(8) RE. Kalman, Physical and mathematical mechansns of astbity in online automate control stems” Tron ASME, vl, 20 5. pp seis 1957 (4) RUE Bus, “Two cumterermples to Azermans constr.” IEEE Trans. Automat Control ACI. pp 583-550, 1988, 15) HP. Honsberger and P. R. Belanger, "Replsors for tinese time-variant plat wih uncertain pramcter” IEEE Tra. lemat Cont, wo AC; 3. pp MS 197 (6) $Boya dO. Yang, Stroctred and simultaneous Lyspunor eins forse bly pablems” I Convo 3006, pp 2218-2240, 1989. Kalman Decomposition for Implicit Linear Systems ‘A. Banaszuk, M. Kocioeki, and FL Lewis Kalman ecompeston. Te protien f taster relation, regulars by by feedback, output feedback, and ouput injection are audi ty ‘Seen of ts doseepetion ‘The importance of implicit singular systems in circuit theory, economics, large-scale stems, power s¥stems, neurology and elsewhere is by now well documented {10}, 18} 17), [7], 2} The fact that these systems give @ more complete class of dynamical ‘models than the state-ariable systems is aso well known [20] [12] (7. They afford a more convenient technique Tor the ‘erivation of linearized aireraft dynamics than the traditional ‘one [18] They have recently arisen in the H= design problem [9] where they allow a symmetric formulation of the design ‘equations. Moreover, its known that in eieult theory 10) and in design applications (1) ti sometimes necessary to deal with general implicit sets of differential equations that may not be Square In this note, we derive the Kalman decomposition for generat implicit jstems. The significance of the Kalman decomposition in the case of state-space systems has been well recognized, In the ease of regula implicit systems (eg, those where there ext "unique solutions fo all inputs) such & decomposition has been derived in [8] using the Weiersiass form. In the gencral cas, ‘more sophisticated geometric tools should be applied to derive the Kalman decomposition. These tools provide a correspond: Igy increased understanding of the sjstem properties and structure. Such methods have recently been applied in [3] for studying the Kalman decomposition for controlled implicit sy Mansrpt recived une 15,1990 revised Apel 19,1991 and August, 9, 191 Ths work was supprted by the Poth Minis of National Fabeation undor Grant 28 ans bythe Nations! Scene Foundation tnder Grant Bc Ss. 'ABanasuk i with School of Mathematics, Gooeis Institute of ‘ecinsowy, Allans GA 3032 TM. Kosch ih lstitte of Cool and Industrial Electrons, Warsaw Unnesity of Technology, ul Kosova 7, 00602 Wars, Poland FL Lewis withthe Automaton and Robots Research Insite, orth Worth TX 3608 ‘We relate system properties like strong reachailiy, obser ability, acceptance of all inputs, uniqueness of solutions, and so fn tothe properties ofthe subsystems in the Kalman decompo- sition. Using these results we are able to study the transfer relation of nonregular systems (ef. [JOD a8 well a the issue of| ‘sing feedback of various sorts 10 make the closed-loop system have unique roltions when the original system doesnot I, Basic Derixrions Forgiven integers i and extended integer j by Lil me shall sean the st of all integers k such that i = k =}. Then for ay linear space W we denote by si; 7) the space ofall Ws ‘ued sequences withthe domain i,j. For simplicity, we wil write CW) instead of ((0,={;W. For any linear mapping 4, A~* Stands forthe inverse imege function rather then the ordinary ‘A gstem given by the equations Bays Any + By Qu) noe @.») wil be denoted by S(E, A, B, CHE B= 0 and C= F we wi Write SCE, A) instead of S(E, A, 0, DL We assume that Bako BU+Z,C:X¥, where X20, and Y ate fnte-dimenionl linear spaces over reals. The spces wil be called inner, outer input and output spaces ofthe tem S(E, Ay 3, C), respcinely. Note that since EJ in gncral we cast, ‘demi the inner space withthe outer space Of the system, nor dowe asume thatthe astem is aque, re, hat the dimensions ofthe incr and outer spaces of assem are equal. Even for Square systems ne donot assume that the stem bas 8 unique solution forall inputs (wich i he case when [2 ~ Al #0) Such nonoguae stems can occu in Gc theory (10, cco ony [Sh (2 (7) and design problems 1] where 2.) represents {he som plus design constraints. Lat lnf be 8 ven inerval If sequences (x(a) say (215) for Ke [fe thon (4) wil bo elled 8 tjectry of the system 6, A, B,C) on {iff corresponding t0 the inp Sequence Cu) ie = 0a we wil spl eal s) jetoy ofthe gstem SUE, 4, B,C)) Then (3) © (ly) + LY) sven ty C210) the upd coresponding 1 the tector (x) Let SCF, 4, B,C) be a sytem withthe ines space X: Fora sien subspace $1©X we deine the following subspaces ofthe Inner space ofthe stem: M(E.A,B.C:8) = 8.0. (E,A.B,CS) = (A(EWCE, A,B,C:5) + Im BY) 1 Ker c for all nonnegative integers i, The limit of the above sequence, i ‘tense (whieh it does when $ = 0 or § =X), will be denoted by WUE, A,B,C; 8). We define VOCE, A,B) = WCE, A,B, 0:), RACE, A,B) = WA, E,B.0:0), VE AO) (EAC) = WA, E0,C30) W(A,E,0,C:X) n189756/9290800 © 1962 IEEEand CCE, A,B) = RUE, A,B) OVE, A,B), V°CE,A) = VME, AO), RXE,A) = RUE, AO), XE, A) = CME, A.D), CoE, A.C) = R(E.A.C) VVAE. AC), De(E, ALC) = Vel E,A,C) * Re Es AC). I the mappings E, A, B, and C follow from the context, we will write V#,RA-~instead of VIE, A, B), RCE, 4, BD, All these spaces irequently appear inthe existing literature (ct {21 (14), (16 (17) and others. They play important roles in the seometic theory of implicit systems. Fis, they provide an immediate link between the geometric structure of # ple (F, 4, B) and the dynamic properties of solutions of the corresponding system SCE, A, B, C). For instance (f. [2-51 [14 (16D, the space V8CE, A, B) contains all admissible inal coaditions x, of the trajectories of the system SUE, 4, B, C) on [0,9 while the space RCE, A, B) consists of al fia conditions x, ofthe trajectories (x,) of SUE, A. B,C) on [O,fl that have zero intial conditions x. The intersection of RACE, A, B) and VUE, 4, B), the space C%E, A, B), represents all vectors ofthe innet space X that can be ‘reached from the origin by_a trajectory on (0,24. The spaces RGAE, A, OVE, AC), O-AE, A, C) play a fnportant role when studying of observabilty of implicit systems (t(21 (6D. ‘Taking nto account the dynamic meanings ofthe subspaces introduced above, it isnot surprising that such dynamic proper ties of implicit stems ab the existence and uniqueness of ‘solutions, reachability, observability,regularzabily by feedback, tnd the existence of disturbance decoupling feedback can be ‘verified by checking some relations between these subspaces (cf Ho), 03) (4 (1), (17). In the present note, We show that these subspaces play 2 crucial role in the Kalman decomposition of implicit systems Jno subsystems conveying reachability and observabity proper- ties ofthe orginal system, This simples analysis of the struc: ture of implicit systems and allows us to assign particular proper ties of the sytem 0 is corresponding subsjtems. Note that a Similar approach has been sucessfully aplied in [4 an (5 for studying regularizablty and disturbance decoupling for implicit systems [Note that the spaces VEE, A, B), RMUE, A, B), CME, A, 2B), EVIE, A, B)+ARME, A,B) + mB and ECE, 4, 4B) + Im B aze anmihilators of the spaces A7RC(E", 4, BP), EIVAE!, AU. BY), EIVACE!, al, BY) + ATRCCE", a7, BY), CET, AT BY), and O-(E', AT, BP), respectively. Ths, some othe results presented throughout the note willbe obtained by ‘dualization oftheir counterparts Inthe remainder ofthe section, we present several definitions of dynamic properties of a system S(E, 4, B, C). The fact that F + Tand SUE, A, B, C) may not be square introduce some fine structure that fequies several new definitions. To give a coher tent picture, we provide geometric and matrix penil conditions Tor these notions. These conditions are meant to bring together several resulls that ae available in the Iiterature ‘We siy that a system SUE, A, B, C) accept all puts if for ‘every sequence (i) © sU) there exists corresponding trjec tory (i). The following wellknown result characterizes this property (et [1 13). IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOI. 37.NO. 10, OCTOBER 1972 Proposition 2.1: Let S(E, A, B, C) be a given system with inner space X. Then the following tatements are equivalent 2) The system accep ll inputs D)imBC EV" + AR? (0 rank (WE ~ 6A] ~ rank 26 ~ AB] for almost all com- plex pairs (is 6). «For etery sequence (1,) € s(U) vanishing on (0,dim X there exists Sequence (x,) © (X) such that 1a) holds and ‘A gysiem SCE, A, B, C) is sad to have the oupurniqueness propery i its every output (y,) uniquely determined by the Corresponding input (1) and the inital condition ofthe core- sponding trajectoy (x,). The property his been introduced in [13] where it has proven to be dual to acceptance ofall inputs ence, dulizing Proposition 21, one can show that a stem SLE, A, B,C) poseses the output-uniqueness property if and ‘only if CC Kee C, of, equivalently, rank (aE — 64Y?] = ranki(Hé ~ 6'CH ae, I every trajectory (xp) of a system SCF, A) is uniquely determined by its inital condition xy we say that the system ‘possess the uniqueness propery. Of course a system SCE, A) Doosseres the uniqueness propery ifthe sytem SUE, 4,0, 7) possesses the output uniqueness property. Hence, a geometric nd an algebraic criterion for the uniqueness property are on nk (HE ~ 44)"] = dim Xe, respectively system S(E, A, B,C) accepts all outer sequences it for every sequence (2,) € (2) there exist sequences (x,) and {() sueh thatthe equation Bays = Arg + Bay +24 @2 holds forall k © [0,2 This notion has been widely studied in [RHIS) (where it hat been called aceepance ofall disurbance) It involves the ovter space ofthe system and therefore allows ‘one to expres those propertics of a system which are related to the outer space. Its important that z, in (22) should be an arbitrary vector from the outer space’ Z so that the whole structure ofthe stem in the outer space can be revealed. In the present, the notion of acceptance ofall imput sequences is applied for examining triangular decompositions of implicit sy tems, Such decompositions have been carefull studied (4, and [SI In particular, in (5} a decomposition of inner and outer Space into subspaces that makes the mappings # and to have an upper triangular form has been called a good decomposition iff the Bint subsystem accepts all disturbances. For more details wwe refer to [5, Chapter 2} and Lemma 3.1 of the present note “The property of aceptance of all inputs is characterized by ‘he following proposition (ef. (21-8) (11) 17D. Proposition 2.2: Let S(E, A, B, C) be a given system with X, 2, and U being its inner, outer, and input spaces, respectively, ‘Then the following statements are equivalent 8) The system accepts all outer sequences. by EVE AR! + Im B= ©) rankl HE ~ AB] = dim Z for almost all complex pairs (uo 1d) For every (25) © 42) vanishing on (0,dim X{ there exist (4p) €s(2) and (u,) © U) such that the (22) holds and x0, 7 ‘A system S(E, A) which possesses the uniqueness propery and accepts all outer sequences i said to be regular. OF course, Such a sjtem always square. Let ws aso recall that a square fystem S(E, A) aocepts all outer sequences if and only if it possesses the uniqueness property) It i well known that 2 Square system i regular if and only if [sE ~ Al # 0.IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL 37, NO. 1, OCTOBER 1952 A.gystem SUE, A, B, C) is said 10 be wajectory obserabl if ‘one can reconstrut the tajectory x.) fom it inital condition “i, and the corresponding output (9. and input (a) on (0 ‘This notion happens tobe dual to that of acceptance ofall outer sequences. A geometric condition and 2 matt penel criterion for trajectory obserabilty are Ce ~ 0, and cank[(nE GA)" CT] = dim X for ales ll complex pars (4), espe tively. ‘A.gaiem S(E, 4, B, C) is sid to be stongh reachable if for every outer sequence (z,) © sZ) and arbitrary vector x €X there erst sequences (x,) © (X), (4) © s(U) such that (22) holds and xy =O and x, =x, for some J € (0,24 (The notion has been studied in (2-13; note that the notion has been called there. srong controllably). It is obvious that every stongly reachable system accepts all outer sequences, A geometric con ition for strong reachability of a system S(E, A, By C) EC? 4 Im B~AC® + Im B= Z, while 9 matric pencil one rankl WE ~ 648) = dim Z for all, 8) 0.0) E21 Bh ‘We say that a system S(E, A, B, C) 8 observable if for every J [dim X,»{U(@), one ean reconstruct the trajectory (x4) from the coresponding output (),) and input (uy) of the stem on [0d (lei clear that the sytem is trajectory observable if ts observable) Since observabiity defined above is dua to strong feachablty (cf. [2), we can eaily derive entra for observabi ly; a geomettic one is O- = 0, while a matrix pencil is rankl(WE ~ &4)?C"T = dim X for all complex pairs (1, 8) 0, ‘We will alla square stem S(E, A, B, C) regulazable by inner (ower, ouput) feedback, if here exist a mapping K:X + U(K:Y ZK: U) sich that the system SUE, + BK) (SUE, A + KO), and SCE, A + BKC), respectively is regular. In the exiting Hterature (Cf eg, (6) [17D on continuoustime stems the reglaibily by incr and outer feedback are also alled the regulazabiy by sac (or semustte) feedback and by ‘output njecuon, respectively. Using results of (17 [8]-6), [11] fone can show that a square system SCE, 4, B, C) is repuariz- tbl by ince (outer, output feedback i and only ft acepts all futer sequences (i 6 tajetory observable, possesses the oth properties, respectively). ‘An explanation is due on the meaning of the term outer eguarizabliy, which has fis been considered in (6 as regular faablty by output injection. Note that repulaizabiity of SUE, A, B, C) is, contrary to the other two Sots of fegularzabliy, related not to the original system SCE, 4, B,C) but 10 i observer candidate” Big. (ARO) + Bu + KG. (23) Tt happens that a nccessry condition for (23) 10 be a regular system for some K is outer regularizablity of S(E, A, B.C). IIL, Kaunan Deconrosiion rR a SYSTEM S(E, A,B,C) Let S(E, A, B, C)be a given system with the inner space X and the outer space Z. Let us define X= CO. 2, = EX + AK, (Choose subspaces 2X, and Z,, © (2,3, 4) 8 follows: Xax,=c%, ¥, 84, =O. 4, 0X, OX, 0%, =X 2, @2,~EC* + Im B, 1, 8.2, = E(%, ®X) +A(K, 8%) = Be + AD, 2.0%, 02, 0%,-Z. 62) on The decomposition XX, @X, @X,@Xy, Z= 2 02,0 2; 2, willbe called a Kalman decompostion of a stem SUE, A. B,C), We have the following result. Propasiion 31: Let X= X, @X, 0X, @Xy, Z=Z) @ 2:8 2,2, be the Kalman decompesiion a sytem S(E, A, By C) ‘Then the quadruple (F, A, B,C) has the following (orm with respect to this decomposition: Eu Eu Ey Bw 0 En 0 Ey 0 0 By Exl 0 0 0 by Ay An Ay Aw 0 An 0 Ay 0 0 Ay Ault 0 0 0 Ay a a, | [0 C0 Cy 33) ofl 1 6 0 Proof Let fot 4 = (23.4 Qy:%, 2 X be a canonical injection while F,:—»Z, Be » canonical surection. Let 4, FAQ, Ey = PE0,B, = P.A.C,-= CO, Then, the mappings Ey and Ay for (© (2,3,4) ae zero since Z, ~ EX; +A, AS X19, C Ker, we have C)=0 and C,~ 0. The inci EX, + im BBC? + ImB= 7, Z, and the relation AC + im B= £C* + lm B Gt. (2) guarantees that the mappings Ey Ans and B, ate zero, for 1 (3,4). From the inclusion EX, # AX, cZ, @ Z, it follows that E35 ~ Az, ~ 0 and Far Ay 0, 7 ‘Let us Yormatize now the notions of ith and (th subsys tems ofa system S(E, 4, B, C) with respeet 10 the Kalman ‘decomposition. For © (,2.3.4) the stem SCE Ais BusC 8 Said t0 be the ith subysiem of SCE, 4, B, C). Similaiy for fy 202,30), 1 #100), @ %) > X being a canonical in jection and PZ» (2 Z,) being a canonical surection, the system SUP EQ,,. FAQ, P.8-C0,,) willbe called the CM suber SLE, A BC). fn other words the (sh sibjstem of SYE: A, B,C) is given by ith and jth block rows of (E, A, B) and {tn and jth block columns of (E, A, C) inthe block fom G3). “The two feuls below, extending those that ae well known for the state variable stems are Rist steps in examining the Kalman decomposition Proposiion 32: Let SUE, A, B,C) bea given system. Then 2s, 2d subsystem strongly reachable 2) ts. sn ssyntem is obseable 5) ts, 4th subsystem possesses the uniqueness propery ') Is, 3nd subsystem aeceps all outer sequences Proof To prove Dand 3) note that the decomposition XaX E2782, for Kym CHEAD) Ky My Ky and Z,= ECF, A.B) + Im Band 2m 2,82, 8 a Kiman-type decomposition for controlled systems introduced in [aL Now the proof of 1) and 3) follows immediately fom [ Corollary 211 The statements 2) and 4) are dual to 1) and 3, respectively.Proposition 33: Let S(E, A, B, C) be a given system, Then 1D The gstem accepts all inputs if and only if its (1, Dad subastem has the same propery 2) The system possesses the outpu-uniqueness property if and conly if its (2, 4th subsystem has the samme property. 43) The gsiem accepts all outer sequences if and only ifs (3, 4th subsystem possesses the same prope. )The sistem is trajectory observable if and only if is (1, rd subsystem possesses the uniqueness propery. Proof. 1) Let (uy) © (U) be a sequence vanishing on (0, im X}. Then, by Proposition 2.1 there exists a sequence (x,) © 2() with j= 0-sich that (21a) holds. Since the (3, 9h subsystem of S(E, A, B, C) possesses the uniqueness property, Gp © s(%, x) 2) This result is dual to D. 3) Follows immediately from (4, Corollary 2.1. 4) This result is dual 0 3) . ‘The following technical lemma wil be usefl in simpliing the proofs of eur main resus, It deals with some properties of @ system in general block triangular form, which is not necessarily the Kalman decomposition Lemma 31: Let S(E, A) be a given sytem with ¥ and Z being its inner and outer spaces, respectively. Assume that E, A) has the following block form with respect to decomposition XX, 0%, 2-7, 07, £y Bal [an dn o ésflo an|P Then 1) S(Ezx, Am) accepts all outer sequences if SCE, A) enjoys the same property ae 2) S(E\y,Ajy) possesses the uniqueness property if SCE, A) rf the ame prover. oe 3) If SlEq, Az) is regular then S(E, A) accepts all outer sequences if and only if S(E,,,Aj,) enjoys the sime propery. 4) If S(E.Ay)) is regular then. SCE, A) possesses the ‘uniqueness property if and only if SCE, Ax) enjoys the same property ‘Proof: The statements 1) and 2) are obvious. 3) (=) Consider an outer sequence (Z,) € s(Z,) such that 42, = 0, for © [0,dim XI. Then, by Proposition 2.2 there exist G,) © s() and (24) € s(G) such that (2.2) holds and ip = 0. Since SUE. Aza) possesses the uniqueness property then (3, 1 HE, Hence SE, accept ll outer sequences. (=) Follows from [5, proposition 23], 4) (9) Let (22) be a trajectory of SUE,,, 4.) with zero initial ‘condition. To get the desired conclusion itis sufficient to show that (22) = 0. LetA = dim X,, For this Jet us define (2) < 8) by 2 = 0, for K€ 10, a Bf ~ £2 for & € [A,24, Then, in view of Proposition 2.2, there exists (2]) © 3(%;) with zero ‘nal condition and such thatthe equation ER, = (Agit = E32.) holds for k € [0,-4. Put Gy) GB. Then (4) is_a trajectory of SUE, A) with zero initial condition, Since S(E, A) possesses the uniqueness property (x4) Hence, (83) ~ 0 and finally 3) ~ 0. (=) Follows from [5, Proposition 26). . ‘The following main theorem summarizes the properties of all, ‘subsystems obtained via a Kalman decomposition. Theorem 3: Let S(E, A, By C) be a given system decom. posed in the Kalman form (3:3). Then 1) S(E,,, Ay) accepts all outer sequences. i) SUE, Az, ByyC3) is strongly reachable and observable oa) fi) (Ey, Ag) isa cepa system, 5s) SUE,y, Ay) possesses the uniqueness property Proof. 3) Proposition 32-3) guarantees that the @, 4th subsystem of S(E, 4, B, C) possesses the uniqueness property ‘Then by Lemma’3.1-2) we derive the uniqueness propery of SSUE,s, dss). On the other hand, by dual reasoning. [applying Proposition 32-4) and then Lemma 3.-1)) we get. th SEs, Arg) accep all outer sequences. 1) By Proposition 32-4) (1,3>aubgntem of (E, 4, B, C) accep all outer sequences, The rest ofthe proof follows from Lemma 3.13), ‘4 Follows fom Proposition 323) and Lemma 3.1-), 2) Proposition 32-1) says thatthe (1, 2ind subgstem of SCE, A,B, C)is strongly teachable. Now strong reachability of SUE», Avy, By, C2) follows immediicly. Dual reasoning, [using Propo. ‘ition 32.2) yields observabilty of SCExs, Ax, Bas) ‘Note that Theorem 31-3) states that S(Ey, Ay) which con- stitutes the unreachable and unobservable part ofthe system, s ‘aways regular. In the matri pencil terms this means that the Kronecker form of Ey, ~ Aya contains neither row nor column ‘minimal indexes. This follows from the fact that blocks corre sponding to row minimal indexes are always observable, whereas those corresponding to column ones are always reachable “The Kalman decomposition reveals the reachablity and ob: sorvabiity structure of a system. The next result shows that it Also useful in studying the other properties defied in Section T. Theorem 32: Let SUE, A, B,C) be a given gstem decom posed in the Kalman form (3.3). Then 1) SCE, A, B,C) accepts all inpts if and only if SCE, Az») accepts all outer sequences. ii) SCE, 4, B, C) has the output uniqueness property if and only if (Ezy za) possesses the uniqueness property Ti) S(E, A, B.C) accepts all outer sequences if nd only if S{E ae, Aus) possesses the same property (and thus is regula 9) SCE" 4, B,C) trajectory observable if and only if (Ey, -4,) possess the uniqueness property (and thus i eyula) Proof, 1) (=) Proposition 33-1) sates if SUE, 4, B, C) accepts all inputs them its (1, 2nd subsystem does. Since, by ‘Theorem 3.1-1) (Ey, 43) accepts all outer sequences, then (5, Proposition 22) yields that SUE, Asa, By, C;) accepts all inputs On the other hand, Theorem 3.12) assures that S(Em, Ass, Be, C,)'s stongly teachable, and hence accepts all outet Sequences, The rest ofthe proof follows from equivalences of the statements a) and c) of Propestions 1 and 1.2 applied for SME yy Ag, Bas C2 (€) Follows eaily fom (5, Proposition 23] and Proposition 33. 2) This statement is dual to the statement 1) 53) The statement follows from Proposition 33.3) and Lemma 3p. 4) The statement follows from Proposition 33-4) and Lemma, 312) 7 ‘Although the general stom S(E, 4, B, C) does not have a transfer fonction in the usual sense, it may have a well-defined transfer relation between is inputs and outputs (ef. (10). The tstence of such a relation is well Kaown for regular systems. In ‘what folloms, we show that @ transfer telation may also be Introduced for more general cass of implicit systems. Theorem 3.3 Let S{E, A, B,C) be & system decomposed in the Kelman form (3.3) which ‘asopts all inputs and has the ‘ouputunigueness propery. Let (4) ¢U) be an input of SE, 4, B, C) vanishing on (0, dit X1. Then there exists a ‘corresponding trajectory (x,) © a(X) with xy = 0. Let (94) =IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL 37, NO. 10, OCTOBER 1952 (Ca) be the corresponding output. Then Uz) = uy + "ay “te and Y(z) = yp-+ Hy) + ~ (a formal power series cor. responding to (1) and ()) are related by the equation Y(2)~ C282 Az) "Ba “The formula (5) transfer flaton involving formal power series of the input and output when the inital condition of the Corresponding trajectory is 040 (the existence of such a tajc= tory is guaranteed by Proposition LD. The above theorem shows that even for a nonregular and nonsquare system SUE, A. B,C) ‘one can have such a relation provided tha the system accep inputs and has the output-uniqueness property. The issue of closed-loop regularity of implicit systems is an {important question, especially ithe context of large-scale inter connected systems, where a state-space formulation may not ven exit, The mest result reveals the role of the Kalman flecomposition in studying reguarizabiity using inner feedback, futput injection and output feedback Covllay 31: Let SUE, A, B, C) be a given square sytem decomposed inthe Kalman form 3.3. Ten 1) SLE, B,C) ie regularzable by inner feedback if and only if S(Ey. Aud is square (and thas is regula 2) SUE, A, B, C) is regularzable by output injection if and only if S(E;y, Ay) squae (and thus regula) ©) SUE, A, B,C) is regularizabe by output feedback if and only if SUEyy ys) and SUE,g, Ay) ate square Cand thus they are regula) ‘Proof, The system S(Eyy, Ay) is square as itis regular. I the stems S(E, A, B, Che S(Ey, Ay) are also square then fim(EC® + ImB) = dim Z ~ ‘dim (Z, @ Z,) = dim X — ‘in; @.4,) = dimC#. To complete the proot we apply [4 Corollary 4.1 2) The proof ofthis statement is dul to that of statement 1). 3) (=)'This implication is obvious. (=) Since the fist, third, and fourth subsystems of SCE, A, 1B, C) are square its Second subsystem has the same propery Since, by Theorem 21-2, SCE. zy, Bas C,) i stongly reac able and observable one can easily see that the conditions Im Az + Im By = Z, and Ker Ay, 0 Ker C;~ 0 ate sated. But these are necestary and sufficient conditions for existence of ‘mapping K:YU such that (4+ B,XC,) i invertible. Then the system S(E zy, Ays + BKC.) is regular and hence so does SE, A+ BKC, B,C). . [Note thatthe definitions of the space X, and 2; allow one also to express these cegularizbiliy criteria by means of the dimensions ofthe spaces C®, EC® + Imm BO, and EO, + AO. ina straightforward manner Note that statement 3) of Corollary 3.1 can be also derived from the statements 1) and 2) and (11, theorem 2), where it has teen shown that a system is regularzable by output feedback i land only if it is regulariable by inner feedback and by output injection. However, the proof presented in the present note ‘offers more insight ino the problem of output-feedback regular izabiliy It adresses the problem in terms ofthe second subsy- tem of SUE, A, B, C), whic is always repularizable by output feedback iit square In this context Corollary 3.13) sys that SCE, 4, B, C) i roplarizabe by output feedback if and only if the remaining subsystems are already regular. Moreover, it Seen that any feedback regularizng the second subsystem regi lanzes the original system. or the results ofthis note 10 be of some practical value, 8 comment is due on determining the Kalman decomposition G5) Direct calculation of the subspaces (.1) and (3.2) by recursive algorithms i not advisable. Instead, one can mosiy the algorithms of [19], which allow representation of a matrix pene in # generalized Hessenberg, fem, to find the Kronecker Ftructure of pencils [96 ~ 4B] and (GE ~ A)" C1) Note that the column minimal indexes of these pencils correspond to the reachable and observable parts of the stem SUE, A, B,C) Tespectively. However, an additonal effort is necessary to keep track ofthe linear transformations involved fr they can mix up the inputs with the inner variables, and the outputs with the tuter variables ofthe system SUE, A, B,C) IV. Concuusion In this note we derived the Kalman decomposition for a general class of implicit systems, We studied dyramic properties ‘Of subsystems obtained by meats of this decomposition. The ‘decomposition has proven seful fr studying a transfer relation land repularizabiity by feedback. Besides these applications, this ‘Seeomposition seems to be appropriate for examining the prob {ems of minimal realization and closed-loop structure assign ment by output feedback. Revexences i) 1B, Anlevich, “Recarsne controler design sing onoreted epic pst” Proce ACC. 88, pp 2136-2138 tay A anata aad’. Resize K'M Praaski, “On dua ooeeen stueraton and cond fo imp near dsete-ime Stems submited for ptcation, 99 tay Rpoenwuks and M. Keck, KM Pst, “On the Hat ‘oe condos for contellaity for plc ieardsertetime ‘Sema Che St. Saal Proc wo 289-258, 196, (a) Ribanacoly and M. Rosie KM. Prqtus, “On Kalmansype ‘Seompoitesfor inp finer discrete-time sem an Splicatons as Cor, so 52 pp 1263-127, 1990. 1s) anaes, M: Koseek aba KM. Ps “Phe dturbanse ‘coupling problem for mpc pear dueretetime ystems” Stans Cor vot 28 pp. 1570-1293 (6) U-Basee and K Ogaden, “Oberland regularity by ‘utptinjosion of he deri sims” sbmited fr pubic (71 S°1; Camphet, “Nonreple singular dynamic Leoni stems” Econmatc #7 pp 385-1808 197. is) LD Sagar Coal Sera, Lv. Notes Com. Info. Sines ew York Springer-Verlag. 1983 19) 1° Dove Re Ghner BP Rhargoekat, and B.A. Frac “tte pan sitions to anders Hf and conta poten IEEE Tras tama. Cor. 3 p. 831-47. 1388 Bi. Doris ad W. Newt “Noateglar seiate ots sample and ipet-outpt paling” In Pre. 26h IEEE CDD. ‘NewYork 987 pp 125-1136 PSR rier "Regulrabliy of dexriptor systems” Int. J Sat Se vo 17, pp 83-887, NE ess "Gece Inepretion of the zeros and of he iin des constant er item va 3 renewed ealzation theory. in Po. TPAC Moka "St Sucre, Cont,” Pras, 19a 20°23, Ft Rewin “Desipon ystoms: Expanded descriptor equation fd Marlow pareters” IEEE Tran dude Con, 0. AC Bh pp ots-oa7, Ee EP Sem “A tutorial on the geometric properties of near fincimaran angler stems Automata, 181 Dr tacabegee, "Tine uvaat dvepoe ems.” Auomat- Fea pp atd-aB 197% IM Mises “Generatze linear gstems: Gsometric ant stuc- tual eppocches Liar Agta Appl, pp- 122-123 198. Onion snd Lens "On fhe tegolrzbilty of snglar Spsena” EEE Tran Automat Com vl 38, pp 1156-16, i. [BT Stevens, “Derfation of raft Hear sate exuations from Ips nonlin equations” CDC, p44, 1990. Van Dooren, “fae computation of Kronecker canon frm {ea sngulr pen Linar Aber Apps 027, pp 108-10, Ww. uo} uw a) us na. us, 8 on ws) 9)(20) 4. C. Wilems “nput-outpt and satespace representations of Sine dimensioal Tar tine-iiant Sten famear Age App 930 pp 581-008, 1S ‘Variable Structure Control Using System Decomposition M. Zohdy, MS. Fadl and J. Li Abaract—Varabe strctre systems ae dsineds that deseable performance achieved by juicoes ingot switching. In tis ate, we Ererodace a new approach fr the deign of large variate srcire ‘ystems subject fo conta bunds The meth tnades a mew itching iyperptane design based on geeralaed verses and system decomp! son. To ensure reaching the hyperplane and achieving a sding ona tee, the contr etched between oa qulvaea cor and Bed torrie control The design of the corrective conte component Completed ering system decomposition into smaller subsjatems. An Sstinae ofthe domaie of strain corresponding t the bse fSatrl is obtained nad ated sl the appropiate contol tovads, ‘The method i astrated wing» Aardr numerical example A variable structure system (VSS) sa system whose structure 's intentionally changed to achieve the desired performance, ‘his intentional structural change is wypially accomplished ‘through discontinuous contra action in accordance with a pre= designed algorithm and switching hyperplanes [1], 2 ‘The problem of hyperplane design for linear time-invariant systems as been shown fo be equivalent to a pole assignment problem [3]. Several approaches have been suggested for hyper. plane design exploiting this observation (3), [4 In [sa hyper- plane design using generalized inverses is wed 10 asign the esired eigenvalues inthe sliding mode. Using the algorithm of IS}, itis possible to simplify any pole asignment problem by decomposing it into a series of lowerorder pole assignments ‘We combine the design of [4] and the algorithm ofS] to obtain 4 new hyperplane design procedure for large-scale systems Te is wellknown that the system trajectories can be main- twined a8 closely a6 desired to the switching hyperplane with a sucintly large gan [6 In practice, the contro variables inthe system are bounded because of physical constraints. Here, we discuss the mullevel variable stricture controller (VSC) design with bounded corrective control and local equivalent control ‘The equivalent contol is used when the sytem i close 10 the ‘witching hyperplane. Otherwise, the bounded corective control is used. The corrective controller design for large-scale systems is aocomplised via system decomposition as in [7] und [8]. The note is organized as follows. Fist, we present the new hyper plane design for large-scale systems using the generalized in verses approach of [4] and the decomposition algorithm of (5 Neat, the controller design method where the system is decom hls se Je 1, Weed Mey 2,191 an Jo 25 'M:Zohdy swith she Department of Electical and Stems Engine ing, Oakland Unies, Rochester, M333 ‘Faas ith the Department of Electical Engineering, Une sity of Nevada, Reo, BV 3557 5, Liu i wih the Departsent of Electrical Engineering, Notional Unies, Smenpore THEE ing Nember 920137, posed into smaller subsystems is presented and an estimate of {he domain of atraction i obtained. Finally, an example f given to illustrate the integrated hyperplane and controller desig. 1, Des oF Stowe SunrAcE Consider the liner time-invariant stem kn Art Bu w @ where x= RYw € R%, 5 © R". Is asumed that matric CB is onsingula, and 8, C have fll-rank m “The contol as the form Fa). (n> me, 50) <0) Where 4, af the Ith component of u and the ‘th hyperplane Of s, respectively. A sufficient condition for the sliding motion of the state on & surge sG2) = 018, s= (a) e s8<0 o in the neighborhood of 5, = 1o--jm. In the siding mode, the system states will satisfy the equations s(x) = Ce o 5) = C= 0. o ‘Substituting (1) into (6, gives the Hiner equivalent cootrl(2] Mag ~(CB) Cae o and the equivalent sytem in the sliding mode EU (CB) C}aAe =A, ® In the sliding mode, m state variables can be expressed in ‘terms ofthe remaining (n — m) state variables i (6). Hence, the ‘equivalent system has m 2er0 eigenvalues and (n — rm that ean be rely selected. The generalized inverse approach of [4] ‘elects a svitching suefae that assigns the (nm) free cigen- values and the assoiated eigenvectors. The procedure of 6} ean be outind a8 follows. ‘Step Ts Select the (n ~ m) eigenvalues for the equivalent system (8) and form the associated Jordan matrix J. ‘Step 2” Solve the equation ‘AVI = BL. o for the m x(n ~ mm) eigenvector matrix V where L isan abi- trary mt % (nm) mati, V contains (n ~ m eigenvectors and satis yt Pa a torr [2 Pe where BBB = Iyy VV = by ‘Step 4: Let © = NBS where N is an m x m mati, usally selected a I For large-stale systems, the above procedure poses an exces ‘ve computational burden. Using the decomposition aigrithm ‘of [5h the pole placement is reduced to a sercs of lower dimensional problems and a new design procedure for large-scale systems is formulated, om8.9286 5280800 1902 IEEE