13: 117–123. Math. R. 9: 1–33. and P. Praly and Y. [20] L. Math.V. ξ)) ≤ −(M p(t) − c)V (t. Math. 1998.696 ZHONGPING JIANG · YUANDAN LIN · YUAN WANG Thus. in P. Krsti´c. Prague. 2005. 1967. P. 1995. John Wiley & Sons. Z. On nonuniform and semi-uniform input-to-state stability for time varying systems. A. 16th IFAC World Congress. [17] A. Y. Stability of Motion. Sepulchre. The proof of Proposition 3. Nonlinear and Adaptive Control Design. 15: 177–201. SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization. 1989. Malisoff. and J. and A. Xie and L. Mathematics of Control. Nonlinear Analysis. Loria. Signals Syst. Sontag. Lee and Z. Further results on Lyapunov functions for slowly time-varying systems.. in Proc. July 1996. Systems & Control Letters. Panteley. Signals. 2005. Berlin. IFAC Publications. Artstein. pages 73–78. Wang. One concludes that the system is ugas. [13] D. Integral characterizations of uniform asymptotic and expo- nential stability with applications. [2] E. Theory. Kokotovi´c. B. C. 2003. and Z. 47: 13–24. Kanellakopoulos. Hahn. [7] A. Tsinias. Control. On the PE stabilization of time-varying systems: Open questions and preliminary answers. Bastin. and Y. Nesic. Karafyllis and J. [15] T. ξ) + M p(t)g(t. 19(1): 1–21. 2000. P. [19] Y. . ξ)κ(t. 42(4): 936–965. 1998. Methods & Applica- tions. Pomet. 2005. References [1] Z. San Francisco. Praly. Systems & Control Letters. Loria and E. in Proc. Peuteman. [3] E. [8] A. 50: 1147–1163. Input-to-state stability with respect to noncompact sets. 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. 19: 151–182. [9] J. Backstepping design for time-varying nonlinear systems. 2002. Signals Syst. Asymptotic stability conditions for time-variant sys- tems and observability: Uniform and non-uniform criteria. A generalization of Krasovskii-LaSalle theorem for nonlinear time- varying systems: Converse results and applications. Kokotovi´c. and Systems. 2007. IEEE Trans. editor. Lyapunov functions for time varying systems satisfying generalized con- ditions of Matrosov theorem. [6] I. 347–433. G. Malisoff. Signals Syst. Math. 1983. 1991. Panteley. Automatic Control. Adaptive stabilization of nonlinear systems. How much uncertainty can be dealt with by feedback.σ . Berlin. Tsinias. Mathematical Control Theory (second edition). [12] F. 1996. Mazenc and M. E. 2000. [10] L. Cheng.17 is thus completed. Control. Foundations of Adaptive Control. G. A ‘universal’ construction of Artstein’s theorem on nonlinear stabilization. Guo. (M p(·) − c) ∈ wPτ. ξ). Wang. [14] D. Jiang. Lin. 2005. New York. Systems & Control Letters.