This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.
Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS
Bipartite Fixed-Time Output Consensus of
Heterogeneous Linear Multiagent Systems
Huaguang Zhang , Fellow, IEEE, Jie Duan, Yingchun Wang , Member, IEEE, and Zhiyun Gao
Abstract—In this article, the bipartite fixed-time output
consensus problem of heterogeneous linear multiagent systems
(MASs) is investigated. First, a distributed bipartite fixed-time
observer is proposed, by which the follower can estimate the
leader’s state. The estimate value is the same as the leader’s state
in modulus but may not in sign due to the existence of antag-
onistic interactions between agents. Then, an adaptive bipartite
fixed-time observer is further proposed. It is fully distributed
without involving any global information. This adaptive bipar-
tite fixed-time observer can estimate not only the leader’s system
matrix but also the leader’s state. Next, distributed nonlinear con-
trol laws are developed based on two observers, respectively, such
that the bipartite fixed-time output consensus of heterogeneous
linear MASs can be achieved. Moreover, the upper bound of the
settling time is independent of initial states of agents. Finally, the
examples are given to demonstrate the results.
Index Terms—Adaptive control, antagonistic interactions,
bipartite output consensus, fixed-time control, heterogeneous
linear multiagent systems (MASs).
I. I NTRODUCTION
OR THE past decade, the consensus problem of
F multiagent systems (MASs) has been a hot topic due to
its widespread engineering applications [1]–[5]. For the pre-
liminary works, simple cases where agents have single- or
double-integrator dynamics are considered [6], [7]. Afterward,
more general and complex cases are investigated in [8]–[10].
However, all agents have identical dynamics in the afore-
mentioned works, known as homogeneous MASs. In practical
applications, agents often have different dynamics and even
dimensions referred to as heterogeneous MASs. In this case,
the output consensus problem is investigated [11]–[15]. In
these works, the observer (or dynamic compensator) is essen-
tial for each agent to design the controller. As is known, the
Manuscript received March 12, 2019; revised June 4, 2019; accepted August
12, 2019. This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Grant 61627809, Grant 61433004, and Grant
61621004, and in part by the Liaoning Revitalization Talents Program under
Grant XLYC1801005. This article was recommended by Associate Editor
L. Liu. (Corresponding author: Huaguang Zhang.)
H. Zhang is with the State Key Laboratory of Synthetical Automation for
Process Industries, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110004, China, and
also with the School of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern
University, Shenyang 110004, China (e-mail: hgzhang@ieee.org).
J. Duan, Y. Wang, and Z. Gao are with the School of Information Science
and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110004, China (e-mail:
dj89111@163.com; drwangyc@gmail.com; crazycrazybird@163.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this article are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TCYB.2019.2936009
2168-2267 c 2019 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.
1
study on heterogeneous MASs is more challenging but more
meaningful.
In the study of consensus problems, one of the practically
important problems is how to improve the convergence rate.
Many methods have been applied to solve this problem, such
as enlarging the coupling strength, maximizing the algebraic
connectivity, and optimizing the control gain. However, only
the asymptotical consensus can be achieved by these meth-
ods. In some practical applications, it is often required that
the consensus can be achieved in finite time. This is because
not only can a faster convergence rate be guaranteed, but also
the system performance can be improved, including the distur-
bance rejection and robustness against uncertainties. Because
of these advantages, the finite-time consensus problem of
MASs has drawn great attention. Wang and Xiao [16], Zuo and
Tie [17], and Chen et al. [18] investigated the finite-time con-
sensus problem of single-integrator MASs. Then, [19]–[21]
extended it to double-integrator and high-order MASs. Using
the terminal sliding-mode technique, the fast finite-time leader-
following consensus problem was investigated in [21], and
the globally fast finite-time stable concept was introduced.
However, the upper bound of the settling time depends on the
initial states of agents in these works. Then, two issues arise.
One is that the estimate of the settling time cannot be given
accurately if initial states are unavailable, and the other is that
the settling time will be arbitrarily large with the increase in
initial states.
The fixed-time stability concept, as an extension of finite-
time stability, was introduced for a single linear system [22],
which aims to remove the dependence on the initial states
of the settling time. Some researchers have extended it to
solve the consensus problem of MASs [17], [23]–[25]. Zuo
and Tie [17] investigated the fixed-time consensus problem of
single-integrator MASs. Ni et al. [23] and Zuo et al. [24] con-
sidered the case of double-integrator and high-order integrator
MASs, respectively. In [25], the fixed-time leader-following
tracking problem was addressed, where agents had inher-
ent nonlinear dynamics. Further, Hong et al. [26] considered
more complex MASs with uncertain disturbances, but the
state of each agent was a scalar. Then, Ning et al. [27],
Zuo [28], and Wang et al. [29] investigated the fixed-time
consensus problem of MASs under a directed communica-
tion graph. Zuo et al. [30] presented an overview of recent
results on the fixed-time consensus problem, and pointed out
some challenging issues to solve. However, it is worth notic-
ing that the aforementioned works focus on the fixed-time
state consensus problem, where agents have single-integrator,
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS
double-integrator, high-order integrator dynamics, or simple
nonlinear dynamics. The extension to the general dynamics,
especially to the MASs with heterogeneity, is of practical
significance, since agents often have different dynamics in
practical applications. Due to the existence of heterogene-
ity, both the observer and controller have to be designed
and fixed-time estimate and control should be guaranteed.
Thus, completely different forms of the observer and con-
troller are required to be designed, which is challenging.
To the best of our knowledge, there is no literature report-
ing the fixed-time output consensus problem of MASs with
heterogeneous dynamics, which forms a motivation of this
article.
On the other hand, cooperative interactions and antagonis-
tic interactions may both exist in MASs. In this case, a signed
graph, which has both positive and negative edges, is used to
describe communication topology. Due to the co-existence of
cooperative and antagonistic interactions, the bipartite consen-
sus concept is introduced, which means that agents converge
to corresponding values which are the same in modulus but
not in sign. The bipartite consensus problem was first inves-
tigated for single-integrator MASs [31]. Afterward, it was
extended to general MASs [32]–[34]. Bipartite tracking con-
sensus was addressed in [35]. Meng et al. [36] investigated the
finite-time consensus problem. Furthermore, Meng et al. [37]
introduced a concept of interval bipartite consensus. However,
the aforementioned works all concern homogeneous MASs.
To the best of our knowledge, little attention has been paid to
heterogeneous MASs, which forms another motivation of this
article.
Inspired by the aforementioned works, we investigate the
bipartite fixed-time output consensus problem of heteroge-
neous linear MASs in this article. Compared with related
works, this article has the following contributions.
1) A novel distributed bipartite fixed-time observer form
is proposed, which accomplishes the bipartite finite-
time estimate of the leader’s state. While for common
observers to solve the heterogeneity problem [11]–[15],
only an asymptotic estimate can be achieved.
2) A novel adaptive bipartite fixed-time observer form
is proposed. It is more practical compared with most
existing observers [11], [13]–[15], since there is no
global information of MASs involved. The idea is partly
inspired by [5] and [12]. However, we consider more
general MASs with heterogeneity and antagonistic inter-
actions, and the fixed-time output consensus problem,
which are not considered in [5] and [12].
3) Two novel nonlinear control laws are proposed based
on two observers, respectively, such that the fixed-time
bipartite output consensus of heterogeneous linear MASs
can be achieved.
4) We take the heterogeneity, antagonistic interactions, and
fixed-time control into consideration. To the best of our
knowledge, existing works only consider some but not
all points.
The remainder of this article is organized as follows. Some
preliminaries are given in Section II. Section III presents the
problem formulation, and some assumptions and lemmas are
given. Section IV presents the main results. The examples are
given in Section V, and the conclusions are made in Section VI.
II. P RELIMINARIES
Throughout this article, R+ 0 , R , and R
n m×n represent the
non-negative real number, n-dimensional Euclidean space, and
m × n real matrices, respectively. I represents the identity
matrix with compatible dimensions. 1 and 0 represent the
column vectors with compatible dimensions, where the ele-
ments are 1 and 0, respectively. A > 0 (A < 0) means that
A is symmetric positive definite (negative definite). λmax (A)
and λmin (A) represent the maximum and minimum eigenval-
ues of A, respectively. For A = (aij )m×n ∈ Rm×n , define
sig(A)α = sgn(A)|A|α , where sgn(·) denotes the sign func-
tion and | · | represents the absolute value operation. Define
vec(A) = [AT1 , AT2 , . . . , ATn ]T , where Ai is the ith column
of A. Let Mm n (vec(A)) = [A , A , . . . , A ]. ⊗ represents the
1 2 n
Kronecker product.
Consider MASs with one leader and N followers. The com-
munication topology among them is described by a signed
graph Ḡ = G ∪ {0}, where 0 denotes the leader and the
subgraph G = (V , ε, A ) describes the information exchange
among followers. V = {1, 2, . . . , N}, ε ⊆ V × V , and A =
(aij )N×N are the node set, edge set, and signed weighted adja-
cency matrix, respectively. If agent i can obtain information
from agent j, aij = 0, else aij = 0. aij > 0 and aij < 0 mean
that a cooperative interaction and antagonistic interaction exist
between agent i and agent j, respectively. Ni = {j ∈ V |aij = 0}
represents the neighbors of agent i. The graph is undirected
if aij = aji is satisfied. Let R = diag(a10 , a20 , . . . , aN0 ) rep-
resent the adjacency matrix between the leader and followers.
ai0 > 0 means that follower i can obtain information from the
leader; otherwise, ai0 = 0. If there exists a root node, from
which the directed paths to all other nodes exist, the graph
contains a directed spanning tree. The Laplacian matrix L of
subgraph G is defined as follows. Define H = L + R to be the
matrix of Ḡ
 N
j=1,j=i | aij |, i = j
L= (1)
−aij , i = j.
Definition 1 [31]: A signed graph is said to be structurally
balanced if itadmits a bipartition  of nodes V 1 and V 2 ,
satisfying V 1 V 2 = V and V 1 V 2 = ∅, such that
aij ≥ 0, i, j ∈ V q (q ∈ 1, 2) and aij ≤ 0, i ∈ V q , j ∈ V 3−q . It
is said to be structurally unbalanced otherwise.
Define D = {diag(d1 , d2 , . . . , dN )}, where di ∈ {1, −1}.
Then, the following lemma is satisfied.
Lemma 1 [31]: A connected signed graph G is structurally
balanced if and only if ∃D ∈ D , such that DA D is a non-
negative matrix. Moreover, the bipartition of the nodes can be
determined by D.
III. P ROBLEM F ORMULATION
Consider a heterogeneous linear MASs with the communi-
cation topology Ḡ . The leader is described by
ẋ0 = Sx0 , y0 = Fx0 (2)
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

ZHANG et al.: BIPARTITE FIXED-TIME OUTPUT CONSENSUS OF HETEROGENEOUS LINEAR MASs 3

N
and the followers are described by Proof: It is obvious that zT sig(z)β = β
i=1 |zi | |zi | is
T

satisfied. Suppose zi = [zi(1) , zi(2) , . . . , zi(n) ] , then we have

T
ẋi = Ai xi + Bi ui
zTi zi = z2i(1) +z2i(2) +· · ·+z2i(n) . Following Minkowski’s inequal-
yi = Ci xi , i = 1, 2, . . . , N (3) ity, (zTi zi )[(1+β)/2] ≤ |zi(1) |1+β + |zi(2) |1+β + · · · + |zi(n) |1+β =
T |z |β holds. Further, we have
N T |z |β
where x0 ∈ Rn0 , xi ∈ Rni , y0 ∈ Rq , and yi ∈ Rq are the states |z |
N T [(1+β)/2]
i i N T [(1+β)/2] i=1 T|zi |[(1+β)/2] i ≥
and outputs of the leader and ith follower, respectively. ui ∈ (z
i=1 i i z ) ≥ ( z
i=1 i i z ) = (z z) .
Rni is the control input of the ith follower. S, F, Ai , Bi , and Ci Lemma 4: Consider the following system:
have compatible dimensions. ż(t) = f (z(t)), z(0) = z0 (8)
Now, we give the definition of the bipartite fixed-time output
consensus problem of heterogeneous linear MASs. where z ∈ Rn , f (z)
: → Rn Rn
is continuous on and Rn
Definition 2 (Problem 1): Consider MASs (2) and (3) with f (0) = 0. There exist a continuous positive-definite func-
the communication topology Ḡ . Design a distributed control tion V(z) : Rn → R+ 0 , real numbers a, b, c > 0, α > 1, and
law, such that for any initial conditions xi (0), the following β ∈ (0, 1), such that
condition satisfies: V̇(z) + aV(z) + b(V(z))α + c(V(z))β ≤ 0, z ∈ Rn \{0}. (9)
lim (yi − di y0 ) = 0 (4) Then, the origin of system (8) is globally fast fixed-time stable,
t→Tc
and the settling time satisfies
where Tc > 0 is the settling time, which is upper bounded by 
a constant independent of xi (0). 1 a+c 1
T< ln + . (10)
Remark 1: Without loss of generality, let followers who are a(1 − β) c b(α − 1)
neighbors of the leader be di = 1, and the remaining assigned Proof: The proof procedure is similar to [17, Lemma 4.1].
according to Definition 1. More details can be referred to in [17].
Some assumptions are stated as follows. Remark 3: This lemma is an extension of some existing
Assumption 1: Bi , i = 1, 2, . . . , N, are of full-row ranks. results. First, it is an extension of [21, Theor. 2], where the
Assumption 2: S has eigenvalues with zero real parts. origin of the system is globally fast finite-time stable, and
Assumption 3: For i = 1, 2, . . . , N, there exists solution the upper bound of the settling time depends on the initial
(Xi , Ui ), satisfying the following equations: states of the system. In this article though, the upper bound
Ai Xi + Bi Ui = Xi S of the settling time is fixed and independent of initial states.
Second, it gives a less conservative upper bound of the set-
Ci Xi − F = 0. (5) tling time compared with [17, Lemma 4.1], where the settling
Assumption 4: The undirected subgraph G is connected and time satisfies T < (1/c(1 − β)) + (1/b(α − 1)). Due to the
structurally balanced. There exists at least one follower that fact that (1/a) ln([a + c/c]) < (1/c), the upper bound of the
can obtain information from the leader. settling time in (10) is smaller. Although we give a defini-
Remark 2: In Assumption 1, a restriction is imposed on tion of “globally fast fixed-time stable,” it does not involve
input matrix Bi . This restriction provides control redundancy the convergence rate problem. If it is required to increase the
to ensure control ability, such that the solvability of Problem 1 convergence rate further, it can be accomplished by adjusting
can be guaranteed. Assumption 3 is a standard condition, parameters a, b, c, α, and β appropriately.
which can be seen in many results [11]–[15]. Equation (5) Lemma 5: Under Assumption 4, H and H ∗ = DHD are
is known as the regulator equations. There are also results on positive definite.
the structurally unbalanced graph, which can be seen in [31] Proof: By Definition 1 and Lemma 1, A ∗ = DA D =
and [37]. (|aij |)N×N corresponds to the adjacency matrix of the graph
Some lemmas are needed in order to solve Problem 1. only with cooperative interactions, and H ∗ = DHD can be
Lemma 2: Let z = [zT1 , zT2 , . . . , zTN ]T ∈ RNn , where zi ∈ defined. Under Assumption 4, H ∗ is positive definite. Since H ∗
Rn , i = 1, 2, . . . , N; then, the following inequality satisfies: is the similarity transformation of H, H is positive definite.
1−α   1+α
zT sig(z)α ≥ n−α N 2 zT z 2 (6) IV. M AIN R ESULTS
where α > 1. A. Bipartite Fixed-Time Observer
Proof: Suppose  zi = [zi(1) , zi(2) , . . . , zi(n)
]T , then one The bipartite fixed-time observer is designed in the follow-
has z sig(z) = α N α N n
i=1 |zi | |zi | = j=1 |zi(j) |
T T 1+α .
i=1 ing form:
According
N ton [17, 1+α Lemma  3.4], it  can be obtained
η̇i = Sηi − μ1 Pφi − μ2 sig{Pφi }α − μ3 sig{Pφi }β (11)
that |zi(j) | ≥ N
n−α ( nj=1 |zi(j) |)1+α ≥
 i=1 j=1 i=1
n−α N T [(1+α)/2] ≥ n−α N 1−[(1+α)/2] (zT z)[(1+α)/2] .
i=1 (zi zi )
where ηi ∈ Rn0 isthe estimate of the leader’s state for the
Lemma 3: Let z = [zT1 , zT2 , . . . , zTN ]T ∈ RNn , where zi ∈ ith follower, φi = N j=1 |aij |(ηi − sgn(aij )ηj ) + ai0 (ηi − di x0 ).
R , i = 1, 2, . . . , N; then, the following inequality satisfies:
n P ∈ Rn0 ×n0 > 0, μ1 > 0, μ2 > 0, μ3 > 0, α > 0, and β > 0
  1+β are parameters to be designed.
zT sig(z)β ≥ zT z 2 (7) Define the error variable η̄i = ηi − di x0 . Then
where β ∈ (0, 1). η̄˙ i = Sη̄i − μ1 Pφi − μ2 sig{Pφi }α − μ3 sig{Pφi }β . (12)
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS

Let η̄ = [η̄1T , η̄2T , . . . , η̄NT ]T , then the augmented system Combining (17) and (18) with (16), one has
of (12) can be expressed as    1+α
cλ1 −α 1−α λmin  2 2

η̄˙ = [IN ⊗ S − μ1 (H ⊗ P)]η̄ − μ2 sig{(H ⊗ P)η̄}α V̇ ≤ − V − 2μ2 n0 N 2

λmax () λmax ()
− μ3 sig{(H ⊗ P)η̄}β . (13)   21+β
1+α λmin  2 1+β
Then, we give the following result. × V 2 − 2μ3 V 2 . (19)
Theorem 1: For systems (2) and (11), suppose λmax ()
Assumptions 2 and 4 hold. Then, limt→T (ηi − di x0 ) = 0 Since α > 1 and β ∈ (0, 1), it can be verified that
holds if μ1 > 1/λ1 , μ2 > 0, μ3 > 0, α > 1, β ∈ (0, 1) and P [(1 + α)/2] > 1 and [(1 + β)/2] ∈ (0, 1) hold. According to
satisfies Lemma 4, η̄ = 0 is globally fast fixed-time stable. Therefore,
limt→T (ηi − di x0 ) = 0 holds, where the settling time T
ST P + PS − 2P2 + cIn0 = 0 (14)
satisfies (15).
where λ1 = λmin (H), and c > 0. Moreover, the settling time The proof is complete.
satisfies Remark 4: Equation (11) is called the bipartite fixed-time
⎧  2  − 1+β ⎫ observer. On the one hand, due to the existence of antag-
2λmax () ⎨ cλ1 λmin  2 ⎬ onistic interactions, the estimate value is the same as the
T < T∗  ln +1 leader’s state only in modulus. Then, this forms the “bipar-
cλ1 (1 − β) ⎩ 2μ3 λmax () λmax () ⎭
tite.” On the other hand, this observer can accomplish the
α−1  − 1+α
nα0 N 2 λmin ( 2 ) 2 exact estimate in a finite time. In existing works on the output
+ (15) consensus problem of MASs, observers can only accomplish
μ2 (α − 1) λmax ()
the asymptotic estimate, and only cooperative interactions are
where  = H ⊗ P,  2 = H 2 ⊗ P2 . considered [11]–[15]. Thus, observer (11) is more general and
Proof: Under Assumption 4 and Lemma 5, H is symmetric has better performance.
and positive definite. Then, there exists an orthogonal U ∈
RN×N , where UU T = UU −1 = IN , satisfying UHU T = J = B. Adaptive Bipartite Fixed-Time Observer
diag(λ1 , λ2 , . . . , λN ). It is noted that the bipartite fixed-time observer (11) involves
Consider the candidate Lyapunov function V = η̄T (H ⊗ P)η̄ the matrix S of the leader and the spectrum information of the
for the system (13). Let η̃ = (U ⊗ In0 )η̄ and ξ = (H ⊗ P)η̄. communication topology. On the one hand, S is required to be
The time derivative of V along (13) can be obtained known by each follower, which is not realistic in some appli-
     cations. On the other hand, the global spectrum information is
V̇ = η̄T H ⊗ ST P + PS − 2μ1 H 2 ⊗ P2 η̄
unknown to followers in practice, especially, when the MASs
− 2μ2 η̄T (H ⊗ P)sig{(H ⊗ P)η̄}α are large in scale.
− 2μ3 η̄T (H ⊗ P)sig{(H ⊗ P)η̄}β For the foregoing reasons, we further design an adaptive
     bipartite fixed-time observer, satisfying limt→T (ηi − di x0 ) = 0
= η̃T J ⊗ ST P + PS − 2μ1 J 2 ⊗ P2 η̃ and limt→Ts (Si −S) = 0. Not only can this observer accomplish
− 2μ2 ξ T sig{ξ }α − 2μ3 ξ T sig{ξ }β the estimate of the leader’s state and the matrix S concurrently,
  but it also avoids the dependence on the global information.
N
= η̃iT λi ST P + PS − 2μ1 λi P2 η̃i The adaptive bipartite fixed-time observer is designed in the
i=1 following form:
− 2μ2 ξ T sig{ξ }α − 2μ3 ξ T sig{ξ }β . (16) Ṡi = −
1 sig{ϕi }γ −
2 sig{ϕi }δ (20a)
Since μ1 > 1/λ1 and (14) holds, one has η̇i = Si ηi − αi φi − μ2 sig{φi }α − μ3 sig{φi }β (20b)
α̇i = φiT φi , αi (0) = αi0 (20c)

N  
η̃iT λi ST P + PS − 2μ1 λi P2 η̃i whereSi ∈ Rn0 ×n0
is the estimate of S for the ith follower,
i=1 ϕi = N |a
j=1 ij |(S i − Sj ) + ai0 (Si − S), and αi is the coupling

N
cλ1 gain.
1 > 0,
2 > 0, μ2 > 0, μ3 > 0, γ > 0, δ > 0, α > 0,
≤ −cλ1 η̃iT η̃i ≤ − V. (17) and β > 0 are the parameters to be designed.
λmax ()
i=1 Then, we give the following results.
According to Lemmas 2 and 3, one has Theorem 2: For systems (2) and (20), suppose
Assumptions 2 and 4 hold. Then, we have:
− 2μ2 ξ T sig{ξ }α − 2μ3 ξ T sig{ξ }β 1) limt→Ts (Si − S)=0 holds if
1 >0,
2 >0, γ >1, and
 2   1+α δ ∈ (0, 1) and 2) limt→T (ηi − di x0 ) = 0 holds if the condi-
λ  2
≤ −2μ2 n−α
1−α min 1+α
tions in 1) satisfy and μ2 > 0, μ3 > 0, α > 1, β ∈ (0, 1), and
0 N V 2
2
λmax () αi0 > 0. The upper bounds of the settling times Ts and T are
   1+β fixed and independent of the initial conditions, respectively.
λmin  2 2
1+β
Moreover, each coupling gain converges to some bounded
− 2μ3 V 2 . (18)
λmax () value.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

ZHANG et al.: BIPARTITE FIXED-TIME OUTPUT CONSENSUS OF HETEROGENEOUS LINEAR MASs 5

Proof: We prove the results, respectively. When t ∈ (0, Ts ), the time derivative of V1 along (25) can
1) Define the matrix error S̄i = Si − S, and let S̄ = be obtained as follows:
[S̄1T , S̄2T , . . . , S̄NT ]T . We can easily obtain the following form: %   &
  γ   δ V̇1 = η̄T H ⊗ ST + S − 2HH ⊗ In0 η̄
S̄˙ = −
1 sig H ∗ ⊗ In0 S̄ −
2 sig H ∗ ⊗ In0 S̄ (21)   
− 2μ2 η̄T H ⊗ In0 sig H ⊗ In0 η̄
 α
    β
where H ∗ is symmetric and positive definite as stated in − 2μ3 η̄T H ⊗ In0 sig H ⊗ In0 η̄
Lemma 5.  
+ 2η̄T H ⊗ In0 S̃η̄
Define the operation S̄j , j = 1, 2, . . . , n0 , which denotes  
the jth column of S̄. Then, we have + 2η̄T HD ⊗ In0 S̃(1N ⊗ x0 ). (26)
     γ    δ
S̄˙ = −
1 sig H ∗ ⊗ In0 S̄ j −
2 sig H ∗ ⊗ In0 S̄ j . The time derivative of V2 along (20c) can be obtained as
j
(22) 
N
V̇2 = 2 (αi − ω)φiT φi . (27)
Let V(S̄j ) = S̄Tj (H ∗ ⊗ In0 )S̄j , and ξj = (H ∗ ⊗ In0 )S̄j . i=1
The time derivative of V(S̄j ) along (22) can be obtained
    T      γ Let η̃ = (U ⊗ In0 )η̄, and ζ = (H ⊗ In0 )η̄. According to
V̇ S̄ j = −2
1 S̄ j H ∗ ⊗ In0 sig H ∗ ⊗ In0 S̄ j Lemmas 2 and 3, we have
 T      δ
− 2
2 S̄ j H ∗ ⊗ In0 sig H ∗ ⊗ In0 S̄ j V̇ = V̇1 + V̇2  
 γ  
= −2
1 ξjT sig ξj − 2
2 ξjT sig{ξj }δ = η̃T J ⊗ ST + S − 2ω J 2 ⊗ In0 η̃

−γ 1−γ
  1+γ   1+δ − 2μ2 ζ T sig{ζ }α − 2μ3 ζ T sig{ζ }β
≤ −2
1 n0 N 2 ξjT ξj
2
− 2
2 ξjT ξj
2
   
+ 2η̄T H ⊗ In0 S̃η̄ + 2η̄T HD ⊗ In0 S̃(1N ⊗ x0 )
⎡   ⎤ 1+γ
λmin H ∗ 2
2
   1+γ 
N
 
−γ 1−γ ≤ η̃iT λi ST + S − 2ωλi In0 η̃i
≤ −2
1 n0 N 2 ⎣ ⎦ V S̄ 2

λmax (H ∗ ) j i=1
1−α   1+α   1+β
⎡   ⎤ 1+δ − 2μ2 n−α0 N
2 ζ T ζ 2 − 2μ3 ζ T ζ 2
λmin H ∗ 2
2
   1+δ  
− 2
2 ⎣ ⎦ V S̄ 2
(23) + 2η̄T H ⊗ In0 S̃η̄ + (1N ⊗ x0 )T (1N ⊗ x0 )
∗
λmax (H ) j    
+ η̄T HD ⊗ In0 S̃S̃T DH ⊗ In0 η̄. (28)
where Lemmas 2 and 3 are used. It can always find a ω > 0, such that ST + S − 2ωλi In0
According to [22, Lemma 1], S̄j = 0 is globally fixed-time is Hurwitz. According to the proof of 1), it is known that
stable. The settling time Ts(j) satisfies S̃ = 0 is globally fixed-time stable. Let χ1 = (H ⊗ In0 )S̃, and
⎡   ⎤− 1+δ χ2 = (HD⊗In0 )S̃. χ1 and χ2 are both bounded and converge to
λ H ∗2 2
1 min zero in finite time. Then, there exist bounded constants c0 , c1 ,
∗
Ts(j) < Ts(j)  ⎣ ⎦

2 (1 − δ) λmax (H ∗ ) and c2 , such that the following fact holds:
 ⎡  ⎤− 1+γ 1−α   1+α   1+β
γ γ −1 λmin H ∗ 2
2 V̇ ≤ −2μ2 n−α
0 N
2 ζ T ζ 2 − 2μ3 ζ T ζ 2
n0 N 2
+ ⎣ ⎦ . (24) +
c1
V1 +
c2
V1 + c0

1 (γ − 1) λmax (H ∗ ) λmin (H) λmin (H)
 2   1+α
Further, S̄ = 0 is globally fixed-time stable with the set- λ H 2 1+α
≤ −2μ2 n−α
1−α min
∗ , T∗ , . . . , T∗ N 2 V1 2
tling time Ts < Ts∗  max{Ts(1) s(2) s(n0 ) }. Therefore,
0 λmax (H)
limt→Ts (Si − S) = 0 holds.  2   1+β
2) Define the error variable η̄i = ηi − di x0 , and let η̄ = λmin H 2 1+β c1 + c2
[η̄1T , η̄2T , . . . , η̄NT ]T . The augmented system can be expressed as − 2μ3 V1 2 + V1 + c0 (29)
λmax (H) λmin (H)
    α
η̄˙ = IN ⊗ S − H ⊗ In0 η̄ − μ2 sig H ⊗ In0 η̄
  β where c0 ≥ (1N ⊗ x0 )T (1N ⊗ x0 ). Due to the fact that [(c1 +
− μ3 sig H ⊗ In0 η̄ + S̃η̄ c2 )/(λmin (H))], and c0 are bounded, V is bounded. Thus, η̄
 
+ D ⊗ In0 S̃(1N ⊗ x0 ) (25) and αi are bounded. It can be obtained that V(Ts ) is bounded.
When t ∈ [Ts , ∞), S̃ = 0 holds. The time derivative of V1
where  = diag(α1 , α2 , . . . , αN ), and S̃ = along (25) can be obtained as
block diag(S̄1 , S̄2 , . . . , S̄N ).  %   &
Let V1 = η̄T (H ⊗In0 )η̄ and V2 = N i=1 (αi −ω) , where ω is
2
V̇1 = η̄T H ⊗ ST + S − 2HH ⊗ In0 η̄
a positive constant to be determined. Then, V = V1 +V2 can be     α
− 2μ2 η̄T H ⊗ In0 sig H ⊗ In0 η̄
considered as a candidate Lyapunov function for systems (20c)     β
and (25). − 2μ3 η̄T H ⊗ In0 sig H ⊗ In0 η̄ . (30)
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS

⎧
   1+α
The time derivative of V2 along (20c) is the form (27). Then ⎨ λmin H 2 2 1+α
2μ2 n−α
1−α
> N 2 1 2
⎩ 0 λmax (H)
V̇ = V̇1 + V̇2
   1+β ⎫
%  & 
N
λmin H 2 2 1+β ⎬
= η̄T H ⊗ ST + S η̄ − 2ω φiT φi
+ 2μ3 1 2 (τ − Ts )
i=1 λmax (H) ⎭
− 2μ2 ζ T sig{ζ }α − 2μ3 ζ T sig{ζ }β
   1+α  ψ(τ − Ts ). (35)
−α 1−α λmin H 2 2 1+α
≤ −2μ2 n0 N 2 V1 2 From (35), V(Ts ) is not bounded when τ → ∞, which con-
λmax (H)
tradicts the fact that V(Ts ) is bounded. Then, the conclusion
 2   1+β is true. The time that η̄(Ts ) enters into the set 1 is calculated
λmin H 2 1+β
− 2μ3 V1 2 . (31) as
λmax (H)
V(Ts )
τ= + Ts . (36)
Obviously, V is bounded. η̄ and αi are bounded. There exists ψ
ω > 0 such that α = max{ω−αi , i = 1, 2, . . . , N} > 0. Then
Let 2 = [[(α λmax (H 2 )nα0 N [(α−1)/2] )/(μ2 (1 −
θ2 )λmin (H))]] (2/α−1) [([λmax (H)]/[λmin (H 2 )])][(1+α)/(α−1)] ,
V̇1 = V̇ − V̇2
  1+α where θ2 ∈ (0, 1). Define a bounded set 2 =
λmin (H 2 ) 2 1+α
{η̄(Ts )|η̄(Ts )T (H ⊗ In0 )η̄(Ts ) ≥ 2 }. If η̄(Ts ) ∈ 2 , we
−2μ2 n−α
1−α
≤ 0 N
2 V1 2
λmax (H) have
   1+β      1+α
λmin H 2 2 1+β 2α λmax H 2 −α 1−α λmin H 2 2 1+α
− 2μ3 V1 2
+ V1 . (32) V̇1 ≤ −2θ2 μ2 n0 N 2 V1 2
λmax (H) λmin (H) λmax (H)

  1+β
Let 1 = [([μ3 (1 − θ1 )λmin (H)]/[α λmax (H 2 )])](2/1−β) λmin H 2 2 1+β
− 2μ3 V1 2 . (37)
[(λmin (H 2 )/λmax (H))][(1+β)/(1−β)] , where θ1 ∈ (0, 1). Define λmax (H)
a bounded set 1 = {η̄(Ts )|η̄(Ts )T (H ⊗ In0 )η̄(Ts ) ≤ 1 }.
If η̄(Ts ) ∈ 1 , then Then, the time that η̄(Ts ) needs to reach the bound of the
2 is given as

   1+α
λmin H 2 2 1+α   − 1+β
−2μ2 n−α
1−α
V̇1 ≤ 0 N
2 V1 2 ∗ 1 λmin H 2 2
λmax (H) T2 < 
T 2
μ3 (1 − β) λmax (H)
   1+β
λmin H 2 2 1+β α−1   − 1+α
− 2θ1 μ3 V1 2 . (33) nα0 N 2 λmin H 2 2
λmax (H) + . (38)
θ2 μ2 (α − 1) λmax (H)
Thus, η̄ = 0 is globally fixed-time stable. The settling time
Next, we give a conclusion of the settling time under dif-
satisfies
ferent cases based on the premise that η̄(Ts ) ∈ / 1 . Fig. 1
 2  − 1+β illustrates a simplest trajectories description under three cases,
∗ 1 λ min H 2
T1 < T  which helps to understand.
1
θ1 μ3 (1 − β) λmax (H) Case 1: If 1 ≥ 2 , the trajectory of η̄(t) from η̄(Ts ) to the
α−1   − 1+α origin can be divided into two parts:  1 η̄(Ts ) → ∂2 and  2
nα0 N 2 λmin H 2 2
∂2 → origin, where ∂2 represents the bound of 2 . Then,
+ + Ts∗ . (34)
μ2 (α − 1) λmax (H) the settling time is given as T < T ∗ = T ∗ + T∗ .
2
1
Case 2: If 1 < 2 and η̄(Ts ) ∈ / 1 ∪ 2 , the trajectory of
If η̄(Ts ) ∈
/ 1 , then V1 (Ts ) > 1 . There must exist a η̄(t) from η̄(Ts ) to the origin can be divided into two parts: 1
bounded τ > Ts , such that η̄(t) ∈ 1 for t ≥ τ . We η̄(Ts ) → ∂1 and  2 ∂1 → origin, where ∂1 represents
explain it by reduction to absurdity. Suppose the above con- the bound of 1 . Then, the settling time is given as T < T ∗ =
clusion is not true. Then, for all τ , the following inequality T∗ + ( /ψ).
1 2
holds: Case 3: If 1 < 2 and η̄(Ts ) ∈ 2 , the trajectory of η̄(t)
from η̄(Ts ) to the origin can be divided into three parts:  1
V(Ts ) ≥ V(Ts ) − V(τ )
⎧    1+α η̄(Ts ) → ∂2 ,  2 ∂2 → ∂1 , and  3 ∂1 → origin. Then,
' τ⎨
−α 1−α λmin H 2 2 1+α the settling time is given as T < T ∗ = T ∗ + T ∗ + ( /ψ).
2 2
≥ 2μ2 n0 N 2 V1 2 Therefore, limt→T (ηi − di x0 ) = 0 holds.
1

Ts ⎩ λmax (H)
⎫ It follows from (20c) that αi is monotonically increasing.
   1+β Combined with the boundedness of αi from the foregoing anal-
λmin H 2 2 1+β ⎬
+ 2μ3 V1 2 ds ysis and η̄ being globally fixed-time stable, each coupling gain
λmax (H) ⎭
converges to some bounded value. The proof is complete.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

ZHANG et al.: BIPARTITE FIXED-TIME OUTPUT CONSENSUS OF HETEROGENEOUS LINEAR MASs 7

Proof: The regulator equations (5) can be expressed in the

following form:
       
Ini 0 Xi A B Xi 0
S− i i = . (42)
0 0 Ui Ci 0 Ui −F
Then, (42) can be expressed as

Qi ωi∗ = bi . (43)

Fig. 1. Illustration of three cases. (a)–(c) Cases 1–3. From the foregoing analysis, limt→Ts (Qi (t) − Qi ) = 0 and
limt→Tf (bi (t)−bi ) = 0 hold. According to [12, Lemma 4], (40)
Remark 5: Compared with (11), observer (20) involves no has a unique bounded solution such that (41) holds.
global spectrum information and the leader matrix S. Then, the Remark 8: It is noted that S̄i = 0 and F̄i = 0 hold after time
adaptive bipartite fixed-time observer (20) is more practical. Tmax = max{Ts , Tf }. Then, we employ the following method
Remark 6: Obviously, the upper bound of the settling time to solve the regulator equations.
is independent of any initial conditions. However, the upper 1) When t ∈ (0, Tmax ), calculate the solution of the regula-
bound of the adaptive bipartite fixed-time observer cannot be tor equations by Lemma 6, obtaining [Xi (t)T , Ui (t)T ]T =
n
determined exactly, because it involves the global spectrum Mni0+mi (ωi (t)).
information. We still give the expression of the settling time 2) When t = Tmax , calculate the solution of the regulator
in order to state that there involves no initial conditions. equations (5) directly, obtaining (Xi , Ui ).
Remark 7: The matrix F of the leader is also required to 3) When t ∈ (Tmax , ∞), employ the result obtained
estimate the following control law design. from 2).
 It has a uniform
form with (20a), that is, Ḟi = −
1 sig{ N j=1 |aij |(Fi − Fj ) +
Next, we are ready to solve Problem 1. First, we design the
 control law by the adaptive fixed-time observer.
ai0 (Fi −F)}γ −
2 sig{ N |a
j=1 ij |(F i −Fj )+a δ
i0 (Fi −F)} , where
Fi is the estimate of F. The upper bound of the settling time Theorem 3: For MASs (2) and (3), suppose
is given by Tf∗ . Assumptions 1–4 hold, and the adaptive bipartite fixed-
time observer (20) is designed by Theorem 2. If Ki1 satisfies
that Ai +Bi Ki1 is Hurwitz, and Ki3 satisfies that Bi Ki3 = Ini ×ni ,
C. Control Law Design
Problem 1 can be solved with the control law
The solution of the regulator equations (5) is used to design
the control law. Equation (5) implies that the solution depends ui = Ki1 xi + Ki2 (t)ηi − c1 Ki3 sig{xi − Xi (t)ηi }α̃
on matrices S and F of the leader. When we consider the case − c2 Ki3 sig{xi − Xi (t)ηi }β̃ (44)
where each follower knows the system matrices of the leader,
the bipartite fixed-time observer (11) is used, and the regula- where c1 > 0, c2 > 0, α̃ > 1, and β̃ ∈ (0, 1). Ki2 (t) =
tor equations (5) can be solved directly. When we consider a Ui (t) − Ki1 Xi (t), where (Xi (t), Ui (t)) is calculated by the
more practical case, where some followers do not know the method proposed in Remark 8.
system matrices of the leader, the adaptive bipartite fixed-time Proof: Let x̄i = xi − di Xi x0 , K̄i2 (t) = Ki2 (t) − Ki2 , X̄i (t) =
observer (20) is effective. In this case, Si and Fi are used Xi (t) − Xi , and x̂i = xi − Xi ηi . It is easy to know x̄i − x̂i = Xi η̄i .
to solve the regulator equations. Then, we adopt the method Then, we have
proposed in [12] to adaptively solve the regulator equations.
Let x̄˙ i = ẋi − di Xi ẋ0
   
Xi 0 = (Ai + Bi Ki1 )xi + Bi Ki2 (t)(η̄i + di x0 )
ωi∗ = vec , bi = vec    α̃
Ui −F − c1 sig xi − X̄i (t) + Xi ηi
   
I 0 A B    β̃
Qi = ST ⊗ ni − In 0 ⊗ i i − c2 sig xi − X̄i (t) + Xi ηi − di Xi Sx0
0 0 Ci 0  
    = (Ai + Bi Ki1 )xi + Bi Ki2 (t)η̄i + di Bi K̄i2 (t) + Ki2 x0
Xi (t) 0  α̃  β̃
ωi (t) = vec , bi (t) = vec
Ui (t) −Fi − c1 sig x̂i − X̄i (t)ηi − c2 sig x̂i − X̄i (t)ηi
   
I 0 A B − di Xi Sx0
Qi (t) = SiT ⊗ ni − In 0 ⊗ i i . (39)
0 0 Ci 0 = (Ai + Bi Ki1 )xi + Bi Ki2 (t)η̄i + di Bi K̄i2 (t)x0
Lemma 6: Under Assumption 3, for i = 1, 2, . . . , N, the + di Bi (Ui − Ki1 Xi )x0 − di Xi Sx0
following system:  α̃
− c1 sig x̄i − Xi η̄i − X̄i (t)ηi
ω̇i (t) = −εQi (t)T (Qi (t)ωi (t) − bi (t)), ωi (0) = ωi0 (40)  β̃
− c2 sig x̄i − Xi η̄i − X̄i (t)ηi
has a unique bounded solution for any initial condition ωi0 , if  α̃
= (Ai + Bi Ki1 )x̄i − c1 sig x̄i − Xi η̄i − X̄i (t)ηi
ε > 0 is sufficiently large. Moreover
    β̃
n0 X − c2 sig x̄i − Xi η̄i − X̄i (t)ηi
lim Mni +mi (ωi (t)) − i = 0. (41)
t→∞ Ui + Bi Ki2 (t)η̄i + di Bi K̄i2 (t)x0 . (45)
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS

When t ∈ (0, max{T, Tmax }), it is easy to know that x̄i is

bounded because of the boundedness of η̄i , K̄i2 (t), and X̄i (t).
When t ∈ [ max{T, Tmax }, ∞), the above three variables are
zero from the foregoing analysis. Let Aik = Ai + Bi Ki1 . Thus,
we have
x̄˙ i = (Ai + Bi Ki1 )x̄i − c1 sig{x̄i }α̃ − c2 sig{x̄i }β̃ Fig. 2. Communication graph of MASs.
α̃ β̃
= AiK x̄i − c1 sig{x̄i } − c2 sig{x̄i } . (46)
The proof procedure is the same as in Theorem 3. Then,
Consider the candidate Lyapunov function Vx̄i = x̄iT x̄i for we omit it here.
the system (46). The time derivative of Vx̄i along (46) can be Remark 9: By Theorem 3 and Corollary 1, Problem 1 can
obtained be solved. In existing works on the output consensus problem
 
V̇x̄i = x̄iT ATiK + AiK x̄i − 2c1 x̄iT sig{x̄i }α̃ − 2c2 x̄iT sig{x̄i }β̃ of heterogeneous MASs, only asymptotic output consensus can
 T  ni
( ( be achieved [11]–[15]. Moreover, only cooperative interactions
≤ λmax AiK + AiK Vx̄i − 2c1 (x̄i(m) (1+α̃ are considered in these works. Fixed-time control laws (44)
m=1 and (50) are novel forms, which are first proposed in this

ni
( ( article.
− 2c2 (x̄i(m) (1+β̃
m=1
) *1+α̃ V. E XAMPLE

ni
( (
≤ λmax (ATiK + AiK )Vx̄i − 2c1 n− α̃ (x̄i(m) ( Consider heterogeneous linear MASs with the communica-
i
m=1
tion topology depicted in Fig. 2, and the dynamics of all agents
) *1+β̃ are given as follows:
−β̃

ni
( ( ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
− 2c2 ni (x̄i(m) ( 0 1 0 0 1 0  
⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ 01
m=1 A1 = 0 0 1 , A2 = 0 0 1 , A3 =
00
  1+α̃
−β̃
1+β̃ 0 −1 0 0 −1 0
≤ λmax ATiK + AiK Vx̄i − 2c1 n−
i
α̃
Vx̄i
2
− 2c2 ni Vx̄i .
2    
0 1 0 1
(47) A4 = , A5 = , A6 = 0
−2 −2 −2 −2
According to Lemma 4, x̄i = 0 is globally fast fixed-time Bi = I3 , i = 1, 2, Bi = I2 , i = 3, 4, 5, B6 = 1
stable, and the settling time satisfies % & % &
Ci = 1 0 0 , i = 1, 2, Ci = 1 0 , i = 3, 4, 5, C6 = 1
⎡ ⎤
2 0 1 0
Tic < Tic∗      % &
β̃ − 1 λmax ATiK + AiK S = ⎣0 0 1⎦, F = 1 0 0 .
⎛ ⎞ 0 −1 0
  β̃
−λmax ATiK + AiK ni
× ln⎝ + 1⎠ It can be verified that Assumptions 1–4 satisfy. Without
2c2 loss of generality, the initial conditions of agents are chosen
 randomly. The initial conditions of observers are supposed to
nα̃i be ηi (0) = [0, 0, 0]T , i = 1, 2, . . . , 6.
+ + max T ∗ , Ts∗ , Tf∗ . (48)
c1 (α̃ − 1) Example 1: Problem 1 is solved by the bipartite fixed-time
It can be concluded that x̄ = [x̄1T , x̄2T , . . . , x̄N
T ]T = 0 is observer (11). According to Theorem 1, revelent parameters
globally fast fixed-time stable as the settling time satisfies are chosen as μ1 = 10.5>1/λmin (H)=1.475, μ2 = μ3 = 25,
Tc < Tc∗  max{T1c∗ , T ∗ , . . . , T ∗ }. Then, we have α = 1.3, β = 0.5, and c = 25. According to Corollary 1,
2c Nc
control parameters are chosen as c1 = c2 = 8.5, α̃ = 1.5,
lim (yi − di y0 ) = lim Ci x̄i = 0. (49) β̃ = 0.3
t→Tc t→Tc
⎡ ⎤
The proof is complete. −3.2 −2.2 −5.7
Corollary 1: For MASs (2) and (3), suppose K11 = K21 = ⎣−3.4 −2.6 −3.2⎦
Assumptions 1–4 hold, and the bipartite fixed-time −3.2 −1 −8.5
 
observer (11) is designed by Theorem 1. If Ki1 satis- −2 −1.5
K31 =
fies that Ai + Bi Ki1 is Hurwitz, and Ki3 satisfies that −2.8 −3.3
 
Bi Ki3 = Ini ×ni , Problem 1 can be solved with the control law −5.5 −6.4
K41 = K51 = , K61 = −4
−2.2 −5.8
ui = Ki1 xi + Ki2 ηi − c1 Ki3 sig{xi − Xi ηi }α̃
− c2 Ki3 sig{xi − Xi ηi }β̃ (50) and Ki2 are calculated by Ui − Ki1 Xi . The time responses of
the output errors yi − di y0 are shown in Fig. 3. It can be seen
where Ki2 = Ui − Ki1 Xi , and (Xi , Ui ) is the solution of the that the exact bipartite output consensus can be achieved. We
regulator equations (5). The control parameters are the same calculate the upper bound of the settling time by (15) and (48),
as those in Theorem 3. and the result is Tc∗ = 6.193. From Fig. 3, the actual converge
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
ZHANG et al.: BIPARTITE FIXED-TIME OUTPUT CONSENSUS OF HETEROGENEOUS LINEAR MASs
Fig. 3. Output errors of followers.
Fig. 4. Coupling gains of followers.
Fig. 5. Output errors of followers.
time is Tc ≈ 0.4. Obviously, the actual settling time is less
than the theoretical estimate.
Example 2: Problem 1 is solved by the adaptive bipartite
fixed-time observer (20). The initial conditions of coupling
gains αi (0) are chosen randomly. According to Theorem 2,
revelent parameters are chosen as
1 =
2 = 10.5, γ = 1.3, Dec. 2010.
and δ = 0.5, and the other parameters are the same as in
Example 1. The time responses of αi are shown in Fig. 4.
It is shown that all coupling gains converge to some steady
values.
Let ε = 5.5, and the control parameters are chosen the
same as in Example 1. The time responses of the output errors
yi − di y0 are shown in Fig. 5. It can be seen that the exact
bipartite output consensus can be achieved. Tmax is the set-
tling time after which Si = S and Fi = F hold as stated in
Remark 8. It is shown in Fig. 5 that the curves variation trend
varies after Tmax . This is caused by the fact that the value of
(Xi (t), Ui (t)), t ∈ (0, Tmax ) is far away from the target value
(Xi , Ui ) when ε is small. Then, when (Xi , Ui ) is used to calcu-
late the control law from Tmax , it will cause a sudden variation.
In order to solve this problem, we can increase ε such that the
convergence rate of (Xi (t), Ui (t)) to the target value (Xi , Ui )
can be increased. Then, the variation range can be reduced,
and the curves can be more smooth. The results are shown
in Fig. 6. Therefore, parameters should be chosen properly to
improve the control performance.
9
Fig. 6. Output errors of followers under different ε. (a) ε = 12. (b) ε = 18.5.
VI. C ONCLUSION
This article has addressed the bipartite fixed-time output
consensus problem of heterogeneous linear MASs. A novel
bipartite fixed-time observer has been proposed to estimate
the leader’s state. Then, in order to avoid involving any global
information, an adaptive bipartite fixed-time observer has been
proposed further. Next, distributed nonlinear control laws have
been developed to solve the bipartite fixed-time output con-
sensus problem, respectively. Finally, the examples have been
provided to demonstrate the results. Further considerations
include the bipartite fixed-time output consensus problem of
more complex MASs under the directed signed graph, and
with the communication delay among agents.
R EFERENCES
[1] Y. Wang, H. Zhang, X. Wang, and D. Yang, “Networked synchronization
control of coupled dynamic networks with time-varying delay,” IEEE
Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. B, Cybern., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1468–1479,
[2] H. Zhang, J. Zhang, G.-H. Yang, and Y. Luo, “Leader-based optimal
coordination control for the consensus problem of multi-agent differ-
ential games via fuzzy adaptive dynamic programming,” IEEE Trans.
Fuzzy Syst., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 152–163, Feb. 2015.
[3] X. Ge, Q.-L. Han, D. Ding, X.-M. Zhang, and B. Ning, “A
survey on recent advances in distributed sampled-data cooperative
control of multi-agent systems,” Neurocomputing, vol. 275, no. 31,
pp. 1684–1701, 2018.
[4] X. Ge, Q.-L. Han, and F. Yang, “Event-based set-membership leader-
following consensus of networked multi-agent systems subject to lim-
ited communication resources and unknown-but-bounded noise,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 5045–5054, Jun. 2017.
[5] Z. Li, X. Liu, W. Ren, and L. Xie, “Distributed tracking control for
linear multiagent systems with a leader of bounded unknown input,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 518–523, Feb. 2013.
[6] W. Ren, “On consensus algorithms for double-integrator dynamics,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 1503–1509, Jul. 2008.
[7] J. Qin, W. X. Zheng, and H. Gao, “Coordination of multiple agents with
double-integrator dynamics under generalized interaction topologies,”
IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. B, Cybern., vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 44–57,
Feb. 2012.
[8] W. Zhu, Z.-P. Jiang, and G. Feng, “Event-based consensus of multiagent
systems with general linear models,” Automatica, vol. 50, no. 2,
pp. 552–558, 2014.
[9] Z. Zhang, L. Zhang, F. Hao, and L. Wang, “Leader-following consensus
for linear and Lipschitz nonlinear multiagent systems with quantized
communication,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 1970–1982,
Aug. 2017.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
10
[10] H. Zhang, T. Feng, G.-H. Yang, and H. Liang, “Distributed cooperative
optimal control for multiagent systems on directed graphs: An inverse
optimal approach,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 1315–1326,
Jul. 2015.
[11] Y. Su and J. Huang, “Cooperative output regulation with application
to multi-agent consensus under switching network,” IEEE Trans. Syst.,
Man, Cybern. B, Cybern., vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 864–875, Jun. 2012.
[12] H. Cai, F. L. Lewis, G. Hu, and J. Huang, “The adaptive distributed
observer approach to the cooperative output regulation of linear multi-
agent systems,” Automatica, vol. 75, pp. 299–305, Jan. 2017.
[13] H. Zhang, J. Han, Y. Wang, and H. Jiang, “H∞ consensus for linear het-
erogeneous multiagent systems based on event-triggered output feedback
control scheme,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 2268–2279,
Jun. 2019.
[14] H. Zhang, J. Han, Y. Wang, and H. Jiang, “H∞ consensus for
linear heterogeneous discrete-time multiagent systems with output feed-
back control,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 3713–3721,
Oct. 2019.
[15] W. Hu, L. Liu, and G. Feng, “Output consensus of heterogeneous linear
multi-agent systems by distributed event-triggered/self-triggered strat-
egy,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 1914–1924, Aug. 2017.
[16] L. Wang and F. Xiao, “Finite-time consensus problems for networks
of dynamic agents,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 55, no. 4,
pp. 950–955, Apr. 2010.
[17] Z. Zuo and L. Tie, “Distributed robust finite-time nonlinear consen-
sus protocols for multi-agent systems,” Int. J. Syst. Sci., vol. 47, no. 6,
pp. 1366–1375, 2016.
[18] G. Chen, F. L. Lewis, and L. Xie, “Finite-time distributed consensus via
binary control protocols,” Automatica, vol. 47, no. 9, pp. 1962–1968,
Sep. 2011.
[19] S. Li, H. Du, and X. Lin, “Finite-time consensus algorithm for multi-
agent systems with double-integrator dynamics,” Automatica, vol. 47,
no. 8, pp. 1706–1712, Aug. 2011.
[20] Y. Zhao, Z. Duan, G. Wen, and G. Chen, “Distributed finite-time track-
ing for a multi-agent system under a leader with bounded unknown
acceleration,” Syst. Control Lett., vol. 81, pp. 8–13, Jul. 2015.
[21] S. Khoo, L. Xie, S. Zhao, and Z. Man, “Multi-surface sliding control for
fast finite-time leader–follower consensus with high order SISO uncer-
tain nonlinear agents,” Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, vol. 24, no. 16,
pp. 2388–2404, Nov. 2014.
[22] A. Polyakov, “Nonlinear feedback design for fixed-time stabilization
of linear control systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 57, no. 8,
pp. 2106–2110, Aug. 2012.
[23] J. Ni, L. Liu, C. Liu, and J. Liu, “Fixed-time leader-following consensus
for second-order multiagent systems with input delay,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 64, no. 11, pp. 8635–8646, Nov. 2017.
[24] Z. Zuo, B. Tian, M. Defoort, and Z. Ding, “Fixed-time consensus track-
ing for multi-agent systems with high-order integrator dynamics,” IEEE
Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 563–570, Feb. 2018.
[25] B. Ning, J. Jin, J. Zheng, and Z. Man, “Finite-time and fixed-time leader-
following consensus for multi-agent systems with discontinuous inherent
dynamics,” Int. J. Control, vol. 91, no. 6, pp. 1259–1270, 2018.
[26] H. Hong, W. Yu, G. Wen, and X. Yu, “Distributed robust fixed-time
consensus for nonlinear and disturbed multiagent systems,” IEEE Trans.
Syst., Man, Cybern., Syst., vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 1464–1473, Jul. 2017.
[27] B. Ning, Z. Zuo, J. Jin, and J. Zheng, “Distributed fixed-time coordinated
tracking for nonlinear multi-agent systems under directed graphs,” Asian
J. Control, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 646–658, 2018.
[28] Z. Zuo, “Nonsingular fixed-time consensus tracking for second-order
multi-agent networks,” Automatica, vol. 54, pp. 305–309, Apr. 2015.
[29] H. Wang, W. Yu, G. Wen, and G. Chen, “Fixed-time consen-
sus of nonlinear multi-agent systems with general directed topolo-
gies,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II, Expr. Briefs, to be published.
doi: 10.1109/TCSII.2018.2886298.
[30] Z. Zuo, Q.-L. Han, B. Ning, X. Ge, and X.-M. Zhang, “An overview of
recent advances in fixed-time cooperative control of multiagent systems,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 2322–2334, Jun. 2018.
[31] C. Altafini, “Consensus problems on networks with antagonistic inter-
actions,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 935–946,
Apr. 2013.
[32] H. Zhang and J. Chen, “Bipartite consensus of multi-agent systems over
signed graphs: State feedback and output feedback control approaches,”
Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 3–14, 2017.
[33] Y. Jiang, H. Zhang, and J. Chen, “Sign-consensus of linear multi-
agent systems over signed directed graphs,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 5075–5083, Jun. 2017.
[34] M. E. Valcher and P. Misra, “On the consensus and bipartite con-
sensus in high-order multi-agent dynamical systems with antagonistic
interactions,” Syst. Control Lett., vol. 66, pp. 94–103, Apr. 2014.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS
[35] G. Wen, H. Wang, X. Yu, and W. Yu, “Bipartite tracking consensus of
linear multi-agent systems with a dynamic leader,” IEEE Trans. Circuits
Syst. I, Expr. Briefs, vol. 65, no. 9, pp. 1204–1208, Sep. 2018.
[36] D. Meng, Y. Jia, and J. Du, “Finite-time consensus for multiagent
systems with cooperative and antagonistic interactions,” IEEE Trans.
Neural Netw. Learn. Syst., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 762–770, Apr. 2016.
[37] D. Meng, M. Du, and Y. Jia, “Interval bipartite consensus of networked
agents associated with signed digraphs,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control,
vol. 61, no. 12, pp. 3755–3770, Dec. 2016.
Huaguang Zhang (M’03–SM’04–F’14) received
the B.S. and M.S. degrees in control engineering
from the Northeast Dianli University of China, Jilin,
China, in 1982 and 1985, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degree in thermal power engineering and automa-
tion from Southeast University, Nanjing, China, in
1991.
He has authored and coauthored over 280 journal
and conference papers, six monographs, and co-
invented 90 patents. His current research interests
include fuzzy control, stochastic system control,
neural-networks-based control, nonlinear control, and their applications.
Dr. Zhang was a recipient of the Outstanding Youth Science Foundation
Award from the National Natural Science Foundation Committee of China
in 2003 and the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON N EURAL N ETWORKS 2012
Outstanding Paper Award. He was named the Cheung Kong Scholar by
the Education Ministry of China in 2005. He is an Associate Editor
of Automatica, the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON N EURAL N ETWORKS, the
IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON C YBERNETICS, and Neurocomputing. He was an
Associate Editor of the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON F UZZY S YSTEMS from
2008 to 2013. He is the E-Letter Chair of the IEEE CIS Society and the Former
Chair of the Adaptive Dynamic Programming and Reinforcement Learning
Technical Committee on the IEEE Computational Intelligence Society.
Jie Duan received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in
control engineering from Northeast Electric Power
University, Jilin, China, in 2013 and 2016, respec-
tively. She is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree
in control theory and control engineering with
Northeastern University, Shenyang, China.
Her current research interests include multiagent
systems, switching systems, adaptive control, and
finite-time control.
Yingchun Wang (M’09) was born in Liaoning,
China, in 1974. He received the B.S. degree in met-
allurgy machinery, the M.S. degree in mechanical
design and theory, and the Ph.D. degree in control
theory and control engineering from Northeastern
University, Shenyang, China, in 1997, 2003, and
2006, respectively.
He is currently an Associate Professor with the
College of Information Science and Engineering,
Northeastern University. From 2015 to 2016, he was
a Visiting Scholar with West Sydney University,
Sydney, NSW, Australia. His current research interests include fuzzy con-
trol and fuzzy systems, network control, multiagent systems, and stochastic
control.
Dr. Wang was an Outstanding Reviewer of the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON
C YBERNETICS in 2015.
Zhiyun Gao received the B.S. degree in math-
ematics and applied mathematics from Changzhi
University, Changzhi, China, in 2015, and the M.S.
degree in basic mathematics from Northeastern
University, Shenyang, China, in 2017, where she is
currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in control the-
ory and control engineering.
Her current research interests include descrip-
tor multiagent systems, fractional-order multiagent
systems, and event-triggered control.