Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract—The recent progress of advanced vehicle control sys- performance maximization and cost minimization. Such a trend
tems presents a great opportunity for the application of model presents a great opportunity to use model predictive control
predictive control (MPC) in the automotive industry. However, (MPC) theory in automotive industry because of its exceptional
high computational complexity inherently associated with the
receding horizon optimization must be addressed to achieve capability in implementing optimal control while explicitly
real-time implementation. This paper presents a generic scale re- handling nonlinearities and constraints [1]–[4].
duction framework to reduce the online computational burden of A typical application of MPC in automotive field is the vehic-
MPC controllers. A lower dimensional MPC algorithm is formu- ular longitudinal automation, e.g. adaptive cruise control (ACC)
lated by combining an existing “move blocking ” strategy with a [2], [3]. Motivated by the growing concern on energy crisis,
“constraint-set compression” strategy, which is proposed to fur-
ther reduce the problem scale by partially relaxing inequality researchers started to explore fuel economy-oriented ACC tech-
constraints in the prediction horizon. The closed-loop stability is niques. This kind of design highly demands an optimal or quasi-
guaranteed by adding terminal zero-state constraint. The trade- optimal controller, which can possess desirable optimality of
off between control optimality and computational intensity is predefined cost function while still reserving the ability to
achieved by proper design of the blocking and compression ma- handle constraint and nonlinearity. Li et al. [5] have showed the
trices. The fast algorithm has been applied on intelligent vehicular
longitudinal automation, implemented as a fuel economy-oriented effectiveness of MPC-based ACC in improving fuel economy
adaptive cruise controller and experimentally evaluated by a series through simulation studies. However, the high computational
of real-time simulations and field tests. These results indicate that burden associated with the receding horizon optimization must
the proposed method significantly improves the computational be mitigated for real-time implementations.
speed while maintaining satisfactory control optimality without In MPC, a plant model is used to predict the state evolution
sacrificing the desired performance.
over a future horizon, whereas an optimization problem (min-
Index Terms—Adaptive cruise control (ACC), computation effi- imizing a cost function of state variables and control inputs
ciency, fuel economy, model predictive control (MPC). in the prediction horizon) is solved to determine the optimal
control sequence [6], [7]. One critical challenge for MPC is
I. I NTRODUCTION the computational burden in numerical optimization. This may
not be a problem in process control applications because of
I NTENDED to assist drivers during the driving process and
improve road safety, advanced vehicle control systems have
been investigated by both academia and industry for decades
relatively slow plant dynamics, infrequent control updates, and
abundant computing power [7]. It, however, becomes critical
to control some aspects of vehicle dynamics, e.g., antiskid for applications with fast dynamics (e.g., vehicles and robots)
traction/braking, desired yaw motion, and longitudinal/lateral and/or limited computing power (e.g., on-board single-chip
automation. Related technologies have also progressed from controllers).
previously basic functional realization to today’s focus on The computational issue of MPC motivates researchers to
explore more efficient computing techniques [7], some of which
are summarized as follows. An approach to achieve fast com-
Manuscript received May 21, 2013; revised October 31, 2013, January 22,
putation is to utilize the structural sparseness of predictive
2014, May 14, 2014, and August 10, 2014; accepted August 28, 2014. Date of controllers. By properly reordering the manipulated variables
publication September 16, 2014; date of current version May 29, 2015. This related to the sparse matrices, an interior-point method could
work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China under Grant 51205228 and in part by the Tsinghua University Initiative
become more efficient during directional search [8]. This type
Scientific Research Program under Grant 2012THZ0. The Associate Editor for of sparse formulation can be used to reduce computational time
this paper was A. Hegyi. of applications with large horizons without jeopardizing the
S. E. Li is with the State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy,
Department of Automotive Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 10084,
closed-loop stability. Another scheme is called explicit MPC,
China (e-mail: lisb04@gmail.com). which is often used for linear or piecewise affine linear plants
Z. Jia is with the Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineer- with 1-, 2- or ∞-norm-based costs and linear constraints [7]. In
ing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA (e-mail: zhenzjia@
umich.edu). this method, an explicit solution is generated offline by using
K. Li and B. Cheng are with the Department of Automotive Engineering, multiparametric programming [9]–[12]. The control input is
Tsinghua University, Beijing 10084, China. then calculated through a preprepared lookup table, thereby
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. greatly simplifying online computation. One major problem
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TITS.2014.2354052 associated with this approach is the large online data storage
1524-9050 © 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1200 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 16, NO. 3, JUNE 2015
requirements for high-order controllers due to exponentially function with respect to the pair (x, u) and satisfies l(0, 0) = 0.
increasing complexity. Other constraints on x and u can also exist in the aforemen-
In engineering practices, an effective approach to reduce tioned problem but omitted here for narrative simplicity. For
the computational intensity is to reformulate the original MPC the sake of convenience, we introduce three column vectors,
problem as a lower order optimization problem by reducing i.e., Uk ∈ RP m , Umax ∈ RP m , and Vmax u
∈ RP m , defined as
the dimension of manipulated variables. Two examples are T
the parameterization method [13] and the “move blocking Uk = uT0|k , . . . , uTP −1|k
(MB)” method [14]–[16]. The former often assumes a priori T
Umax = uTmax , . . . , uTmax
knowledge of the control law, which can be approximated by T
a parameterized function (with less unknowns to reduce the u
Vmax = (vmaxu
)T , . . . , (vmax
u
)T . (4)
order of the original problem), e.g., polynomial [13]. However,
this method may change the structure of the original problem Similar definition can be found for state vector Xk ∈ RP l .
due to specific parameterized functions used, thereby resulting Plugging (1) and (4) into (2) and (3), the MPC problem is
in pseudo-optimal solutions and losing the degree of control transformed into a nonlinear programming (NLP) problem [6]
optimality. In the MB method, the number of free variables
is reduced by fixing the input or its derivatives to be constant min J = L(Xk , Uk ) + ρε2k (5)
over several time steps by using a “blocking matrix” [14]. This
straightforward method can be easily integrated with other fast- subject to set Θ
computing schemes. Uk
The purpose of this paper is to extend the MB scale re- Θ = Uk , εk [IU − Vmax
u
] ≤ Umax (6)
εk
duction strategy by introducing an additional “constraint-set
compression (CSC)” strategy capable of further reducing the where L(·) is assumed to be a convex function, i.e., IU = IP m
computational intensity of MPC for real-time implementation, (unity matrix).
particularly in the fields of engineering practice, e.g., auto- For an NLP problem, its computational intensity depends on
motive control techniques. The remainder of this paper is three aspects: 1) problem style; 2) problem scale; and 3) opti-
organized as follows. Section II reviews a simplified MPC mization algorithm to be used. The change of problem style and
formulation, followed by a brief analysis of its problem scale the improvement of optimization algorithm are not the focus
and computational complexity. Section III presents a generic of this paper. How to reduce the problem scale is more pre-
scale reduction framework for the MPC optimization problem, ferred in engineering practice due to its easy-to-use and in-field
together with the aforementioned MB strategy and the proposed flexibility. For example, the scale of a commonly constructed
CSC strategy. The MPC-based vehicular adaptive cruise con- optimization problem relies on two critical factors: the number
troller is presented in Section IV. Application of the proposed of manipulated variables NA and the number of inequality con-
fast MPC algorithm to ACC is evaluated through real-time straints NB [17]. In the Dantzig–Wolfe algorithm introduced in
simulation and field tests in Sections V and VI, respectively. [18], the required iteration is often no less than Niter , which is
The last section concludes this paper. equal to the sum of NA and NB . Hence, the scale reduction is
expected to reduce the computing time effectively.
II. P ROBLEM S TATEMENT
Consider a nonlinear (but affine with respect to the input) III. F RAMEWORK OF P ROBLEM S CALE R EDUCTION
system in the discrete-time domain
The scale reduction framework consists of two parts, i.e.,
xk+1 = f (xk ) + g(xk ) · uk (1) “MB” and “CSC.” The former aims to reduce the number of
manipulated input variables in the predictive horizon, whereas
where u ∈ Rm is the control input, x ∈ Rl is the system state, the latter aims to reduce the number of inequality constraints.
and f (·) and g(·) are nonlinear functions of x. The pair (x, u) =
(0, 0) is the exclusive equilibrium point of (1).The receding
horizon optimization problem has the following form: A. MB Strategy
P −1 A common strategy to reduce the computational complexity
min J = l(xi+1|k , ui|k ) + ρ · ε2k . (2) of optimal control is to reduce degrees of freedom by fixing
u
i=0 the control input (or the control increment) to be constant over
several steps. This policy is referred to as “MB” [14]. Instead
Subject to (1) and constraint
of solving for the optimal Uk ∈ RP m , problem (5) is restated
ui|k ≤ umax + εk · vmax
u
, i=0:P −1 (3) in terms of solving for a lower order vector
T
where P is the length of the prediction horizon, xi|k is the Zk = z0|kT T
, . . . , zQ−1|k ∈ RQm (Q < P ) (7)
predicted state using the measured (or estimated) state xk , ε ∈
R+ is the slack variable, ρ ∈ R+ is the weighting coefficient, so that
umax ∈ Rm is the upper bound of u, and vmax u
∈ Rm is the re-
laxing coefficient [6]. The function l(x, u) is a positive definite U k = MT · Z k , MT = T ⊗ I m . (8)
LI et al.: COMPUTATION OF A MODEL PREDICTIVE CONTROLLER AND ITS APPLICATION TO FUEL ECONOMY–ORIENTED ACC 1201
the optimization problem (5) before and after the MB method where ωj is the length of interval, in which all the constraints
(8) being applied, respectively. Consider vector U Z defined as except those of the first step are deactivated (see Fig. 2), and Ω
U Z = MT · Zk∗ ∈ RQm . (11) is the number of steps, in which the constraints are enabled in
the prediction horizon. Note that Π is a full-row rank matrix.
We see that U Z is actually a staircase approximation of Uk∗ . Define a linear compressing mapping from the original con-
The length (i.e., qj ) of each interval can be different from each straint set Θ in (6) to a lower dimensional constraint set Φ as
other, i.e., they do not need to be equally distributed. Smaller qj
indicates a more accurate approximation and accordingly less φ(MΠ ) : Θ → Φ
(14)
loss of optimality after the MB transformation. In engineering MΠ = Π ⊗ I m .
practice, we can select small qj ’s for points that are close to the A lower dimensional problem can be formulated by applying
current step and large qj ’s for those relatively far away. the compressing mapping (14) to deactivate some inequality
constraints. In practice, a properly selected compression matrix
B. CSC Strategy Π can significantly reduce the computational intensity (par-
Under some circumstances, the computational intensity is ticularly the maximum single-step computational time) with
still challenging even after the MB strategy being applied, negligible effect on the optimality of solutions.
as shown in the following real-time simulation in Section V.
One major reason is that the dimensional reduction of ma- C. Formulation of Fast MPC Algorithm
nipulated variables should be not too excessive when using To construct a fast MPC algorithm, we apply both the MB
MB in case of large loss of control optimality. In a plant with and CSC strategies into (5) and (6), yielding
fixed controlling frequency, e.g., ACC, a critical factor for real-
time implementation is the peak CPU time (i.e., the maximum min J = L(Xk , MT · Zk ) + ρε2k (15)
1202 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 16, NO. 3, JUNE 2015
From (19) and (20), and the fact that l(·, ·) is a positive
definite function with respect to pair (x, u), we have
V ∗ (x∗k , zk∗ , ε∗k , k) ≥ V (xk+1 , zk+1 , εk+1 , k + 1). (22)
Using the optimality property [24], we always have
V (xk+1 , zk+1 ,εk+1 ,k+1) ≥ V ∗ x∗k+1 , zk+1
∗
,ε∗k+1 ,k+1 . (23)
Therefore, the defined Lyapunov function monotonically de-
creases when increasing the control step
V ∗ (x∗k , zk∗ , ε∗k , k) ≥ V ∗ x∗k+1 , zk+1
∗
, ε∗k+1 , k + 1 . (24)
Hence, the closed-loop stability is ensured (end of proof).
Note that the proof of stability uses the so-called feasibility Fig. 3. Hierarchical control architecture, consisting of an upper layer con-
property: a feasible control consequence at the (k + 1)th step troller and a lower layer controller.
is obtained by appending zeros to previous optimal control and state constraints. The lower level controller is used to deal
sequence. An interesting property is that once the feasibility with nonlinearities of vehicle dynamics and errors in modeling.
property holds, the existence of inequality constraints will Interested readers can refer to [5] and [27] for more details. The
not affect the closed-loop stability. In addition, the proposed emphasis in this paper is to implement the MPC-based upper
CSC strategy always relaxes inequality constraints, instead lever controller in a real-time manner.
of strengthening them. Therefore, the introduction of CSC
actually does not affect the closed-loop stability when using A. Continuous-Time Model for Controller Design
zero-state terminal constraint. It should be noted that other The vehicle to be controlled is a passenger car with 2.0-L
aforementioned approaches can also guarantee closed-loop sta- gasoline engine, five-speed automatic transmission and hy-
bility. In practical applications, however, those approaches are draulic braking system. Its longitudinal dynamics includes
not always used because they enforce unnecessary constraints static nonlinearity of the engine, discontinuous gear ratio, and
and/or penalty to the original problem. In this case, a posteriori quadratic aerodynamic drag. These nonlinearities are compen-
check of stability via simulations can be used [7], [14]. The sated by using an inverse model in the lower level controller by
closed-loop stability can be achieved if not using rather worse neglecting the powertrain dynamics. In addition, a switching
blocking and compression matrices. logic with hysteresis is built to avoid simultaneous actions of
driving and braking. The outputs of the lower level controller
IV. M ULTIOBJECTIVE -BASED ACC are the acceleration pedal position aaccl and the brake pressure
This section summarizes the design of a MPC-based multiple Pbrk . A proportional–integral (PI)-type feedback controller
objective ACC system, with special interest in reducing fuel is incorporated to track the desired acceleration af des . The
consumption, which is expected to have a large penetration into combination of vehicle longitudinal dynamics, inverse model,
the markets in the near future. It should be noted that the term and PI-type controller is approximated as a first-order transfer
“multiple objective” is not used in the sense of optimization, but function, with a gain KL and a time constant TL . This transfer
for engineering practices. It means that several goals are consid- function, together with intervehicle dynamics, is viewed as the
ered in the ACC design, such as good fuel economy, necessary controlled plant for the upper level controller. Its state-space
tracking capability, satisfactory driver feelings, and rear-end model is formulated to be [5], [27]
safety. However, to reduce acceleration alone is not sufficient ẋ = A(vf ) · x + B · u + G · ξ
in the design of ACC algorithms. The smoothing acceleration x = [⎡Δd Δv af ]T , u = af des , ξ = a⎤
p
could improve fuel economy; however, it also weakens the
0 1 −τh − r(2vf − vMean )
tracking capability and enlarges the range error. Moreover,
A = ⎣0 0 −1 ⎦
drivers are essential to evaluate the efficacy any ACC system;
⎡0 0 ⎤ −1/T
⎡ L⎤
ACC will be completely useless if drivers choose not to use
0 0
(e.g., due to undesirable ride comfort) no matter how it works in
B = ⎣ 0 ⎦, G = ⎣1⎦ (25)
fuel economy and tracking capability. Therefore, it is critical to
KL /TL 0
systematically consider multiple objectives, i.e., fuel economy,
tracking capability, and driver feelings, instead of focusing on a where [Δd, Δv, af ]T is the system state (distance error, relative
single one. The hierarchical control structure is shown in Fig. 3. speed, and longitudinal acceleration); af des is the control input
The upper level controller, synthesized by the MPC theory, aims (the desired acceleration); ap is the measurable disturbance
to reduce fuel consumption while comprehensively balancing (the acceleration of the preceding vehicle); vf is the vehicle
other two objectives, i.e., tracking capability and driver feel- speed; and τh , r, and vMean are the parameters of the quadratic
ings. Other demands, e.g., ride comfort, rear-end safety, and headway policy, representing the headway time, quadratic co-
physical limits of the vehicle, are formulated as constraints. The efficient, and average speed, respectively. Notice that (25) is
selection of MPC mainly attributes to its special capability in quasi-linear. The sampling rate if 10 Hz is used to linearize (25)
achieving optimal control while directly handling various input (i.e., sampling time Ts = 100 ms).
1204 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, VOL. 16, NO. 3, JUNE 2015
TABLE I
T HREE MPC A LGORITHMS I NVOLVED IN R EAL -T IME S IMULATION
TABLE II
K EY PARAMETERS FOR THE MPC-BASED U PPER L EVEL C ONTROLLER
TABLE III
K EY PARAMETERS FOR THE MB AND CSC S TRATEGIES
TABLE IV
C OMPARISON OF C OMPUTATIONAL E FFICIENCY
Fig. 7. Speed profiles from naturalistic traffic flow. Fig. 9. Distribution of Δv and its computation errors. (a) Relative speed.
(b) Computation errors.
Fig. 8. Computational efficiency of three MPC algorithms. (a) Average. Fig. 10. Distribution of Δd and its computation errors. (a) Distance error.
(b) Maximum. (b) Computation errors.
Fig. 11. Configuration of experimental platform. Fig. 13. Powertrain state of ACC vehicle, including acceleration pedal angle,
engine speed in revolution per minute, gear range, and engine fuel rate.
R EFERENCES [26] N. Zeilinger, M. Morari, and C. Jones, “Soft constrained model predictive
control with robust stability guarantees,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control,
[1] F. Borrelli, A. Bemporad, M. Fodor, and D. Hrovat, “An MPC/hybrid
vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 1190–1202, May 2014.
system approach to traction control,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol.,
[27] S. E. Li, K. Li, and J. Wang, “Economy-oriented vehicle adaptive cruise
vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 541–552, May 2006.
control with function of multiple objectives coordination,” Veh. Syst. Dyn.,
[2] B. Bageshwar, W. Garrard, and R. Rajamani, “Model predictive control of
vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 1–17, Jan. 2013.
transitional maneuvers for adaptive cruise control vehicles,” IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol., vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 365–374, Sep. 2004.
[3] D. Corona, M. Lazar, B. Schutter, and M. Heemels, “A hybrid MPC
approach to the design of a smart adaptive cruise controller,” in Proc.
IEEE Int. Conf. Control Appl., Munich, Germany, 2006, pp. 231–235. Shengbo Eben Li received the M.S. and Ph.D. de-
[4] P. Falcone, F. Borrelli, H. E. Tsengz, J. Asgari, and D. Hrovat, “A hi- grees from Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in
erarchical model predictive control framework for autonomous ground 2006 and 2009, respectively.
vehicles,” in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., Seattle, WA, USA, 2008, He is an Assistant Professor with the Department
pp. 3719–3724. of Automotive Engineering, Tsinghua University.
[5] S. Li, K. Li, R. Rajamani, and J. Wang, “Model predictive multi-objective His active research interests include nonlinear opti-
vehicular adaptive cruise control,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., mal control, autonomous vehicle control, and lithium
vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 556–566, May 2011. ion battery management. He is the author of more
[6] J. Maciejowski, Predictive Control With Constraints. London, U.K.: than 60 journal/conference papers and the coinventor
Pearson Education, 2002. of more than ten patents.
[7] J. Sun, R. Ghaemi, and I. Kolmanovsky, “Developments in receding hori- Dr. Li received the Award for Science and Tech-
zon optimization-based controls: Towards real-time implementation for nology of China ITS Association (2012), Award for Technological Invention
nonlinear systems with fast dynamics,” in Advances in Control Theory in Ministry of Education (2012), National Award for Technological Invention
and Applications, G. Tao and J. Sun, Eds. Berlin, Germany: Springer- in China (2013), and Honored Funding for Beijing Excellent Youth Researcher
Verlag, 2008. (2013).
[8] Y. Wang and S. Boyd, “Fast model predictive control using online opti-
mization,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 267–278,
Mar. 2010.
[9] A. Bemporad, M. Morari, V. Dua, and E. N. Pistikopoulos, “The explicit
linear quadratic regulator for constrained systems,” Automatica, vol. 38, Zhenzhong Jia received the B.E. degree in mea-
no. 1, pp. 3–20, Jan. 2002. surement, control technology, and instruments and
[10] F. Borrelli, A. Bemporad, and M. Morari, “A geometric algorithm for the M.E. degree in mechanical engineering from
multi-parametric linear programming,” J. Optim. Theory Appl., vol. 118, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 2005 and
no. 3, pp. 515–540, Sep. 2003. 2007, respectively, and the M.S. degree in mechani-
[11] L. Imsland, N. Bar, and B. Foss, “More efficient predictive control,” cal engineering, the M.S. degree in mathematics, and
Automatica, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 1395–1403, Aug. 2005. the Ph.D. degree in naval architecture and marine
[12] A. Alessio and A. Bemporad, “A survey on explicit model predictive engineering, from the University of Michigan, Ann
control,” in Proc. Int. Workshop Assessment Future Directions Nonlinear Arbor, MI, USA, in 2009 and 2014, respectively.
Model Predictive Control, Pavia, Italy, Sep. 2008, pp. 345–369. His research interests are in the field of robotics,
[13] A. Zheng, “A computationally efficient nonlinear MPC algorithm,” in controls, and hybrid power systems.
Proc. ACC, Albuquerque, NM, USA, 1997, pp. 1623–1627.
[14] R. Cagienard, P. Grieder, E. Kerrigan, and M. Morari, “Move blocking
strategies in receding horizon control,” J. Process Control, vol. 17, no. 6,
pp. 563–570, Jul. 2007.
[15] P. Tøndel and T. Johansen, “Complexity reduction in explicit model pre- Keqiang Li received the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees
dictive control,” in Proc. 15th IFAC World Congr., Barcelona, Spain, 2002. from Chongqing University, Chongqing, China, in
[16] J. Sun, I. Kolmanovsky, R. Ghaemi, and S. Chen, “A stable block model 1988 and 1995, respectively, and the B.Tech. degree
predictive control with variable implementation horizon,” Automatica, from Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 1985.
vol. 43, no. 11, pp. 1945–1953, Nov. 2007. He is Professor of automotive engineering with
[17] M. Kothare, V. Nevistic, and M. Morari, “Robust constrained Tsinghua University. His main areas of research in-
model predictive control for nonlinear systems—A comparative study,” terest include vehicle dynamics and control for driver
in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision Control, New Orleans, LA, USA, 1995, assistance systems and hybrid electrical vehicle. He
pp. 2884–2885. has authored over 90 papers and holds 12 patents in
[18] R. Fletcher, Practical Methods of Optimization. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, China and Japan.
1987. Dr. Li has been a Senior Member of the Society
[19] D. Mayne, J. Rawlings, C. Rao, and P. Scokaert, “Constrained model of Automotive Engineers of China, and on the editorial boards of International
predictive control: Stability and optimality,” Automatica, vol. 36, no. 6, Journal of ITS Research and International Journal of Vehicle Autonomous Sys-
pp. 789–814, Jun. 2000. tems. He has been a recipient of the “Changjiang Scholar Program Professor.”
[20] W. Kwon and A. Pearson, “On feedback stabilization of time-varying
discrete-linear system,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. AC-23, no. 3,
pp. 479–481, Jun. 1978.
[21] J. Rawlings and K. Muske, “The stability of constrained receding horizon
control,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 38, no. 10, pp. 1512–1516, Bo Cheng received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from
Oct. 1993. Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 1985 and
[22] S. Keerthi and E. Gilbert, “Optimal infinite-horizon feedback laws for a 1988, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree from Tokyo
general class of constrained discrete-time systems: Stability and moving- University, Tokyo, Japan, in 1998.
horizon approximations,” J. Optim. Theory Appl., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 265– He is a Professor with Tsinghua University and the
293, May 1988. Dean with the Suzhou Automotive Research Insti-
[23] D. Mayne and H. Michalska, “Receding horizon control of nonlinear tute, Tsinghua University. His active research inter-
systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 814–824, ests include autonomous vehicles, driver assistance
Jul. 1990. systems, active safety, and vehicular ergonomics. He
[24] T. Yang and E. Polak, “Moving horizon control of nonlinear systems is the author of more than 70 journal/conference
with input saturation, disturbances and plant uncertainty,” Int. J. Control, papers and holds more than 20 patents. He also is
vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 875–903, Oct. 1993. Chairman of the Academic Board of SAE-Beijing, Committee Member of
[25] A. Zheng and M. Morari, “Stability of model predictive control with National 863 Plan, Member of Academic Committee of China Transportation
mixed constraints,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 40, no. 10, Technology Project, and Member of Academic Committee of Ministry of
pp. 1818–1823, Oct. 1995. Public Security Traffic Management.