Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Adaptive Control With Recurrent High-Order Neural Networks - Theory and Industrial Applications
Adaptive Control With Recurrent High-Order Neural Networks - Theory and Industrial Applications
Springer
London
Berlin
Heidelberg
New York
Barcelona
Hong Kong
Milan
Paris
Santa Clara
Singapore
Tokyo
Other titles published in this Series:
Control ofModern Integrated Power Systems
E. Mariani and S.S. Murthy
Advanced Load Dispatch for Power Systems: Principles, Practices and Economies
E. Mariani and S.S. Murthy
Supervision and Control for Industrial Processes
Bjorn Sohlberg
Modelling and Simulation ofHuman Behaviour in System Control
Pietro Carlo Cacciabue
Modelling and Identification in Robotics
Krzysztof Kozlowski
Spacecraft Navigation and Guidance
Maxwell Noton
Robust Estimation and Failure Detection
Rami Mangoubi
Adaptive Internal Model Control
Aniruddha Datta
Price-Based Commitment Decisions in the Electricity Market
Eric Allen and Marija Hie
Compressor Surge and Rotating Stall
Jan Tommy Gravdahl and Olav Egeland
Radiotherapy Treatment Planning
Oliver Haas
Feedback Control Theory For Dynamic Traffic Assignment
Pushkin Kachroo and Kaan 6zbay
Control Instrumentation for Wastewater Treatment Plants
Reza Katebi, Michael A. Johnson and Jacqueline Wilkie
Autotuning ofPID Controllers
Cheng-Ching Yu
Robust Aeroservoelastic Stability Analysis
Rick Lind & Marty Brenner
Performance Assessment of Control Loops:Theory and Applications
Biao Huang & Sirish L. Shah
Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery for Process Monitoring and Control
XueZ. Wang
Advances in PID Control
Tan Kok Kiong, Wang Quing-Guo & Hang Chang Chieh with Tore J. Hagglund
George A. Rovithakis
and Manolis A. Christodoulou
Adaptive Control
with Recurrent High-order
Neural Networks
Theory and Industrial Applications
With 30 Figures
Springer
George A. Rovithakis, PhD
Manolis A. Christodoulou, PhD
Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering,
Technical University of Crete,
GR-73100 Chania,
Crete,
Greece.
Series Editors
Dr D.C. McFarlane
Department of Engineering
University of Cambridge
Cambridge CB2 1QJ
United Kingdom
Professor B. Wittenmark
Department of Automatic Control
Lund Institute of Technology
PO Box 118
S-221 00 Lund
Sweden
Professor H. Kimura
Department of Mathematical Engineering and Information Physics
Faculty of Engineering
The University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongo
Bunkyo Ku
Tokyo 113
Japan
Dr M.K. Masten
Texas Instruments
2309 Northcrest
Plano
TX 75075
United States of America
cepts. The book is the outcome of the recent research efforts of its authors.
Although it is intended to be a research monograph, the book is also useful
for an industrial audience, where the interest is mainly on implementation
rather than analyzing the stability and robustness of the control algorithms.
Tables are used to summarize the control schemes presented herein.
Organization of the book. The book is divided into six chapters. Chap-
ter 1 is used to introduce neural networks as a method for controlling un-
known nonlinear dynamical plants. A brief history is also provided. Chapter
2 presents a review of the recurrent high-order neural network model and an-
alyzes its approximation capabilities based on which all subsequent control
and scheduling algorithms are developed. An indirect adaptive control scheme
is proposed in Chapter 3. Its robustness owing to unmodeled dynamics is an-
alyzed using singular perturbation theory. Chapter 4 deals with the design
of direct adaptive controllers, whose robustness is analyzed for various cases
including unmodeled dynamics and additive and multiplicative external dis-
turbances. The problem of manufacturing systems scheduling is formulated
in Chapter 5. A real time scheduler is developed to guarantee the fulfillment
of production demand, avoiding the buffer overflow phenomenon. Finally, its
implementation on an existing manufacturing system and comparison with
various conventional scheduling policies is discussed in Chapter 6.
The book can be used in various ways. The reader who is interested in
studying RHONN's approximation properties and its usage in on-line system
identification, may read only Chapter 2. Those interested in neuroadaptive
control architectures should cover Chapters 2, 3 and 4, while for those wishing
to elaborate on industrial scheduling issues, Chapters 2, 5 and 6 are required.
A higher level course intended for graduate students that are interested in
a deeper understanding of the application of RHONNs in adaptive control
systems, could cover all chapters with emphasis on the design and stability
proofs. A course for an industrial audience, should cover all chapters with
emphasis on the RHONN based adaptive control algorithms, rather than
stability and robustness.
Chania, Crete, Greece George A. Rovithakis
August 1999 Manolis A. Christodoulou
CONTENTS
1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 General Overview ...................................... 1
1.2 Book Goals & Outline .................................. 7
1.3 Notation.............................................. 8
Man has two principal objectives in the scientific study of his environment:
he wants to understand and to control. The two goals reinforce each other,
since deeper understanding permits firmer control, and, on the other hand,
systematic application of scientific theories inevitably generates new problems
which require further investigation, and so on.
It might be assumed that a fine-grained descriptive theory of terrestrial
phenomena would be required before an adequate theory of control could
be constructed. In actuality this is not the case, and indeed, circumstances
themselves force us into situations where we must exert regulatory and cor-
rective influences without complete knowledge of basic causes and effects. In
connection with the design of experiments, space travel, economics, and the
study of cancer, we encounter processes which are not fully understood. Yet
design and control decisions are required. It is easy to see that in the treat-
ment of complex processes, attempts at complete understanding at a basic
level may consume so much time and so large a quantity of resources as to
impede us in more immediate goals of control.
Artificial Neural Networks have been studied for many years with the hope
of achieving human-like performance in solving certain problems in speech
and image processing. There has been a recent resurgence in the field of neu-
ral networks owing to the introduction of new network topologies, training
algorithms and VLSI implementation techniques. The potential benefits of
neural networks such as parallel distributed processing, high computation
rates, fault tolerance and adaptive capability, have lured researchers from
other fields such as controls, robotics etc. to seek solutions to their compli-
cated problems.
Several types of neural networks appear to offer promise for use in con-
trol systems. These include the multilayer neural network trained with the
commonly attributed to Rumelhart et al., [97], the recurrent neural networks
such as the feedback network of Hopfield, [38], the cerebellar model articula-
tion controller (CMAC) model of Albus, [2], the content-addressable memory
ofKohonen, [55], and the Gaussian node network of Moody and Darken, [69].
The choice of which neural network to use and which training procedure to
be fed back and used as part of the network input. In this way, the network
can be used independently of the plant. Such a network model is described
by
ym(k + 1) = fapr(ym(k), .. , ym(k - n + 1); u(k), .. , u(k - m + 1».
u
PLANT
Suppose now that the information we have about the plant is in the form
of an input-output table, which makes the problem of identification look like a
typical pattern recognition problem; then, for the training of the plant model
the current and previous inputs to the plant, as well as the previous outputs
of the plant should be used again. Other possibilities for the training include
the plant states and derivatives of the plant states.
For this reason, if a feedforward multilayer neural network is used and the
training is done with the BP algorithm, then we realize that since we need
discrete outputs of the plant model, a discrete or discretized continuous plant
has to be considered, as discussed before. This can be illustrated in Figure 1.1.
The arrow that passes through the neural model is indicative of the fact that
the output error is used to train the neural network. As mentioned before,
we see that the discrete inputs of the plant, as well as the discrete outputs of
the plant are used for the training. The number of delays of previous inputs
and outputs is unknown; since we have no information about the structure
of the plant this number has to be determined experimentally. As far as the
training signal is concerned, it has been suggested, [41],[74], that a random
signal uniformly distributed over certain ranges should be used.
Instead of training a neural network to identify the forward dynamics of
the plant, a neural network can be trained to identify the inverse dynamics of
the plant. The neural network's input is the plant's output, and the desired
neural network output is the plant's input. The error difference between the
actual input of the plant and the output of the neural network is to be
4 1. Introduction
minimized and can be used to train the neural network. The desired output
of the neural network is the current input to the plant. When modeling the
inverse dynamics of the plant with a neural network, the assumption is being
made, either implicitly or explicitly, that the neural network can approximate
the inverse of the plant well. This, of course, means that the inverse exists
and it is unique; if not unique then care should be taken with the ranges of
the inputs to the network. It also means that the inverse is stable.
u y
NEURAL
PLANT
CONTROLLER
MODEL J
+
/
NEURAL e
~ PLANT \.
r reference input
u yI'
NEURAL
PLANT
DELAY CONTROLLER plant
output
~
r DELAY
L
f
l
DELAY }-
Fig. 1.3. An open loop control configuration
• Chapter 3 deals with the problem of controlling affine in the control non-
linear dynamical systems, attacking it from an indirect adaptive control
point of view. Modified accordingly, the learning algorithms developed in
Chapter 2 are employed for on-line system identification. Subsequently, the
RHONN model acquired, is used for control. The scheme is tested for both
parametric and dynamic uncertainties, operated within a singular pertur-
bation theory. Simulations performed on a nonlinearly operated Dc motor,
highlight certain performance issues.
• Chapter 4 introduces the problem of controlling nonlinear dynamical sys-
tems through direct adaptive control techniques. The algorithms developed
may handle various destabilizing mechanisms like modeling errors, external
disturbances and unmodeled dynamics, without the need of singular per-
turbation theory. Both regulation and tracking issues are examined. The
results are also extended to cover the case where the number of measured
states is different from the number of control inputs.
• Chapter 5 discusses the issues of manufacturing systems modeling and
control, using recurrent high order neural networks. Appropriately de-
signed RHONN-based controllers are used to output the required schedule,
guaranteeing achievement of production demand, while keeping all system
buffers bounded.
• Finally, Chapter 6, applies the theoretical framework developed in Chap-
ter 5 to solve a real test case. Calculation of various performance indices
indicates near optimal operation.
1.3 Notation
The following notations and definitions will extensively be used throughout
the book. I denotes the identity matrix. I . I denotes the usual Euclidean
norm of a vector. In cases where y is a scalar, I y I denotes its absolute value.
If A is a matrix, then IIAII denotes the Frobenius matrix norm [29], defined
as
IIAI12 = L laijl2 = tr{AT A},
ij
where tr{.} denotes the trace of a matrix. Now let d(t) be a vector function
of time. Then
IIdll2 ~ (1 00
Id(rWdr)1/2,
and
Ildlloo ~ sup Id(t)l.
t~O
We will say that d E L2 when IIdl1 2is finite. Similarly, we will say that d E Loo
when IIdlloo is finite.
CHAPTER 2
IDENTIFICATION OF DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS USING
RECURRENT HIGH-ORDER NEURAL NETWORKS
The use of multilayer neural networks for pattern recognition and for model-
ing of "static" systems is currently well-known (see, for example, [1]). Given
pairs of input-output data (which may be related by an unknown algebraic
relation, a so-called "static" function) the network is trained to learn the par-
ticular input-output map. Theoretical work by several researchers, including
Cybenko [16], and Funahashi [24], have proven that, even with one hidden
layer, neural networks can approximate any continuous function uniformly
over a compact domain, provided the network has a sufficient number of
units, or neurons. Recently, interest has been increasing towards the usage of
neural networks for modeling and identification of dynamical systems. These
networks, which naturally involve dynamic elements in the form of feedback
connections, are known as recurrent neural networks.
Several training methods for recurrent networks have been proposed in
the literature. Most of these methods rely on the gradient methodology and
involve the computation of partial derivatives, or sensitivity functions. In this
respect, they are extensions of the backpropagation algorithm for feedforward
neural networks [97]. Examples of such learning algorithms include the recur-
rent backpropagation [80], the backpropagation-through-time algorithms [106],
the real-time recurrent learning algorithm [107]' and the dynamic backprop-
agation [75] algorithms. The last approach is based on the computation of
sensitivity models for generalized neural networks. These generalized neural
networks, which were originally proposed in [74], combine feedforward neural
networks and dynamical components in the form of stable rational transfer
functions.
Although the training methods mentioned above have been used success-
fully in many empirical studies, they share some fundamental drawbacks. One
drawback is the fact that, in general, they rely on some type of approximation
for computing the partial derivative. Furthermore, these training methods re-
quire a great deal of computational time. A third disadvantage is the inability
to obtain analytical results concerning the convergence and stability of these
schemes.
Recently, there has been a concentrated effort towards the design and
analysis of learning algorithms that are based on the Lyapunov stability the-
ory [81],[100], [10], [9],[61], [98], [99], [85], [57] targeted at providing stability,
convergence and robustness proofs, in this way, bridging the existed gap be-
tween theory and applications.
In this chapter we discuss the identification problem which consists of
choosing an appropriate identification model and adjusting its parameters
according to some adaptive law, such that the response of the model to an
input signal (or a class of input signals), approximates the response of the real
system to the same input. Since a mathematical characterization of a system
is often a prerequisite to analysis and controller design, system identifica-
tion is important not only for understanding and predicting the behavior of
the system, but also for obtaining an effective control law. For identification
models we use recurrent high-order neural networks. High-order networks are
expansions of the first-order Hopfield [39] and Cohen-Grossberg [12] models
that allow higher-order interactions between neurons. The superior storage
capacity of has been demonstrated in [77, 4], while the stability properties
of these models for fixed-weight values have been studied in [18, 51]. Fur-
thermore, several authors have demonstrated the feasibility of using these
architectures in applications such as grammatical inference [28] and target
detection [63].
The idea of recurrent neural networks with dynamical components dis-
tributed throughout the network in the form dynamical neurons and their
application for identification of dynamical systems was proposed in [57]. In
this chapter, we combine distributed recurrent networks with high-order con-
nections between neurons. In Section 1 we show that recurrent high-order
neural networks are capable of modeling a large class of dynamical systems.
In particular, it is shown that if enough higher-order connections are allowed
in the network then there exist weight values such that the input-output be-
havior of the RHONN model approximates that of an arbitrary dynamical
system whose state trajectory remains in a compact set. In Section 2, we
develop weight adjustment laws for system identification under the assump-
tion that the system to be identified can be modeled exactly by the RHONN
model. It is shown that these adjustment laws guarantee boundedness of all
the signals and weights and furthermore, the output error converges to zero.
In Section 3, this analysis is extended to the case where there is a nonzero
mismatch between the system and the RHONN model with optimal weight
values. In Section 4, we apply this methodology to the identification of a
simple robotic manipulator system and in Section 5 some final conclusions
are drawn.
of the next layer. In the most simple case, the state history of each neuron is
governed by a differential equation of the form:
where Xi is the state of the i-th neuron, ai, bi are constants, Wij is the synaptic
weight connecting the j-th input to the i-th neuron and Yj is the j-th input
to the above neuron. Each Yj is either an external input or the state of a
neuron passed through a sigmoid function (i.e., Yj = s(Xj)), where s(.) is the
sigmoid nonlinearity.
The dynamic behavior and the stability properties of neural network mod-
els of the form (2.1) have been studied extensively hy various researchers
[39], [12], [51], [18]. These studies exhibited encouraging results in applica-
tion areas such as associative memories, but they also revealed the limitations
inherent in such a simple model.
In a recurrent second order neural network, the input to the neuron is
not only a linear combination of the components Yj, but also of their product
Yj Yk· One can pursue this line further to include higher order interactions
represented by triplets Yj Yk YI, quadruplets, etc. forming the recurrent high
order neural networks (RHONNs).
Let us now consider a RHONN consisting of n neurons and m inputs. The
state of each neuron is governed by a differential equation of the form:
•
Xi = -aiXi + bi [ L
k=I
L Wik IT
jE1k
Yj 1
dj(k)
, (2.2)
s(x n )
y= Yn (2.3)
UI
Yn+I
U2
Yn+m
Um
where U = [UI, U2, ... , umJT is the external input vector to the network. The
function s(.) is monotone-increasing, differentiable and is usually represented
by sigmoids of the form:
12 2. RHONNs for Identification of Dynamical Systems
a
s(X) = l+e- fJx -"I, (2.4)
where the parameters a, {3 represent the bound and slope of sigmoid's curva-
ture and "I is a bias constant. In the special case where a = {3 = 1, "I = 0, we
obtain the logistic function and by setting a = (3 = 2, "I = 1, we obtain the
I
hyperbolic tangent function; these are the sigmoid activation functions most
commonly used in neural network applications.
We now introduce the L-dimensional vector z, which is defined as
Zl]
z [ TIjElt Yjy1;(I)
d;(2)
z-
_
[ .. 2 _
-
jE/2
. . (2.5)
. ..
ZL TIjElL Yjdj(L)
Hence, the RHONN model (2.2) becomes
Xi = -aiXi + bi [t
k=l
WikZkj. (2.6)
Proof: From (2.8), the dynamic behavior of the RHONN model is described
by
i: = Ax + WT z( x, u) . (2.10)
Adding and subtracting AX, (2.9) is rewritten as
X=AX+G(X,u), (2.11)
where G(X, u) = F(X, u) - AX. Since x(O) = X(O), thE; state error e = x - X
satisfies the differential equation
e=Ae+WTz(x,u)-G(x,u), e(O)=O. (2.12)
By assumption, (X(t), u(t)) E Y for all t E [0, T], where Y is a compact subset
of ~n+m. Let
Ye = {(X, u) E ~n+m : I(x, u) - (Xy, uy)1 ~ c, (Xy, uy) E y}. (2.13)
It can be seen readily that Ye is also a compact subset of ~n+m and Y c
Yeo In simple words Ye is c larger than y, where c is the required degree
of approximation. Since z is a continuous function, it satisfies a Lipschitz
14 2. RHONNs for Identification of Dynamical Systems
condition in Ye, i.e., there exists a constant I such that for all (Xl, u), (X2' u) E
Ye
(2.14)
In what follows, we show that the function WT z( x, u) satisfies the condi-
tions of the Stone-Weierstrass Theorem and can approximate any continuous
function over a compact domain, therefore.
From (2.2), (2.3) it is clear that z(x, u) is in the standard polynomial
expansion with the exception that each component of the vector X is prepro-
cessed by a sigmoid function s(.). As shown in [14], preprocessing of input
via a continuous invertible function does not affect the ability of a network
to approximate continuous functions; therefore, it can be shown readily that
if L is sufficiently large, then there exist weight values W = W* such that
W*T z( x, u) can approximate G( x, u) to any degree of accuracy, for all (x, u)
in a compact domain. Hence, there exists W = W* such that
sup IW*T z(X, u) - G(X, u)1 :::; 8, (2.15)
(x,u)EY.
where 8 is a constant to be designed in the sequel.
The solution of (2.12) is
+ lot eA(t-r) [W*T z(X( r), u( r)) - G(X( r), u( r))] dr. (2.16)
Since A is a diagonal stability matrix, there exists a positive constant a
such that IleAtl1 :::; e- at for all t 2: o. Also, let L = IIlW*II. Based on the
aforementioned definitions of the constants a, L, c:, let 8 in (2.15) be chosen
as
c:a L
8=2e--;;->0. (2.17)
First consider the case where (x(t), u(t)) E Ye for all t E [0, T]. Starting from
(2.16), taking norms on both sides and using (2.14), (2.15) and (2.17), the
following inequalities hold for all t E [0, T]:
Now suppose (for the sake of contradiction), that (x, u) does not belong to
Ye for all t E [0, T]; then, by the continuity of x{t), there exist a T*, where
0< T* < T, such that (x{T*), u(T*)) E aYe where aYe denotes the boundary
of Yeo If we carry out the same analysis for t E [0, T*] we obtain that in this
intervallx(t) - x(t)1 :::; ~, which is clearly a contradiction. Hence, (2.18) holds
for all t E [0, T]. •
The aforementioned theorem proves that if sufficiently large number of
connections is allowed in the RHONN model then it is possible to approx-
imate any dynamical system to any degree of accuracy. This is strictly an
existence result; it does not provide any constructive method for obtaining
the optimal weights W*. In what follows, we consider the learning problem
of adjusting the weights adaptively, such that the RHONN model identifies
general dynamic systems.
In this section we develop weight adjustment laws under the assumption that
the unknown system is modeled exactly by a RHONN architecture of the
form (2.8). This analysis is extended in the next section to cover the case
where there exists a nonzero mismatch between the system and the RHONN
model with optimal weight values. This mismatch is referred to as modeling
error.
Although the assumption of no modeling error is not very realistic, the
identification procedure of this section is useful for two reasons:
• the analysis is more straightforward and thus easier to understand,
• the techniques developed for the case of no modeling error are also very
important in the design of weight adaptive laws in the presence of modeling
errors.
Based on the assumption of no modeling error, there exist unknown weight
vectors wf, i = 1,2, ... , n, such that each state Xi of the unknown dynamic
system (2.9) satisfies:
Xi = -aiXi + wfz{x, u), Xi{O) = X? (2.19)
where X? is the initial i-th state of the system. In the following, unless there
is confusion, the arguments of the vector field z will be omitted.
As is standard in system identification procedures, we will assume that
the input u(t) and the state X(t) remain bounded for all t 2: O. Based on
16 2. RHONNs for Identification of Dynamical Systems
the definition of z(X, u), as given by (2.5), this implies that z(x, u) is also
bounded. In the subsections that follow we present different approaches for
estimating the unknown parameters wf of the RHONN model.
(i = 1t e-ai(t-T)z(x(r),u(r))dr;
therefore,
Using (2.20), the right hand side of (2.23) is equal to Xi(t) and this concludes
the proof. •
Using Lemma 2.2.1, the dynamical system described by (2.9) is rewritten
as
{ i=1,2,oo.,n, (2.29)
(2.30)
~ ( -eirPiT (; - '2fi
V. = L..J 1 2) ,
.=1
(2.31)
Since V ::; 0, we obtain that rPi E Loo. Moreover, using (2.26) and the bound-
edness of (i, we have that ei is also bounded. To show that ei(t) converges to
18 2. RHONNs for Identification of Dynamical Systems
zero, we first note that since V is a non-increasing function of time and also
bounded from below, the limt_oo V(t) = Voo exists; therefore, by integrating
both sides of (2.31) from t = 0 to 00, and taking bounds we obtain
[00 n
in I>?(T) dT :::; 2 (V(O) - Voo ) ,
o ;=1
V= ~
2
t
;=1
(<pr Pi- 1 <Pi + 1
t
00
f}(T) dT) .
Remark 2.2.2. The above theorem does not imply that the weight esti-
mation error <Pi = wi - wi converges to zero. In order to achieve convergence
of the weights to their correct value the additional assumption of persis-
tent excitation needs to be imposed on the regressor vector (i. In particular,
(;(t) E ~L is said to be persistently exciting if there exist positive scalars c,
d and T such that for all t ~ 0
cI:::; I t
t+T
(i(T)(T(T) dT :::; dI, (2.32)
where ai(·), bi (·) satisfy certain conditions required for the boundedness of
the state variables [18]. It can be seen readily that in (2.33) the differential
equation is still linear in the weights and hence a similar parameter estimation
procedure can be applied.
The filtered-regressor RHONN model considered in this subsection relies
on filtering the vector z, which is sometimes referred to as the regressor vector.
By using this filtering technique, it is possible to obtain a very simple alge-
braic expression for the error (as given by (2.26)), which allows the application
of well-known optimization procedures for designing and analyzing weight ad-
justment laws but there is an important drawback to this method, namely
the complex configuration and heavy computational demands required in the
filtering of the regressor. Generally, the dimension of the regressor will be
larger than the dimension of the system, i.e., L > n, it might be very ex-
pensive computationaly to employ so many filters. In the next subsection
we consider a simpler structure that requires only n filters and hence, fewer
computations.
Theorem 2.2.2. Consider the filtered error RHONN model given by (2.35)
whose weights are adjusted according to (2.37). Then Jor i = 1,2, ... , n
(a) ej, <Pi E .coo
20 2. RHONNs for Identification of Dynamical Systems
~ (e;2 + cP;T
V = 2"1 L..... ri-1 cPi ) (2.38)
i=1
Then, using (2.36), (2.37), and the fact that ~i = Wi, the time derivative of
V in (2.38) satisfies
(2.39)
Since V S 0, from (2.38) we obtain that ei, cPi E £00 for i = 1, .. . n. Using
this result in (2.36) we also have that ei E £00' Now, by employing the
same techniques as in the proof of Theorem 2.2.1 it can be shown readily
that ei E £2, i.e., e;(t) is square integrable; therefore, by applying Barbalat's
Lemma we obtain that limt--+oo e;(t) = O. •
where iTj is a positive constant chosen by the designer. The above weight
adjustment law is the same as (2.37) if Wi belongs to a ball of radius Mi.
In the case that the weights leave this ball, the weight adjustment law is
modified by the addition of the leakage term iTjriWj, whose objective is to
prevent the weight values from drifting to infinity. This modification is known
as the [45].
In the following theorem we use the vector notation V := [Vi ... vnf and
e := [ei ... enf.
Theorem 2.3.1. Consider the filtered error RHONN model given by (2.44)
whose weights are adjusted according to (2.46). Then for i = 1, ... n
(aJ ej, <Pi E £00
(b J there exist constants A, J.l such that
V ~ (2
= -1 L...J T -1 )
ei + ¢i r i ¢i . (2.47)
2 i=1
(2.48)
(2.50)
where
otherwise
we obtain that (1 - I~.) TI¢;j2 :::; (TiM? Hence (2.50) can be written in the
form
V:::; -aV +K,
where K := 2::7=1 ((TiM? + vl!2ai) and Vi is an upper bound for Vi; therefore,
for V ;::: Vo = Kia, we have V :::; 0, which implies that V E 'coo. Hence
ei, ¢i E 'coo·
24 2. RHONNs for Identification of Dynamical Systems
To prove the second part, we note that by completing the square in (2.49)
we obtain
•
< ~n
V -L.J (-a·e.
'I
2
- e·v-)
I.
< ~n (
-L.J
ai 2
--e·
2'
v·
+-'
2.
2) (2.51 )
i=l i=l a,
Integrating both sides of (2.51) yields
V(t) - V(O) ~ t (-
.
ai
2
it e;( r) dr + ~
2a ,
it v;( r) dr) ,
it
0 0
1=1
it it
where amin:= min{ai ; i = 1, .. . n}; therefore,
2
!e(rW dr ~ - . [V(O) - V(t)] + - 21 - !v(rW dr,
o a mm amin
1t
0
where .x := (2/amin) SUPt>o (V(O) - V(t)] and J.L := l/a~in' This proves part
(b) and concludes the proof of Theorem 2.3.1. •
In simple words the above theorem states that the weight adaptive law
(2.46) guarantees that ei and 1>i remain bounded for all i = 1, ... n, and
furthermore, the "energy" of the state error e(t) is proportional to the "en-
ergy" of the modeling error v(t). In the special case that the modeling error
is square integrable, i.e., v E £2, then e(t) converges to zero asymptotically.
Remark 2.3.1. It is noted that the O'-modification causes the adaptive
law (2.46) to be discontinuous; therefore standard existence and uniqueness
results of solutions to differential equations are in general not applicable.
In order to overcome the problem of existence and uniqueness of solutions,
the trajectory behavior of Wi(t) can be made "smooth" on the discontinuity
hypersurface {Wi E WL !w;j = Md by modifying the adaptive law (2.46)
to
-rizei if {!Wi! < M;} or
{!w;j = Mi and wr rizei > O}
if {!w;j = M;} and (2.52)
Wi=
{-O'iWr riw ~ wr rizei ~ O}
-rizei - O'iriWi if {!Wi! > M;} or {!Wi! = M;}
and {wr rizei < -O'iWr riW}
As shown in [82], the adaptive law (2.52) retains all the properties of (2.46)
and, in addition, guarantees the existence of a unique solution, in the sense
of Caratheodory [34]. The issue of existence and uniqueness of solutions in
adaptive systems is treated in detail in [82].
2.4 Simulation Results 25
System Model:
X = F(X, u),
Parametric Model:
Xi = -aiXi + wtT z + Vi(t),
RHONN Identifier Model:
Xi = -aiXi + wT z,
Identification Error:
ei = Xi - Xi,
Weight Estimation Error:
¢>i = Wi - wt,
Modeling Error:
Fi(X(t), u(t)) + aiXi(t) - wt T z(X(t), u(t))
Robust Learning Algorithms:
a) Switching u-modification:
tV _ {-rize i if !w;/ :S Mi
1- -rizei _ UiriWi if !w;/ >Mi
b) u-mod with existence
and uniqueness of solutions:
-rizei if {!Wi! < M;} or
{!w;/ = Mi and wT F;zei > o}
if {!Wi! = M;} and
tVi=
{ -uiwT riW :S wT rizei :S o}
if {!w;/ > M;} or {!Wi! = M;}
and {wT rizei < -uiwT F;w}
XE ~n, u E ~m, i = 1,2, ... ,n
Summary
In this chapter we have studied the stability, convergence and approximation
properties of the recurrent high-order neural networks (RHONN) as models
of nonlinear dynamical systems. The overall structure of the RHONN con-
sists of dynamical elements distributed throughout the network in the form of
dynamical neurons, which are interconnected by high-order connections be-
tween them. We have shown that if a sufficiently large number of high-order
connections between neurons is allowed then the RHONN model is capable
of approximating the input-output behavior of general dynamical systems to
any degree of accuracy.
28 2. RHONNs for Identification of Dynamical Systems
:l 4
~
0r-----______---------r
2
·2
~71--~~~---793~--~~~--~9~S----%~---9~7----~98----~~~~~lOO
Tune ill secoDds
4r---~----~--~--~----~--~----~--~--~
.S
.!i, 2
) o
j. -2
:S
~~1----~~--~93-----~~---9~S----%~---9~7----~98----~~~--~lOO
Time ita secoads
Fig. 2.1. Identification performance of the first and second joint outputs, Wi and
W2 respectively. The solid line corresponds to the robot model and the dashed line
corresponds to the RHONN model. The training stops at the 96th second, after
which the adjustable weights are kept fixed
3.1 Identification
We consider affine in the control, nonlinear dynamical systems of the form
i: = f(x) + G(x)u, (3.1)
G. A. Rovithakis et al., Adaptive Control with Recurrent High-order Neural Networks
© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2000
30 3. Indirect Adaptive Control
I 1
RHON
+
u e
CONTROLLER
-
UNK OWN
SYSTEM
In the previous section we assumed that there exist weight values W*, wt
such that a nonlinear dynamical system can be completely described by a
neural network of the form
x = Ax + BW*S(x) + BW{S'(x)u,
where all matrices are as defined previously. It is well known however, that the
model can be of lower order than the plant, owing to the presence of unmod-
eled dynamics. In the following, we extend our theory within the framework
of singular perturbations, to include the case where dynamic uncertainties
are present. For more details concerning singular perturbation theory, the
interested reader is referred to [56]. Now we can assume that the unknown
plant can be completely described by
x = Ax + BW*S(x) + BW{S'(x)u
+F(x, W, W 1 )Aol BoWou + F(x, W, W 1 )z,
J1.z = Aoz + BoWou, zE ~r (3.3)
where z is the state of the unmodeled dynamics and J1. > 0 a small singular
perturbation scalar. If we define the error between the identifier states and
32 3. Indirect Adaptive Control
the real system states as e = x- x then from (3.2) and (3.3) we obtain the
error equation
e = Ae + BWS(x) + BW1S'(x)u
-F(x, W, Wl)Ai) 1 BoWou - F(x, w, Wl)Z,
J-tz = Aoz + Bo Wou, z E ~r , (3.4)
where F(x, W, W l ), BoWou, BWS(x), BW1S'(x)u, are bounded and differen-
tiable with respect to their arguments for every W E Bw a ball in ~nxn,
Wl E BWI a ball in ~n and all x E Bx a ball in ~n. Further, we assume that
the unmodeled dynamics are asymptotically stable for all x E Bx. In other
words we assume that there exists a constant v > 0 such that
Re A{A o } ::; -v < o.
z
Note that is large since J-t is small and hence, the unmodeled dynamics are
fast. For a singular perturbation from J-t > 0 to J-t = 0 we obtain
z = -Ai)lBoWou.
Since the unmodeled dynamics are asymptotically stable the existence of Ai) 1
is assured. As it is well known from singular perturbation theory, we express
the state z as
z=h(x,TJ)+'f/, (3.5)
where h(x, TJ) is defined as the quasi-steady-state of z and 'f/ as its fast tran-
sient. In our case
h(x, 'f/) = -Ai) 1 BoWou
Substituting (3.5) into (3.4) we obtain the singularly perturbed model as
e = Ae + BWS(x) + BW1S'(x)u - F(x, W, Wl)'f/,
J-try= Ao'f/ - J-th(e, W, Wb 'f/, u), (3.6)
where we define
. - - 8h . oh':' 8h,:. 8h .
h(e, W, Wl,TJ,u) = J'}e
ve
+ --
oW
W + ---Wl + J'}u.
OWl vU
Notice, however, that in the control case, u is a function of e, W, Wl therefore
making h(e, W, Wb 'f/, u) to be equal to
. - - 8h 8h,:. oh':'
h(e, W, Wl,TJ,u) = J'}e + -- W + ---Wl ·
ve 8W OWl
Remark 3.1.1. F(x, W, Wl)Ai) 1 BoWou, F(x, w,
Wl)z in (3.3) can be
viewed as correction terms in the input vectorfields and in the drift term
of
x = Ax + BW*S(x) + BW[S'(x)u,
in the sense that the unknown system can now be described by a neural
network plus the correction terms.
3 .1 Identification 33
. .
-F(x, W, Wt)TJ + hw W + hWl WI + h"u;
therefore,
Ilh(e, W, WI, TJ, u)11 :s; IlheAel1 + IlheBWS(x)11 + IlheBW1S'(x)ull
+llheF(x, W, W1)TJII + IlhwWII
+llh w1 WIll + Ilh"ull ,
:s; k411ell + k311ell + k211ell + IlheF(x, W, W1)IIIITJII
+kollell + k11lell + k511 ell ,
:s; k411ell + k311ell + k211ell + P2111J11
+kollell + k11lell + k5 l1 ell·
Hence,
V = - clllel12
2
- ~1IT}112
2jl
- cle T P F(:r, W, Wl)T}
T . --
-C2T} Poh(e, W, W l , T}, u),
:::; _ c; II el1 2_ ;~ 11T}11 2
+llcleT P F(x, W, W1T} + C2T}T Poh(e,
.
W, W l , T}, u)ll·
--
. CI 2 1 2
V:::; -Zllell - C2(2jj - C3)111711 + CIC21I ellll17ll, (3.8)
provided that the following inequalities hold
IIPF(x, W, Wdll:::; C2,
IIPollpl :::; CI ,
IIPollp2 :::; C3;
therefore,
.
V:::; - [lI ellll17111
[-T
T C2(JJl
-~
- C3)
] [Ilell]
111711 (3.9)
falls into the indirect category. The purpose of the identification stage is to
give the green light to the control stage, (if identification fails, control is not
performed). Furthermore, it provides adequate initial values to the control
stage, therefore, leading to a better transient response of the output.
In this subsection we assume that the unknown system can be modeled ex-
actly by a dynamical neural network of the form
x = Ax + BW*S(x) + BWtS'(x)u (3.10)
where all matrices are as defined previously. Define the error between the
identifier states and the real system states as
e=x-x,
then from (3.2) and (3.10) we obtain the error equation
e = Ae + BWS(x) + BWIS'(x)u, (3.11)
where
W=W-W*,
WI = WI - wt·
Our purpose is to find suitable control and learning laws to drive both e and
x to zero, while all other signals in the closed loop remain bounded. At each
time instant the actual system is modeled by a RHONN of the form
1: = Ax + BWS(x) + BWI 5'(x)u, (3.12)
where Wand WI are the synaptic weight estimates that are provided by the
RHONN identifier. Taking u to be equal to
u = -[WIS'(x)tIWS(x) , (3.13)
and substituting it into (3.2.3) we finally obtain
x = Ax. (3.14)
Again the Lyapunov synthesis method is used to derive stable adaptive laws
so if we take the Lyapunov function candidate,
- - 1 T 1 T 1 -T - 1 -T-
V(e, x, W, Wt) = Ze Pe + Zx Px + ztr{W W} + ztr{WI Wd,
where P > 0 is chosen to satisfy the Lyapunov equation
PA+ATp=-I,
we obtain, (following the same procedure as in Section 3.1.1), that the learn-
ing laws
3.2 Indirect Control 37
Furthermore, it is trivial to verify that the learning laws above can be written
in matrix form as
W= -EBP50 ,
WI = -BP5'U E,
where all matrices are defined as follows
P = diag[Pl,P2, ... ,Pn],
B = diag[b l , b2, ... , bn] ,
E = diag[el, e2, .. ·, en],
U = diag[ul, U2, .. . , un] ,
_[S(~t) ... s(~n)l
50 - : :'
S(Xl) ... s(xn)
To apply the control law (3.13), we have to assure the existence of (WI5'(x ))-1.
Since WI and 5' (x) are diagonal matrices and s' (x;) I 0, Vi = 1,2, ... , n
all we need to establish is Win+I(t) I 0 , Vi 2: 0 , Vi = 1,2, ... , n. Hence
WI (t) is confined, through the use of a projection algorithm [73], [32], [45]
to the set W = {WI: IIWIII :S w m } where Wm is a positive constant. Fur-
thermore, WI = WI - W{ and W{ contains the initial values of WI that
identification provides. In particular, the standftrd adaptive laws are modi-
fied to
W= -EBP50 ,
-BP5'UE if WI E W or {IIWIII = Wm
and tr{-BP5'UEWd:S O}
WI = -BP5'UE
+tr{BP5'U EWde+~:'11 )2WI if {IIWIII = Wm and
tr{-BP5'UEWd > O}
therefore, if the initial weights are chosen such that IIW(O)n+111 :S W m , then
we have that IIWIII :S Wm for all t 2: O. This can be readily established by
noting that whenever IIW(t)n+111 = Wm then
dIIW(t)n+111 2 < 0
(3.15)
dt -
38 3. Indirect Adaptive Control
which implies that the weights WI are directed towards the inside or the ball
{WI: IIW11I $ w m }. A proof of the (3.15), can be found in Chapter 4. Now
we can prove the following theorem.
Theorem 3.2.1. Consider the control scheme (3.11),(3.13)'(3.14). The
learning law
W= -EBPSo ,
-BPS'UE if WI E W or {IIW11I = Wm
and tr{-BPS'UEWd $ O}
-BPS'UE
+tr{BPS'UEWd(1+~W11I)2Wl if {IIWlll = Wm and
m tr{-BPS'UEWd>O}
guarantees the following properties
• e,x, W, WI E Loo , e,x E L2
• limt_oo e~t) = 0, liffit_oo x(~) = 0
• limt-+oo W(t) = 0, limt_oo W l(t) = 0
Proof: With the adaptive laws mentioned above V becomes
V= _~lIeIl2 - ~llxll2 + Intr{tr{BPS'UEWt}( 1 +~~11l)2WrWd,
~ _~lIeIl2 _ ~lIx112 + Intr{BPS'UEWd( 1 +~~11l)2tr{WrWd,
$ _~lIeIl2 _ ~lIxll2 + Intr{BPS'U EWd( 1 ::m )2I1WlI12,
::; _~lIeIl2 - ~lIxll2 + Intr{BPS'U EWd(l + wm)2,
where In, is an indicato! function defined as In = 1 if the conditions UWllI =
Wm and tr{ -BPS'U EWd > 0 are satisfied. Now since tr{BPS'U EWd < 0
then Intr{BPS'U EWd x(l + wm )2 < o. Hence, V ::; 0 so the additional
terms introduced by the projection can only make Vmore negative. Since V is
negative semidefinite we have that V E L oo , which implies e, X, W, WI E Loo.
Since V is a non-increasing function of time and bounded from below, the
limt_oo V = Voo exists; therefore, by integrating V from 0 to 00 we have
1 2(lI 1l + II xll
o
00 1
e 2 2 )dt ::; [V(O) - Voo ] < 00,
which implies that e,:i E L 2 • By definition the sigmoid functions S(x), S'(x)
are bounded for all x and by assumption all inputs to the reference model
are also bounded. Hence, from (3.13) we have that u is bounded and from
n
(3.11),(3.14) e, i: E Loo. Since e,:i E L2 Loo and e, i: E L oo , using Barbalat's
3.2 Indirect Control 39
= =
Lemma [84], we conclude that limt .... oo e(t) limt .... oo x(t) o. Now using the
boundedness of u, Sex), S'(x) and the convergence of e(t) to zero, we have
that W, WI also converge to zero. •
Remark 3.2.1. The analysis above implies that the projection modifica-
tion guarantees bounded ness of the weights, without affecting the rest of the
stability properties established in the absence of projection.
IIhw WII
::; kollell ,
IIhwl WIll ::; kIliell,
IIheBWIS'(x)ull ::; kzllell,
IIheBWS(x)1I ::; k3l1ell,
IIheF(x, W, WI)II ::; P2,
IIheAell ::; k411ell ,
and
PI = ko + kl + k2 + k3 + k4 .
Proof: Differentiating h(e, W, WI, 7], u) we obtain
. .
+h W- W + hW
- WI·
i'
therefore,
40 3. Indirect Adaptive Control
tr{-BPS'UEWd
>0
guarantees the following properties:
• e, X, 17, W, W1 E L cx )! e, X, 17 E L2
• limt .... oo e~t) = 0, limt .... oo x(~) = 0, limt .... oo 17(t) = 0
• limt .... oo W(t) = 0, limt .... oo Wl(t) = 0
Proof: Let's take the Lyapunov function candidate
-- 1 T 1 T 1 T
V(e, W, W1,17) = 2/1e Pe+ 2/1X PX+ 2/217 Po17 (3.17)
1 -T- 1 -T-
+2/1tr{W W} + 2/1tr{W1 Wd,
where P, Po > 0 are chosen to satisfy the Lyapunov equations
PA+ATp = -I,
PoAo + A5' Po = -1.
Observe that (3.17) is a weighted sum, composed of a slow and a fast part.
Taking the time derivative of (3.17) we obtain
3.2 Indirect Control 41
or
v = ~l(-eTe+ST(x)WTBPe+uTS'(X)WIBpe
-r? FT(X, W, W1)Pe) + ~l ((ST(X)WT BPe)T
+(UT S'(x)W1BPef - (7]T FT(X, W, W1)Pef) - ~l XT X
12 1 T .T - - .T - - T
+-(--7] 7]-h (e,W,Wl,7])Po7]-(h (e,W,W1,7])Po7]) )
2 J.l
:.. T _ :.. T _
+/ltr{W W}+/2tr{Wl Wd·
Now since sT(x)WT Bpe, uTS'(x)W1Bpe, 7]T FT(x, W, W1)Pe,
hT(e, W, WI, 7])Po7], are scalars, we have that
ST(x)WTBpe = (ST(x)WTBPe)T,
uT S'(x)W1Bpe = (u T S'(x)W1BPef ,
7]T FT(x, W, Wt)Pe = (7]T FT(x, W, W1)Pef,
- Wl,
h·T (e, W, - 7])P TJ = (h·T (e, W,
- Wl,
- 7])P 7]) T ;
o o
therefore, V becomes
Since u, Ao, h(e, W, WI), S(x), S'(x) are bounded, e,~, iJ E Loo- Since
n
e, X, 'T] E L2 L oo , using Barbalat's Lemma we conclude that limt ..... oo e(t) =
0, limt ..... oo x(t) = 0, limt ..... oo 'T](t) = o. Now, using the bound.edne~s of u, S(x),
S'(x) and the convergence of e(t) to zero, we have that W , WI also con-
verges to zero. •
In this section we apply our theory to solve the problem of controlling the
speed of a DC motor. A separately excited DC motor, can be described by
the following set of normalized nonlinear differential equations [60], [58], [7],
[21].
44 3. Indirect Adaptive Control
dla
Tadt = -Ia - 4>Q + Va
dQ
Tmdt = 4>Ia - KoQ- mL (3.20)
d4>
Trdi = -If + Vf
4> = alf
1 + /3If
where the physical meaning of all variables and parameters are provided in
Table 3.2. The state equations for this system may be written in the familiar
form
x= f(x) + g(x)u,
where the states are chosen to be the armature current the angular speed
and the stator flux x = [la Q 4>Y. As control inputs we have the armature
and the field voltage, u = [Va Vf y. With this choice, we have
f(x) =
g(x) =
[t n
Traditionally, the angular velocity of a DC motor is controlled with changes
in its armature voltage, while keeping constant the field excitation. Thus, the
nonlinear model (3.20) is linearized and reduced to
dla
Tadt = -la - 4>Q + Va,
Tm dd~ = 4>Ia - KoQ - mL,
now with 4> a constant value parameter. This method of linearization and
reduction can not be used when one has to alter the field excitation to ful-
fil additional requirements imposed to the control system however, as for
example in the loss minimization problem [66].
The regulation problem of a DC motor is translated as follows: Find a
state feedback to force the angular velocity Q and the armature current la,
to go to zero, while the magnetic flux 4>, varies.
To achieve such a goal, assuming that the dynamics (3.20) are unknown, we
first assume that the following RHONN model describes, within a degree of
accuracy, the unknown dynamics (3.20)
3.3 Test Case: Speed Control of DC Motors 45
T.a -- h
Ro. electric time constant
T. - Jn n mechanic time constant
m - TLn
T - NJ~n field time constant
f - VJn
Ko = ~nn normalized viscous friction coefficient
Ln
mL a speed independent component of the applied load torque
Dn nominal no load speed
tPn nominal flux
Vn = ctPnDn nominal armature voltage
I an = l:.u..
Ra extrapolated stalled rotor current at nominal voltage
TLn = ctPnlan extrapolated stalled rotor torque
I fn = ~R nominal field current at nominal field voltage
J
c a constant
rotor resistance
rotor self-inductance
stator self-inductance
number of turns, stator winding
moment of inertia of the motor load system,
referred to the motor shaft
armature voltage
field voltage
armature current
field current
viscous friction coefficient
angular speed
magnetic flux
Parameter Value
1
Ta
148.88
1
Tm
42.91
~ 0.0129
Tm
Tj 31.88
mL 0.0
Q' 2.6
(3 1.6
0.4 -,-------------------------------------------,
0.2
'-
o
t: 0.0
(l)
-0.2
- 0 .4 -+-,..,-..."......,.,......,-,..,-..,-,-...,..,.--r-,....,........,..,....,..,r--r-...-r---r-r-r-.---I
Ul = Uz = 1 + 0.8sin(0.00lt) .
All initial values were set to zero, except that of the magnetic flux which
was taken to be equal to 0.98. Figures 3.2, 3.3, give the evolution of the errors
el and e2 respectively.
In the control phase, we applied the static-state feedback obtained in
the previous subsection, with the initial values that can be seen in Table
3.4. Figures 3.4, 3.5 give the evolution of the angular velocity and armature
current respectively. As can be seen, both [l and Ia converge to zero very
fast as is desired.
48 3. Indirect Adaptive Control
0.8
0.4
L
o
:: 0.0
(J)
-0.4
-0.8
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
time (in seconds)
Summary
0.32 . , . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
0.24
l:J
Q)
Q)
0..
if)
....
0.16
o
......
o
2
0 .08
Fig. 3.4. Convergence of the angular velocity to zero from 0.3 initially
50 3. Indirect Adaptive Control
0.15 -r-- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
-
-
0.075 -
.....,
c
CIJ
~ 0.0-
u
CIJ
'-
:::l
~ -0.075 -
'-
<I:
-0.15 - V
- 0 .2 2 5 -l-T"""T"""T""""T""T1' 1'T"""T
I I 'I--r-r
I I 'I--r-r
11 '1-,---,-
1 ---,--.------.-1---,--.------.----,---1
0.0 0. 1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 .5
time (in seconds)
tion. Again, convergence of the error to zero and boundedness of all signals
in the closed loop, are proved. Finally, only the states of the unknown plant
which are related to the reduced-order model, are assumed to be available
for measurement.
CHAPTER 4
DIRECT ADAPTIVE CONTROL
In this section we investigate the adaptive regulation problem when the mod-
eling error term is zero, or in other words, when we have complete model
matching. Under this assumption the unknown system can be written as
x = -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u, ( 4.1)
where x E ~n is the system state vector, u E ~n are the control inputs, W* is
a n x n matrix of synaptic weights, W[ is a n x n diagonal matrix of synaptic
weights of the form W[ = [wtl' wt2' ... , wtn] and A is a n x n matrix with
G. A. Rovithakis et al., Adaptive Control with Recurrent High-order Neural Networks
© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2000
54 4. Direct Adaptive Control
with the state ( E lR. This method is referred to as error filtering. Further-
more, we choose h(x) to be
1 2
h(x) = 21xl .
Hence, (4.5) becomes
(+ 11":( = II":h - x T Ax + xTWS(x) + XTWiS'(x)u. (4.6)
To continue, consider the Lyapunov-like function
4.1 Adaptive Regulation - Complete Matching 55
12 1 -T- 1 -T-
£ ="2e + "2 tr {W W} + "2tr{WI Wd, (4.7)
where
W=W-W*,
WI = W I - wt,
If we take the derivative of (4.7) with respect to time we obtain
£'=e~+tr{WTW}+tr{W[Wd. (4.8)
Employing (4.3), (4.8) becomes
1° 00 1
1~12dt = -[£(0) - £00] < 00 ,
r
which implies that I~I E L 2 • We also have that
~ = -K~ + xTWS(x) + XTWIS'(x)u.
Hence, eE Loo provided that u E Loo. Having in mind that ~ E L2 nLoo and
eE Loo , applying Barbalat's Lemma [84] we conclude that limt ..... oo~(t) = o.
Now, using the boundedness of u, S( x ), s' (x), x and the convergence of ~ (t)
to zero, we have that W, WI also converge to zero. •
Remark 4.1.1. From Lemma 4.1.1 we cannot conclude anything about
the convergence of the weights Wand WI to their optimal values W* and
W{ respectively. In order to guarantee convergence, S( x), S' (x)u need to
satisfy a persistency-of-excitation condition. A signal z(t) E ~n is persistently
exciting in ~n ifthere exist positive constants fio, fil, T such that
fioI~ t I t+T
Z(T)zT(T)dT~fiII \ft~O,
however, such a condition cannot be verified a priori since S(x) and S'(x)u
are nonlinear functions of the state x.
To proceed further, we observe that h can be written as
h = x T [-Ax + WS(x) + WIS'(x)u] - xTWS(x) - XTWIS'(x)u.
4.1 Adaptive Regulation - Complete Matching 57
where
c = 2n.Amin(A) ,
where .Amin(A) denotes the minimum eigenvalue of the A matrix. Observe
that (4.20) is equivalent to
it :::; -ch - ~ - r;;~ . (4.21 )
Furthermore,
h =(-C
hence, (4.21) becomes
( :::; -c( + c~ - r;;C
:::; -c(+(c+r;;)I~I, (4.22)
however, in order to apply the control law (4.18) we have to assure the
existence of [WIS'(X)r l . Since, WI and S'(x) are diagonal matrices and
sHx) > 0, Vi = 1,2, ... , n all we need to establish is Wil(i) :/; 0 Vi:::: 0, Vi =
1,2, ... ,n. Hence, Wil(i), i = 1,2, ... ,n are confined through the use of a
projection algorithm [73],[32],[45],[46] to the set W' = {Wil : 0 < E :::; Wil :::;
w m } where E, w m are appropriately chosen positive constants i . In particular,
the standard update law defined by (4.15) is modified to
-~XiS;(X)Ui if Wil E W' or wilsgn(wil) = E
and ~XiS;(x)uisgn(wil) :::; 0
o ifwilsgn(wil) = E and
~XiS;(x)uisgn(wil) > 0
(4.23)
-~XiS;(X)Ui if Wil E W' or wilsgn(wil) = wm
and ~XiS;(x)uisgn(wil) :::: 0
o if wilsgn(wil) = wm and
~XiS;(x)uisgn(wil) < 0
for all i,j = 1,2, ... , n, where the update law is written in terms of elements
for easier understanding. The following lemma presents the properties of the
projection algorithm in detail.
1 Observe that Wil can be also confined to be negative. However, the above choice
does not harm the generality.
58 4. Direct Adaptive Control
Lemma 4.1. 2. The update law (4.15) with the projection modification
(4.23), can only make .c
more negative and in addition guarantee that
Wi1 E W' for all i = 1,2, ... , n, provided that Wi1(0) E W' and wf1 E W'.
Proof: In order to prove that the projection modification given by (4.23) can
only make i more negative, we observe that the update law (4.23) has the
same form as the one without the projection except for the additional term
eXisi(X)Ui if wi1 sgn (wf1) = C
R = 1 and eXisi(x)Uisgn(wf1)
or if wi1sgn(wf1) = w m
and eXisi(x)Uisgn(wf1)
>0
<0
o otherwise
in the expression for Wi1 for all i = 1,2, ... , n.
Thus, .c is augmented by the following quantity
n
Ra = 2.: eXis;(X)UiWil.
i=1
Furthermore, assume that wf1 > 0 without loss of generality. Hence, sgn( wf1) =
1. Now, having in mind that Wi1 = Wi1 - Wf1' we obtain
n
Ra = 2.:e Xi S;(X)Ui(Wi1 - wt1)·
i=1
Case 1: Wi1 = C
Now Ra becomes
n
Ra = 2.:e xi si(x)Ui(C - Wf1)
i=1
but C - wf1 < 0 and eXiSi(X)Ui > 0 hold by definition. Hence, Ra < o.
Case 2: Wil = w m
In this case we have
n
Ra = :LeXiS;(X)Ui(W m - wtl)
i=1
Hence, when Wil = € we have Wil 2 0, which implies that Wil is directed
towards the interior of W', provided that w7I E W' and Wil(O) E W'.
Case 2: Wil = w m
In this case
°
-';XiS:(X)Ui if WI E W' or Wil = w m
= and ';XiS:(X)Ui 2
° °
Wil {
In principle, the projection modification does not alter Wil given by (4.15) •
if Wil is in the interior Win of W' or if Wil is at the boundary 8(W/) of W'
and has the tendency to move inward. Otherwise, it subtracts a vector normal
to the boundary so that we get a smooth transformation from the original
vector field, to an inward or tangent to the boundary, vector field.
Remark 4.1.2. Observe that in order to apply the projection algorithm
(4.23) we need to know the sign of the unknown parameter wtl'
To continue, we need to state the following well known Lemma [19]:
Lemma 4.1.3. Let 'I] be a C I time function defined on [0, T) where (0 ::;
T ::; <Xl), satisfying
~ ::; -c'l] + a(t)'T] + {3(t) ,
where c is a strictly positive constant and a(t) and {3(t) are two positive time
functions belonging to L2 (0, T) that is
or
(4.26)
but from Lemma 4.1.1 we have
lim ~(t) = O. (4.27)
t->oo
h = 211 xl 2 ,
" = 1,
together with the update laws
Wij = -~XiSj(X),
-~XiS~(X)Ui ifwil E W' or wilsgn(w71) = C
and ~XiS~(x)uisgn(w71) :S 0
o if wilsgn( W71) = c and
~XiS:(x)uisgn(w71) >0
-~XiS~(X)Ui ifwil E W' or wilsgn(w71) = w m
and ~XiS~(x)uisgn(w71) ;::: 0
o ifwilsgn(w71) = w m and
~xisi(x)uisgn(w71) <0
4.2 Robustness Analysis 61
Let us assume that the true plant is of known order n and can be modeled
exactly by the recurrent high-order neural network (4.1) plus a modeling
error term w(x, u).
x = -Ax + W*S(x) + W{S'(x)u +w(x, u). (4.29)
We follow the same procedure as in Section 4.1. Thus, we choose a function
h( x) of class C 2 from ~n to ~+ whose derivative with respect to time is now
· ahT
h = 8x [-Ax + W*S(x) + W{S'(x)u + w(x, u)] . (4.30)
~+K~=lI,
. ahT
= -h + ax [-Ax + WS(x) + W1S'(x)u] . (4.32)
Again set
~
~=(-h. ( 4.33)
Hence,
· ahT
(+ K( = Kh + ax [-Ax + WS(x) + W1S'(x)u] , (4.34)
4.2 Robustness Analysis 63
£. = ~e
2
+ ~tr{WTW}
2
+ ~tr{WiWd,
2
( 4.36)
k~ = O.
Assumption 4.2.2 tell us that at zero we have no modeling error in the con-
trolled vector fields since then Iw(O, u)1 ::::; O. Furthermore, observe that be-
cause of Assumption 4.2.2
w(x, u) == w(x).
Employing Assumption 4.2.2, (4.39) becomes
C : : ; _K,1~12 + k~I~llxI2, ( 4.43)
although it is true that
h=(-~.
but
((t) ::::; 0, "It 2: 0,
which implies
4.2 Robustness Analysis 65
1 lel
00
o
2dt :::;
r- 4
1
k' [£(0) - Cool <
I
00,
= o.
Thus,
66 4. Direct Adaptive Control
lim Jx(t)J
t .... oo
= O.
l
-~XsT(x)
and tr{~xsT(x)W} ~ 0
. T
W = -~xs (x) (4.49)
+tr{~xsT(x)W}( I+JI~II )2W if IIWII = Wm
and tr{~xST(x)W} <0
therefore, we have the lemma:
Lemma 4.2.2. If the initial weights are chosen such that W(O) E Wand
W* E W then we have W E W for all t ~ O.
Proof: The above lemma can be readily established by noting that whenever
IIWII = Wm then
!(IIWII2):sO, (4.50)
which implies that the weights W, are directed towards the inside of the ball
{W: IIWII :s w m }. It is true that
d(IIW(t)1I2) dtr{WTW}
dt dt
= tr{WWT}.
Employing the modified adaptive law (4.49), we obtain
WTW = -eWT xST (x)
+tr{exST(x)W} c+~~Wllr WTW;
therefore,
4.2 Robustness Analysis 67
:S tr{-eWTxST(X)}
+tr{exST(x)W} C+~~WII) 2 tr{WTW}
but
Thus,
tr{WTW}:S tr{-exST(x)WT }
(4.51)
( 4.52)
SInce
tr{W*T W } = tr{WTW*}.
Substituting (4.53) into (4.52) we obtain that the additional term is less than
(4.54)
Lemma 4.2.2 and Lemma 4.2.3 imply that the projection modification •
(4.49) guarantees boundedness of the weights, without affecting the rest of
the stability properties established in the absence of projection.
Now that we have established the validity of (4.48), we observe that if the
design constant Ii is chosen such that
Ii > 4(k~ + k~ku), (4.55)
then (4.47) is true and the results of Theorem 4.2.1 are still valid.
Remark 4.2.2. The previous analysis reveals that the accuracy of the
recurrent high order neural network model should be restricted only at the
origin. In other words, when we have complete model matching at zero, our
modified adaptive regulator can guarantee that the stability properties of
the closed-loop system do not alter. Furthermore, if we don't have modeling
error in the controlled vector fields, that is k~ = 0, there is no need to bound
the Ws uniformly through the use of the projection algorithm (4.49), thus
simplifying the implementation issue.
Remark 4.2.3. Inequalities (4.46) and (4.55) show how the design con-
stant Ii should be selected, in order to guarantee convergence of the state x
to zero, even in the presence of modeling error terms which are not uniformly
4.2 Robustness Analysis 69
bounded a priori, as Assumption 4.2.1 implies. The value of r., becomes large
as we allow for large model imperfections but r., is implemented as a gain in
the construction of ( and for practical reasons it cannot take arbitrarily large
values. this leads to a compromise between the value of r., and the maximum
allowable modeling error terms.
h == tlxl2,
Properties: WI E W', W,~,lxl,e,u E L oo , 1((t)l::; 1((0)1
I~I E L 2 , ((t)::; 0, limt_oo Ix(t)1 == 0,
Requirements: wt E W', WI (0) E W',
((0) ::; 0, Iw(x, u)1 ::; k~lxl + k~/lul,
II: > 4(k~ + k~/kl.l)'
thus making
Iw(x, u)1 == Iw(x)1 ,
and Assumption 4.2.3 equivalent to
kl = k~ + k~ ku , (4.57)
is a positive constant. Employing (4.56), (4.39) becomes
M> 2ko ,
K - 4kl
or equivalently
( 4.62)
4.2 Robustness Analysis 71
with /'C > 4k l . Inequality 4.62 together with (4.60) demonstrate that the
trajectories of ~(t) and x(t) are uniformly ultimately bounded with respect
to the arbitrarily small, (since /'C can be chosen sufficiently large), sets [; and
X shown below
and
• [; = { ~(t): 1~(t)1 :S
4k2
(,,-4t)2' /'C > 4kl > 0 }
• X = {x(t) : Ix(t)1 :S ,,~~t, /'C > 4kl > 0 }
Furthermore,
e= -/'C~ + xTWS(x) + XTWlS'(x)u - x T w(x). (4.63)
Hence, since the boundedness of Wand Wl is assured by the use of the pro-
jection algorithm and w( x) owing to (4.56) and Theorem 4.2.2, we conclude
e
that E Loo.
Remark 4.2.4. The previous analysis reveals that in the case where we
have a modeling error different from zero at Ixl = 0, our adaptive regulator
can guarantee at least uniform ultimate boundedness of all signals in the
closed loop. In particular, Theorem 4.2.2 shows that if ko is sufficiently small,
or if the design constant /'C is chosen such that /'C 2:: 4kll then Ix (t) I can be
arbitrarily close to zero and in the limit as /'C ---+ 00, actually becomes zero
but as we have stated in Remark 4.2.3, implementati0n issues constrain the
maximum allowable value of /'C.
Let us assume that the true plant is of order N 2:: n and therefore, is described
by
x = -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u + ¢(x, Xud) ,
Xud = B(x, Xud), (4.64)
72 4. Direct Adaptive Control
h=tlxI2,
Properties: e
WI E W', u, E Lao, 1((t)1 S; 1((0)1,
WE W, ~, x are u.u.b. with respect to
£ = { ~(t) : 1~(t)1 S; (K.::L" I\; > 4kI > O} ,
X = {x(t): Ix(t)1 S; K~~~l' I\; > 4kI > O} ,
Requirements: Wi"" E W', WI (0) E W',
WI E W, W (0) E W,
((0) ::; 0, Iw(x, u)1 S; ko + kdxl·
where Xud E iRP , is the state of the unmodeled dynamics and ¢(.), B(.) are
unknown vector fields of x and Xud. Obviously p = N - n.
Proceeding as in the previous subsection, we choose a function h( x) of
class C 2 from iRP to iR+ whose derivative with respect to time is
. ahT
h = ax [-Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u + ¢(x, Xud)] , (4.65)
Define
I::;. ah T ah T , . ah T
v = ax WS(x) + ax W1S (x)u - h - ax Ax,
and use the error filtering method
~+IC~=v,
. ah T
= -h + ax [-Ax + WS(x) + W1S'(x)uJ . (4.67)
Set
I::;.
~=(-h; (4.68)
therefore,
. ah T
(+ IC( = ICh + ax [-Ax + WS(x) + W1S'(x)uJ , (4.69)
h(x) = ~lxI2,
2
then (4.69) finally becomes
( = -IC( + ICh - xT Ax + xTWS(x) + XTW1S'(x)u. (4.70)
Now consider the Lyapunov-like function
1 2 1 -T- 1 -T-
C = 2'~ + V(Xud) + 2'tr{W W} + 2'tr{W1 Wd, (4.71)
lim /i(S)
8-+00
= 00, i = 1,2
such that for Xud E ~p
and
(4.75)
The update laws (4.23) and (4.49) guarantee the following properties
.~, Ixl, IXudl,( E Loo , I~I E L2
• limt-+oo ((t) = 0, limt-+oo Ix(t)1 = 0
• limt-+oo W(t) = 0, limt-+oo WI(t) = 0
provided that (4. 81) holds.
Proof: From (4.80) we have that £ E Loo hence, e, Xud E Loo. Furthermore, W
and WI are kept bounded owing to the projection algorithm. Since ~ = ( - h
and ( ~ 0, \:It 2: 0 we have (, h E Loo which in turn implies Ixl E Loo.
Moreover, since £ is a monotone decreasing function of time and bounded
from below, the limt-+oo £(t) = £00 exists so by integrating C from 0 to 00
we have
1 00
o
1
1~12dt ~
K -
k B[£(0) - £001
4 .p
< 00 ,
which implies that I~I E L 2 • We also have that
e= -K~ + xTWS(x) + XTWIS'(x)u - xT ¢J(x, Xud).
Hence, eE Loo. Moreover, since e E L2 nLoo and eE L oo , applying Bar-
balat's Lemma we conclude that limt-+oo~(t) = o. Now, using the bounded-
ness of u, S(x), S'(x), x and the convergence of ~(t) to zero, we obtain that
76 4. Direct Adaptive Control
Case 2: Now assume that the unknown vector field ¢(x, Xud) satisfies the
condition
(4.82)
In other words, ¢( x, Xud) is assumed to be bounded uniformly by a constant.
Thus, (4.76) becomes
.c ~ _"1~12 + Ol~"xl. (4.83)
Again, if we apply Lemma 4.2.1, then (4.44) holds, which in turns gives
and
Theorem 4.2.4. Consider the system (4.64) with the unmodeled dynamics
satisfying Assumption 4.2.4. Assume also that (4.82) holds for the unknown
vector field ¢(x, Xud). Then the contrallaw (4.41), (4.42) together with the
update laws (4.23) and (4.49), guarantees the uniform ultimate boundedness
with respect to the sets
{~(t) : 1~(t)1 ~ ~,
• t' = K > O}
• X = {x(t) : Ix(t)1 ~ 4f, K > O}
Furthermore,
~ = -K~ + xTWS(x) + XTWIS'(x)u - x T ¢(x, Xud). (4.88)
Hence, since the boundedness of Wand WI is assured by the use of the
projection algorithm and ¢( x, Xud) is bounded uniformly, we conclude that
~ E Loo.
The above analysis clearly indicates the importance of the appropriate se-
lection of the design constant K. If it is chosen wisely, our adaptive regulator
can assure convergence of x to zero, or at least uniform ultimate bounded-
ness of x and all other signals in the closed loop. Again, the more informa-
tion we have about the unknown system, the better the control results. The
above statement is mathematically translated as the constants kep, (), B will
be smaller, thus overcoming any implementation issues that may appear ow-
ing to large value in K. Hence, it is desirable, for the RHONN to match the
input-output behavior of the true-but-unknown-nonlinear-dynamical system
as accurately as possible.
Finally, observe that in the case where the unknown vector field ¢( x, Xud) is
uniformly bounded by a constant, any positive value of K, suffices to guaran-
tee uniform boundedness of x.
Violation of the Uniform Asymptotic Stability in the Large Con-
dition. In the present subsection we examine the effect of the unmodeled
dynamics on the stability properties of the closed-loop system when they vi-
olate the uniform asymptotic stability in the large condition, namely (4.75).
Thus we assume that instead of (4.75) we have
with K > 4kcpB > O. Inequality 4.93, together with (4.60) demonstrates that
the trajectories of e(t) and x(t) are uniformly ultimately bounded with re-
spect to the arbitrarily small, (since K can be chosen sufficiently large), sets
£ and X shown below
Furthermore,
e= -Ke + xTWS(x) + XTW1S'(x)u - xT tfJ(x, Xu d) . (4.94)
Hence and since the boundedness of Wand Wt is assured by the use of the
e
projection algorithm and tfJ(x, Xud) is bounded, we conclude that E Leo.
Case 2: Now, assuming that the unknown vector field tfJ(x, xud) satisfies
(4.82), (4.90) becomes
£ S -Klel 2 + Olellxl + plxl 2. (4.95)
After applying (4.60), (4.95) becomes
or equivalently
or equivalently if
and K > o. Inequality 4.97 together with (4.60), demonstrates that the tra-
jectories of e(t) and x(t) are uniformly ultimately bounded with respect to
the arbitrarily small, (since K can be chosen sufficiently large), sets [; and X
shown below
Furthermore,
e= -x:e + xTWS(x) + XTWIS'(x)u - xT¢(x, Xud). (4.98)
Hence and since the boundedness of Wand WI is assured by the use of
e
the projection algorithm and ¢(x, Xud) is bounded, we conclude that E Loo.
Theorems 4.2.5 and 4.2.6 demonstrate that even in the case where the uniform
asymptotic stability in the large condition is violated, our adaptive regulator
can still assure the uniform ultimate boundedness of the state x and of all
signals in the closed loop. Appropriate selection of the design constant x: leads
to better performance, provided it satisfies the implementation constraints.
Again, the accuracy of our model, (recurrent high order neural network), is
a performance index of our adaptive regulator.
4.2.3 Simulations
In this subsection we apply the direct adaptive neural controller to the regu-
lation the nonlinearly-operated DC motor described in Chapter 3. To achieve
such a goal, assuming that the DC motor dynamics are unknown, we first as-
sume that the following first-order RHONN model describes, within a degree
of accuracy, the unknown dynamics
i l = -alzl + wtls(zt) + wt2S(Z2) + wt3s'(Zt)UI,
i2 = -a2z2 + wil s(Z2) + Wi2S'(Z2)U2 , (4.99)
where Zl = faand Z2 = n. Observe that the second differential equation in
(4.99) depends only on Z2 and U2. The above choice is motivated by the fact
that the actual differential equation that describes the evolution of the mag-
netic flux qJ with time, depends only on qJ and Vi. In this way we employ all a
priori information, to develop a model that matches the dynamic behaviour
of the unknown plant as closely as possible. The parameters wII' WI2, wI3' w~l
and w~2 being unknown, estimates are provided by update laws of the form
(4.23) and (4.49) with
( = -x:(, (4.100)
e= (- 1 2 + Z22] .
"2[Zl (4.101)
Table 4.4. Direct adaptive regulation (n = m), model order problems under a
uniform stability in the large condition
and tr{~xST(x)W} ~ 0
Update Laws: vir = _~xST(x)
+tr{~xST(x)W}e+Jt~"?W if IIWI/ = Wm
h=~lxI2,
Casel:
WE w, 1((t)l::; 1((0)1,
~, x are u. u. b. with respect to
[={~(t):I~(t)I::;~, I\;>O} ,
X = {x(t) : Ix(t)1 ::; ~, I\; > O} ,
Requirements: wt E W', Wl(O) E W',
W* E W, W(O) E W,
((0) ::; 0, .
82 4. Direct Adaptive Control
Table 4.5. Direct adaptive regulation (n = m), model order problems. Violation
of the uniform stability in the large condition
Filter: ,=
~=(-h,
-t>(,
~XiS:(x)uisgn(wtd <0
h=~lxI2,
Casel:
Properties: e,
W l E W', u, IXudl E Loo,
W E W, 1((t)l::; 1((0)1,
~, x are u.u.b. with respect to
fa 0.3
n 0.3
~ 0.98
Wll = W12 = W21 0.0
W13 = W22 1.0
give the evolution of the angular velocity and armature current respectively,
when the design constant K is chosen to be K = 80. It can be seen, both {l
and fa converge to zero very fast.
In this section the theory previously developed is extended to cover the more
general case where the modeling error term has polynomial growth of first
order with unknown growth magnitude. We shall prove that despite the above
fact, the proposed adaptive regulator still retains its robustness properties,
provided that certain modifications are made in the control and update laws.
Let us assume that the true plant is of known order n and can be modeled
exactly by a recurrent high order neural network plus a modeling error term
w(x, u).
x = -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u + w(x, u), (4.104)
with the modeling error term satisfying the following assumption:
Assumption 4.3.1. The modeling error term satisfies the relation
Iw(x, u)1 ~ ko + kl (Ixl + luI) ,
where ki • i = 0,1 are unknown, except for ko, positive constants.
Observe that in this way the modeling error is not restricted to be a priori
bounded. The above together with the fact that the actual parameter kl is
84 4. Direct Adaptive Control
simulation results
~ 35.0 =J
w
28.0
~ 21 .0
v
0
Q)
> 14.0
'-
0
:l
0'
C
« 7.0
0.0
- 7 .0 -t--.--r-;---r---r---.--.-,---,--r---.---.---.--r--:I---r--r---:--..,...-l
0.0 0.05 0.1 0. 15 0.2
t ime (in seconds)
0.075
.....,
c:
(l)
t
:J
0.0
U
(l)
'-
.....,
:J
E-0.075
«'-
-0.15
1 if~>O
sgn(~) = { -1 otherwise
Observe that the signal 1/ cannot be measured since h is unknown. Thus we
use the following filtered version of 1/.
~+K~=I/,
. oh T
= -h + ax [-Ax + WS(x) + W1S'(x)u]
oh T •
- ax sgn(e)klx, (4.107)
. K(
(+ oh T
= Kh + ax [ • ]
-Ax + WS(x) + W1S'(x)u - sgn(e)klx ,(4.109)
86 4. Direct Adaptive Control
where
W=W-W*,
WI = WI - wt,
kl = kl - kl .
If we take the derivative of (4.111) with respect to time we obtain
(4.113)
which together with (4.106) gives
C = -Ke + e [-xTW*S(x) - xTWrS'(x)u + xTWS(x)]
+e [xTW1S'(x)u - xTw(x, u)]- e sgn(Ok I lxl 2 + tr{WTW}
. T - -
Wd + kIkl ,
A
+tr{Wl
or equivalently
C = -Ke + exTWS(x) + exTWIS'(x)u - xTw(x, u) -lelkllxl2
'T- 'T--
+tr{W W} + tr{Wl Wd + klkl .
A
Hence, if we choose
tr{WTW} = -exTWS(x), (4.114)
'T- T-
tr{WI Wd = -ex WIS'(x)u, (4.115)
C becomes
(4.116)
4.3 Modeling Errors with Unknown Coefficients 87
It can easily be verified that (4.114) and (4.115) can he written in terms of
elements as
Wij = -eXiSj(X), (4.117)
Wil = -exisHx)Ui, (4.118)
= 1,2, ... , n and in matrix form as
for all i, j
. T
W = -exS (x), (4.119)
WI = -ex'S'(x)U, (4.120)
where
x' = diag[xI, X2,· .. , xn] ,
U = diag[uI, U2, ... , un].
To continue, observe that
lui :S flxl·
Proof" We have that
but since WI E W' owing to the use of the projection modification and S' (x)
is bounded by definition, we have that
Furthermore,
I[WS(x) + ~KX - I
Ax - sgn(e)k1x] :S IWS(x)1 + ~rlxl
+IIAlllxl + k1lxl· (4.121)
Since W, ki are bounded owing to use of the projection modification and
IS(x)1 :S klxl by definition, finally, we obtain that
88 4. Direct Adaptive Control
• «t) ~ 0 Vt ~ 0
• limt ...... oo«t) = 0 exponentially fast
provided that «0) < 0, where «0) the initial value of «t).
4.3 Modeling Errors with Unknown Coefficients 89
Proof" Observe that if we use the control law (4.126) and (4.127), (4.110)
becomes
(( i) ~ ~ (i) , Vi ~ 0 (4.128)
but
(( i) ::; 0 , Vi ~ 0,
which implies that
1((i)1 ::; 1~(i)1 , Vi ~ O. (4.129)
Furthermore,
Ih(x)1 ::; I((i) - ~(i)l,
::; l((i)1 + 1~(i)l,
::; 21~(i)l;
therefore,
(4.130)
or
(4.131)
Remark 4.3.1. Observe that, although the proposed control law (4.126),
(4.127) is discontinuous at first sight since it includes the function sgn(~),
from Lemma 4.3.2 and (4.128) we conclude that ~(t) ::; 0 , "It ~ 0; there-
fore, sgn(~) does not switch from -1 to +1 as time passes and admits the
90 4. Direct Adaptive Control
or equivalently when
with I\: > O. The above analysis, together with (4.131), demonstrates that the
trajectories of ~(t) and x(t) are uniformly ultimately bounded with respect
to the arbitrarily small, (since r can be chosen sufficiently large), sets £, X
shown below.
4k2}
£ = { ~(t): 1~(t)l:S 1\:20 ,
and
X = { x(t): 4ko}
Ix(t)1 :S 7" .
Thus we have the following theorem.
Theorem 4.3.1. Consider the system
x = -Ax + w*S(x) + wts'(x)u + w(x, u),
( = -r.(,
u = -[W1S'(X)t1[WS(x) + v],
1
= ZI\:X - Ax - sgn(Ok1x,
A
~=(-h,
1 2
h = Zlxl ,
I\: > 0,
together with the update laws
kl = 1~lIxI2,
Wij = -~XiSj(X),
4.3 Modeling Errors with Unknown Coefficients 91
!
In particular, the standard update laws (4.119) and (4.124) are modified to
_~xST(x) if WE W or IIWII = Wm
and tr{~xsT(x)W} ~ 0
W= -~xsT(x) (4.133)
+tr{~xsT(x)W}(1+JI:VII)2W if IIWII = Wm
and tr{~xsT(x)W} < 0
and
k {O kl
if = ku (4.134)
1 = 1~llxl2 otherwise
so we have the following lemmas the proof of which can be found in Section
4.2 and are thus omitted here.
Lemma 4.3.3. If the initial weights are chosen such that IIW(O)II :::; w m ,
then we have IIWII :::; Wm for all t ~ 0, provided that IIW*II :::; wm .
Lemma 4-3.4. Based on the adaptive law (4.133), the additional terms
introduced in the expression for.c, can only make .c
more negative, provided
that W(O), W* E W.
92 4. Direct Adaptive Control
Lemmas 4.3.3 and 4.3.4 imply that the projection modification (4.133) guar-
antee boundedness of the weights, without affecting the rest of the stability
properties established in the absence of projection. Similarly, we can prove
the following lemma:
Lemma 4.3.5. The update law (4.124) with the projection modification
(4.134) can only make 1:. more negative and, in addition, guarantee that kl E
K, Vt 2: 0, provided that k1(0), kl E K.
Proof: Observe that the update law (4.134) has the same form as the one
without the projection except for the additional term
Ik = {_I~llxI2 if kl = ku
o otherwise
Thus, £ is augmented by
Ik = -1~llxI2kl'
= _1~llxI2 (kl - kl)
Now, since the above holds when kl = ku and by assumption we have that
kl < ku, we finally obtain that kl - kl > o. Hence Ik :S 0 so 1:. is augmented
by a negative term. .
Furthermore, from (4.134) we have that whenever kl = ku, then kl becomes
zero, thus establishing ku as the upper bound of k1(t), which concludes the
proof of Lemma 4.3.4.
A •
•
Theorem 4.3.1 reveals the role that parameters k o, K play in the perfor-
mance of the closed loop system. High values of ko, which is the modeling
error at Ixl = 0, lead to large deviations from the origin. The above draw-
back, which is the cause of imperfect modeling of the original system by the
4.3 Modeling Errors with Unknown Coefficients 93
kl = 1~lIxI2,
Wij = -~XiSj(X),
94 4. Direct Adaptive Control
o
1 00
1~12dt
"-
1
= -[.c(0) -
.cool < 00,
=0
Thus,
lim Ix(t)1
t-+oo
=0
Remark 4.3.3. The previous analysis reveals that the accuracy of the
recurrent neural network model should be restricted only at the origin. If we
have perfect model matching at Ixl = 0 there is no need uniformly to bound
both the W's and kl through the use of the projection algorithms (4.133)
and (4.134) respectively, thus simplifying the implementation issue.
For comparison purposes, the same DC motor model employed for simulation
in the previous sections, is also used herein, to verify the theory developed.
The RHONN model is also the same. The control laws are however,
Ul = - Wln+lS'(ZI)
1 [WllS(Zt} + W12 S(Z2) + -21 I\: Zl]
1 [-0.2z 1 - klSgn(~)Zl] ,
Wln+lS'(ZI)
U2 = - 1
W2n+l S'(Z2)
[W12 S(Z2) + -21 rZ2 - 0.2Z2 - klSgn(~)Z2]
The initial values of all variables can be seen in Table 4.8. Figures 4.3
and 4.4 give the evolution of the angular velocity and armature current
respectively, when the design constant I\: is chosen to be I\: = 10. It can be
seen that as desired, both [2 and Ia converge to zero very fast (in less than
one second). The control action needed to achieve such a goal is presented
in Figures 4.5 and 4.6 again for I\: = 10. The control action can become
smoother by choosing smaller values of the design constant 1\:.
Comparing the simulations with the ones obtained for the known coef-
ficients case, we observe that similar results are provided with significantly
smaller values of the design gain 1\:. In this way we may prevent the appear-
ance of the high-gain instability mechanism [46].
Table 4.7. Direct adaptive regulation (n = m). Modeling errors with unknown
coefficients
kl =
if 1.1 = k"
1~llxl2 otherwise
Filter: (=-11:(,11:>0,
~=(-h,
h=tl x I 2 ,
fa 0.07
[} 0.3
<P 0.90
Wll = W12 = W2l 0.0
W13 = W22 2.5
0. 3r-------~------~------~------~------~------~
0.25
0.2
...
'C
0.
~ 0.15
o
~
0.1
0.05
°O~----~~~~~~----~------~------~-------J
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Time in seconds
0.05
-0.05
complete model matching. Under this assumption the unknown system can
be written as
x = -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u. (4.137)
Further, assume that we want the unknown system states to follow the states
of a stable linear model 2
(4.138)
From (4.137) and (4.138) we obtain the error equation
e= -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u + Amxm - Bmum , (4.139)
where we have defined
6-
e = x - xm .
O.4,-----..-----....----~---_.__---__r_---__,
0.2~
o --------------------------------------~
.0.2
.0.6
.0.8
·1
where
A = Am -A.
Let us take a function h( e) from ~n to ~+ of class C 2 , whose derivative with
respect to time is
h= ~:T [-Ae+W*S(x)+wts'(x)u+Axm-Bmum].
The above equation which is linear with respect to W* and wt can be written
. ahT ahT _ ahT ahT
h + ae Ae - ae AXm + ae Bmum = ae W*S(x)
+ ah T
ae WI
*S'()
xu. (4.141)
Define
I:;. ah ah, . ah ah T _ ah T
l/ = ax WS(x) + ax WIS (x)u - h - ax Ax + ae AXm - ae Bmum ,
where Wand WI are estimates of W* and wt
respectively. This signal
cannot be measured since h is unknown. To circumvent this problem, we use
100 4. Direct Adaptive Control
O~------~~=---~------~------r-------r-----~
-1
_1.21.....------.l....-------"---------L....------...JL....---__---1
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Time in seconds
oh T [ _ ]
+ oe AXm - Bm U m , (4.142)
1
h(e) = "2 1e12 ,
(4.144) becomes
(+ x:( = x:h - eT Ae + eTWS(x) + eTWIS'(x)u
T- T
+e AX m - e Bm U m . (4.145)
If we consider the Lyapunov-like function
1 2 1 -T- 1 -T-
C = 2"~ + 2"tr{W W} + 2"tr{WI Wt}, (4.146)
where
W=W-W*,
WI = W 1 - wt,
and use the same procedure as in Section 4.1, we finally derive the following
results:
Lemma 4-4.1. Consider the system
x= -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u,
:em = -Amxm + Bmum ,
( = -x:( + x:h - eT Ae + eTWS(x) + eTW1S'(x)u
T- T
+e Axm-e Bmu m ,
~=(-h,
h=~leI2,
e= X - xm ,
~=(-h,
1 2
h= 2iel ,
II: = 1,
together with the update laws
'!Vij = -~eiSj(x),
-~eisHx)ui ifwil E W' or wilsgn(w71) = ~
and ~eis:(x)uisgn(w71) ::; 0
o if wilsgn( w71) = ~ and
~eis~(x)uisgn(w71) > 0
-~eis:(x)Ui ifwl E W' or wilsgn(w71) = w m
and ~eis:(x)uisgn(w71) ;::: 0
o if Wil sgn( w71) = w m and
~eis:(x)uisgn(w71) < 0
Further, assume that we want the unknown system states to follow the states
of the model
(4.148)
as stated in the previous subsection. From (4.147) and (4.148) we obtain the
error equation
e = -Ax + w*S(x) + wts'(x)u + Amxm - Bmum + w(x, u), (4.149)
where we have defined
A
e = x - xm .
where
A = Am -A.
Let us take a function h( e) from iR n to iR+ of class C 2 , whose derivative with
respect to time is
. oh T [ _ ]
h = oe -Ae + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u + w(x, u) + AXm - Bmum .
The above equation which is linear with respect to W* and wt can be written
. oh T oh T oh T _ oh T
h + oe Ae - oe w(x, u) = oe AXm - oe Bmum
+ oh T W* Sex)
oe
104 4. Direct Adaptive Control
(4.151)
Define
A oh oh, . oh oh T _ oh T
v= OXWS(X) + OX W1S (x)u-h- OXAx+ oe Axm - oe Bmum.
To overcome the problem of unknown h, we use the following filtered version
of v.
e+l\:e=v,
oh T oh T . oh T
= oe WS(x) + oe W1S'(x)u - h - oe Ae
oh T _ oh T
+ oe AX m - oe Bm U m ,
. oh T
= -h + oe [-Ae + WS(x) + W1S'(x)u]
oh T [ _ ]
+ oe AXm - Bm U m , (4.152)
h(e) = ~leI2.
Hence, (4.154) becomes
(+ 1\:( = I\:h - eT Ae + eTWS(x) + eT W 1S'(x)u
T - T
+e AX m - e Bm U m . (4.155)
To continue, consider the Lyapunov-like function
1 2 1 -T- 1 -T-
£, = 2e + 2 tr {W W} + 2tr{W1 Wd, (4.156)
where
W=W-W*,
W1- Wi'.
W1 =
If we take the derivative of (4.156) with respect to time we obtain
4.4 Tracking Problems 105
Proof: Observe that if we use the control law (4.164) and (4.165), (4.155)
becomes
( = - x;( , Vt 2: 0 ,
which is a homogeneous differential equation with solution
Hence, if ((0), which represents the initial value of ((t), is chosen negative,
we obtain
((t) ::; 0, Vt 2: 0,
Moreover, ((t) converges to zero exponentially fast.
((t) 2: ~(t)
but
((t) ::; 0, Vt 2: 0,
which implies
1((t)1 ::; 1~(t)1 , Vt 2: 0, ( 4.167)
however,
Furthermore,
Ixi = Ie - xml,
::; lei + IXml ,
::; lei + DXm , ( 4.169)
since we assume that Xm is uniformly bounded by the constant 15xm • Employ-
ing (4.166), (4.168) and (4.169), (4.163) becomes
4.4 Tracking Problems 107
and
4 (k + k' 15 + k" k ) 2
,I\: > 4 (k' + k"k,,) .
}
A = { e(t): le(t)1 :S 0 1 Xm _1 "
(I\: _ 4k~ _ 4k~ k,,) 2 1 1
1
v = -K,e - Ae,
2
h= (-C
h=~leI2,
2
with the modeling error term satisfying Assumption 4.4.1. Then the update
laws
Wij = -eeiSj(x),
-eeis~(x)Uiif Wil E WI or wilsgn(w71) = €
and eeis:(x)Uisgn(w71) ~ 0
o if wilsgn( W71) = € and
eeis:(x)Uisgn(w71) > 0
-ee;sHx)ui if W 1 E WI or wil sgn(w71) = wm
and eeis:(x)Uisgn(w71) 2: 0
o if wilsgn( w71) = wm and
eeis:(x)Uisgn(w71) < 0
for all i,j = 1,2, ... , n guarantee the uniform ultimate boundedness with
respect to the sets
4 ko+k~ bXm +k~'k"
> 4 (kl + kl k,,)
I"- }
• [= { e(t): le(t)1 ~ "-4k;-4k;'k" ' K,
!
but in order to guarantee the boundedness of W(t) and the validity of (4.166),
we modify the standard update law (4.147) to
-eeST(x) ifW E W or IIWII = Wm
and tr{eeST(x)W} 2: 0
W= -eeST(x) (4.172)
+tr{eeST(x)W}( l+JI~" )2W if IIWII = Wm
and tr{eeST(x)W} <0
As stated in previous sections, the projection modification (4.172) guarantees
the boundedness of the weights W without affecting the rest of the stability
properties established in the absence of projection.
So far we have dealt with affine nonlinear systems the number of control
in pu ts (m) to which equals the number of measurable states (n). In this and
in all subsequent sections of this chapter we shall consider the more general
case of m f:. n.
4.5 Extension to General Affine Systems 109
h = ~lel2 ,
Properties: WI E W', u,e,E L oo ,
WE W, 1((t)1 ::; 1((0)1.
~, e are u.u.b. with respect to
f = {e(t): le(t)l::; 4 ko+k;~"~~/kp'"
K-4k -4k k"
, I\; > 4 (k~ + k~/k,,)} ,
1 1
A = {I:(t):
,
II:(t)1 < 4(ko+k;6,,~+k;'k,,)2
, - (K-4k~ -4k~/ku)2 ,
I\; > 4 (k'
1
+ kllk
1
u )}
,
=
for alII, 1,2, ... , Lo and k =
1,2, ... , m, where I,k are collections of mLo
not-ordered subsets of {1,2, ... ,n} and dj(l,k) are non-negative integers.
In all above relationships, s( x j) is a smooth, monotone increasing function,
which is usually represented by sigmoidals of the form
J1.
. + A,
s(Xj) = 1 + e- Iox,
for all j = 1,2, ... , n, with the parameters j.L, 10 to represent the bound and
slope of sigmoid's curvature and A a bias constant.
Choose a function h(x, u, W) of class C 2 from ~n x ~m X ~nxL to ~+
whose derivative with respect to time is
. 8h T ,
h = 8x [-Ax + W*S(x) + wts (x)u + wo(x, u)]
8h T 8h T .
+8u it+ 8W W. (4.176)
The above equation which is linear with respect to W* and W[ can also be
written
. 8h T 8h T 8h T . 8h T *,
h + 8x Ax - 8x wo(x, u) = 8x W*S(x) + 8x WI S (x)u
8h T 8h T .
+ 8u it + 8W W. (4.177)
Define
l!. 8h T 8h T . 8h T
v= - WS(x) + - WIS'(x)u - h - - Ax
8x 8x 8x
8h T 8h T . T
+ 8u it + 8W W - Intr{A W},
4.5 Extension to General Affine Systems 111
uT = _~KuT - XTWIS'(x),
1
2"KI = aI,
-tKW - xsT(x) if WE W or IIWII = Wm
W - { and tr{(tKW + xsT(x))WT } ~ 0
- -tKW - xsT(x) + A if IIWII = Wm
and tr{(tKW + xsT(x))WT } < 0
( 4.182)
where I is the identity matrix, aI =
A with a > 0, A = tr{(tKW +
xsT (x)) WT}( I+JI~II)2 Wand W is the convex set
112 4. Direct Adaptive Control
W = {W(t) : IIW(t)II ~ Wm } .
Furthermore, if we define In = =
1 ifllWil Wm and tr{(~II:W +xsr (x))WT} <
o and In =
0 if WE Wor IIWII =
Wm and tr{(!II:W + xsr(x))WT} ~ 0,
then ( becomes
(= -11:(;
therefore, we have the following lemma:
Lemma .4-5.1. The contra I law
Thus and since II: > 0, if we choose ((0) < 0 we have ((t) ~ 0 'Vt ~ 0
and moreover the convergence of ((t) to zero exponentially fast with rate of
convergence 11:.
To prove the second part, we only need to show that -it(IIW(t)11)2 ~ 0
whenever IIW(t)II = W m . The proof of such an argument, follows the lines of
the proof of 4.2.2 and thus it is omitted.
To continue, consider the Lyapunov-like function
(4.184)
4.5 Extension to General Affine Systems 113
where
WI = W1 - W{.
Taking the derivative of £, with respect to time, (4.184) becomes
. . . T -
£, = ~~ + tr{WI Wd,
or after using (4.178)
Hence,
114 4. Direct Adaptive Control
Observe that Assumption 4.5.1 underlines that the modeling error term
wo( x, u) satisfies a Lipschitz condition, a property necessary to guarantee
the existence and uniqueness of solutions of (4.173). The above is needed
since Theorem 2.1.1 implies that such a property holds for the actual sys-
tem (4.173). Moreover, by choosing larger values of kl, k2 we can enlarge
the admissible modeling errors but it is not expected for k 1 , k2 to admit too
large values, since in Theorem 2.1.1, the approximation error c: can be cho-
sen arbitrarily small. Moreover, notice that in the nonlinear adaptive control
literature, the problem of designing adaptive controllers with certain robust-
ness properties with respect to modeling errors and/or external disturbances,
is still in its infancy and only results that deal with a special class of sys-
tems, namely single-in put-single-output systems, transformable via a global
state-space diffeomorfism, into a nonlinear system the nonlinearities of which
depend only on the output, have appeared and these only recently [65]. In the
above paper, the authors require the uncertainties to be bounded by known
functions of the output, which are not necessarily Lipschitz. In the nonlinear
control literature, the problem of developing controllers for uncertain sys-
tems, has a history of over a decade starting from [13] in which results were
obtained under the very restrictive condition that only input-matched uncer-
tainties are present. See also the works of Barmish and Leitmann [5], that
allow small mismatched uncertainties, and Chen [11] which is along the lines
of [13] but in an adaptive environment. An attempt to relax the very hard
matching assumptions, was provided in [25] where n-dimensional single-input
systems in the form of a perturbed chain of integrators were considered. The
uncertainties 'lj;i (x) were assumed to be bounded by known functions Pi as
follows
In other words, they allow each bounding function to depend only on the first
i states, also known as the strict feedback condition, described in [53]. From
the above discussion it is apparent that generalizing the robustness results to
tolerate more general classes of modeling errors/uncertainties is still an open
problem.
Remark 4.5.1. It is important to note that if we assume that the mod-
eling error term wo( x, u) satisfies
wo(x, u) = wox(x) + wou(x)u,
and
Iwox(x)1 ::; kl + k;lxl,
Iwou(x)1 ::; k~ ,
for some known positive constants k 1 , k~, k~, then
Iwo(x, u)1 ::; Iwox(x)1 + Iwou(x)l,
::; kl + k~ Ixl + k~lul ,
116 4. Direct Adaptive Control
and the results that follow also hold since Lemma 4.5.3 is valid, but now with
k2 = k~ + k~.
Moreover, we have
IIWI! ::; Wm , (4.189)
IS(x)1 ::; ko, ( 4.190)
where ko, wm are known positive constants. Inequality 4.190 holds by the
definition of S(x). On the other hand (4.189) is valid owing to the use of the
projection algorithm (4.182). Employing (4.189),(4.190).c becomes
.c ::; _1\:1~12 + 1~llxlwmko - ~xT wo(x, u).
From Assumption 4.5.1 and Lemma 4.5.3, .c becomes
.c ::; _1\:1~12 + 2kowml~IM + 1~llxllwo(x, u)l,
::; _1\:1~12 + 2kowml~IM + 2kll~IM + 4k21~12,
::; -[(I\: - 4k 2 )M - 2kl - 2kowmll~IM,
::; 0 , (4.191)
provided that
M> 2(kl + kowm ) ,
I\: - 4k2
and
I\: > 4k2 > 0,
or
and
I\: > 4k2 > O.
The above together with Lemma 4.5.3 demonstrates that the trajectories of
~(t) and x(t) are uniformly ultimately bounded with respect to the arbitrarily
small (since I\: can be chosen sufficiently large) sets E and X shown bellow
Theorem 4.5.1. Consider the system (4.173) with the modeling error
term satisfying Assumption 4.5.1. Then the dynamic compensator
u·T = --r.:u
1 T - xTW1 S'( x,
)
2
is a bounded-input-bounded-output ordinary differential equation. Hence,
since the term XTWIS'(x) is bounded, we conclude that u E Loo. Moreover,
~ = -r.:e + xTWS(x) + XTWIS'(x)u - xT wo(x, u) - Intr{A?W}
but W, WI are bounded owing to (4.182) and (4.192) respectively, S(x), S'(x)
are bounded by definition, e,x are bounded owing to Theorem 4.5.1 and
wo(x, u) is also bounded owing to Assumption 4.5.1 and Theorem 4.5.1. Thus,
~ is a function of bounded signals. Hence, ~ E Loo. Thus, we have the lemma:
Lemma 4.5.5. The closed loop system mentioned in Theorem 4.5.1 with
the modified update law (4.192) further guarantees
• 1! E Loo
• eE Loo
Remark 4.5.2. To ensure robustness of the adaptive regulation scheme
with respect to modeling errors, we have considered a projection algorithm
which prevents the weight estimates from drifting to infinity. The stability of
the proposed control scheme in the presence of modeling errors can also be
achieved by other modifications to the standard update laws, such as fixed,
or switching O"-modification [43],[44], E-modification [72] and the dead-zone
[101]. Use of the particular modification is due to its smoothness property
and to the fact that when external disturbances are affecting the system
dynamics, an a priori known bound of IIWIII is needed. The presence of
external disturbances and the problems that they create, is the theme of the
next subsection.
Remark 4.5.3. The dynamic compensator described in (4.183) can be
viewed as a special-purpose RHONN with W = 0, input the state of the true
plant and output the control action. Hence, RHONNs can be used not only
to model the unknown plant, but also to realize dynamic compensators.
4.5 Extension to General Affine Systems 119
Remark 4.5.4. Theorem 4.5.1 shows how the design constant I'C should be
selected, in order to guarantee the uniform utimate boundedness of the state
x, even in the presence of modeling error terms which are not uniformly
bounded a priori, as Assumption 4.5.1 implies. Generally, the value of I'C
becomes large as we allow for large model imperfections but I'C is implemented
as a gain in the construction of ( and for practical reasons it cannot take
arbitrarily large values, leading to a compromise between the value of I'C and
the maximum allowable modeling error. Observe though, that owing to the
approximation Theorem 2.1.1 the values of kl and k2 can be confined to be
small enough.
In what follows we shall examine two special cases of the one presented
above, which are of particular interest, since we can use them further to prove
the convergence of the state to zero.
The No Modeling Error at Zero Case. The analysis herein is dominated
by the following assumption.
Assumption 4.5.2. The modeling error term wo(x, u) satisfies
Iwo(x, u)1 ::; k2lxl·
Observe that Assumption 4.5.2, which is actually Assumption 4.5.1 with kl =
0, dictates that both the unknown system and the RHONN model should
have the same origin. Employing Assumption 4.5.2 and following the same
analysis as we did in the previous section, C becomes:
C::; -I'CleI 2+ 4kowmlel2 + 4k 21e1 2,
::; - [(I'C - 4k2 - 4koWmh/iZl] lel 2,
::; 0 , (4.193)
provided that the design constant I'C is chosen such that
I'C > 4(k2 + kowm) ,
and the following inequality hold:
IS(x)1 ::; kolxl· (4.194)
Hence, we can prove the following theorem:
Theorem 4.5.2. Consider the system:
x = -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)u + wo(x, u),
iJ7 = _~I'CUT - xTW1S'(x) ,
2
(= -I'C(,
h =(-C
1
h =2(lx12 + lul 2+ tr{WTW}) ,
A= tr{(~I'CW + xST(x))WT}(l + IIWII)2W,
2 Wm
120 4. Direct Adaptive Control
1
00
o
1~12dt :::; (k
'" - 4
1
k
2
) [£(0) - £00] < 00,
+ OWm
= o.
Thus,
lim Ix(t)1 = 0,
t-oo
lim lu(t)1 = 0,
t-oo
lim IIW(t)1I = O.
t-+oo
= O.
Thus,
lim Ix(t)1
t->oo
= 0,
lim lu(t)1 = 0,
t->oo
lim
t->oo
IIW(t)11 = O.
•
4.5.2 Disturbance Effects
Let us assume that the true plant is of known order n and is described by
x= -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)(u + udm(t) + da(t)) + wo(x, u) .(4.196)
In other words, the state equations are subject to external disturbances,
da(t), dm(t), which appear in both an additive and a multiplicative way and
are not contained in the original recurrent neural network model, of the actual
plant.
Let us further assume that the disturbances, da(t), dm(t), are unknown
and cannot be measured and the only information about them is that they
are piecewise continuous functions of time and satisfy
Ida(t)1 ::; 8a , (4.197)
Idm(t)1 ::; 8m , (4.198)
for all t ;:::: 0 and some positive constants 8a , 8m . Obviously, from the above
presentation d a and dm are the additive and the multiplicative plant pertur-
bation respectively.
Similar to the previous subsection, we choose a function h(x, u, W) of
class C 2 from ~n x ~m X ~nxL to ~+ whose derivative with respect to time
IS
. 8h T
h = 8x [-Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)(u + udm(t) + da(t)) + wo(x, u)]
8h T 8h T .
+ 8u it + 8W W. (4.199)
124 4. Direct Adaptive Control
Again set
f:>
~=(-h. (4.202)
Hence,
. oh T oh T
(+ K( = Kh + ax [-Ax + WS(x) + W1S'(x)u] + au u
oh T . T
+ow W-Intr{A W}, (4.203)
and
or
II 4(SIWOa + kl + kowm)Z
~ > [1\:-4(SI WOm+ kZ)]2 ,
and
I\: > 4( SI WO m + kz) > 0 ,
The above, together with Lemma 4.5.3, demonstrate that the trajectories of
and x(t) are uniformly ultimately bounded with respect to the arbitrarily
~(t)
small (since I\: can be chosen sufficiently large) sets 3 and X shown bellow
and
X = {x(t) : Ix(t)1 :s; 4(SIWOa + ~1 + kow m )} ,
I\: - 4(SI wO m + kz)
since if we start, for example, from inside 3, then ~(t) is bounded by
4 .,w6 a +k,+k O W m 2
I<-4(.,w6 m +k 2 )j2 owmg
• d fi ill't'lOn 0f' :-: . 0 t h erwIse,
t 0 the e . .c' :S;,
0 wh'IC h
forces the solution ~(t) towards the boundary of 3. Hence, we have the the-
orem:
Theorem 4.5.4. Consider the closed-loop system with the modeling error
term, the additive and the multiplicative disturbances satisfying Assumption
4.5.1, (4.197) and (4.198) respectively
x = -Ax + W*S(x) + wr- S'(x)(u + udm(t) + da(t)) + wo(x, u),
it? = _~I\:UT - xTWl S'(x) ,
2
(= -1\:(,
h =(-C
1
h= Z(lx lZ + lul z+ tr{WTW}) ,
A = tr{( ~I\:W + xST(x))WT}( 1 + IIWII )zW,
2 Wm
p = tr{~x(S'(x)ufw!}( 1 + IIWl l1 )ZWI ,
W
::; 0 , (4.211)
128 4. Direct Adaptive Control
provided that x; > 4( k2 + 8m Sl ill) and (4.194) holds. Hence, we can prove the
following theorem that summarizes the stability properties of our adaptive
regulator, in this special case.
Theorem 4.5.5. Consider the closed loop system with the modeling error
term, and the multiplicative disturbances satisfying Assumption 4.5.2 and
(4.198) respectively
x = -Ax + W*S(x) + wts'(x)(u + udm(t)) + wo(x, u),
u. T I T +xTW1cJC"( x ) ,
=-"2X;U
( = -x;(,
h =(-C
h = ~(JxJ2 + JuJ2 + IIWI12),
A = tr{(~x;W + xST(x))WT}(l + IIWII)2W,
2 Wm
p = tr{~x(S'(x)u)TWr}( 1 + IIW111)2W1.
W
•
guarantee the following properties:
w,
~,e, lxi, lui, W1, ( E L oo , I~I E L2
• limt--+oo ~(t) = 0, limt--+oo u(t) = 0
=
• limt ..... oo IIW(t)11 0, limhoo W1(t) =
0
• limt ..... oo Ix(t)1 = 0
provided that x; > 4(k2 + 8m s 1 ill) and (4.194) holds.
The proof of this theorem is similar to the proof of Theorem 4.5.2 so it is
omitted here.
Theorem 4.5.4 shows that the adaptive regulator system with disturbances
acting upon the plant, operates in a uniformly stable fashion, if the design
constant x; is selected appropriately. Practically, when we are given an upper
bound for the disturbances, one can always find a x; to guarantee the stability
of the closed loop system. Especially in the case where we have complete
model matching at zero and only multiplicative noise is affecting the actual
4.5 Extension to General Affine Systems 129
plant, the stability properties established in the ideal case are retained, as
Theorem 4.5.5 clearly demonstrates. Generally, the presence of disturbances
leads to larger values of the design constant K, which, on the other hand, is
restricted owing to hardware limitations. Hence, both the disturbances and
modeling error should be kept within a maximum admissible tolerance, thus
preventing K from exceeding a prespecified limit.
The DC motor model presented in Chapter 3 is also used to test the per-
formance of the neuroadaptive control algorithm developed to cover the case
were the number of control inputs is not equal to the number of measurable
states (n =F m).
The problem is to find a state feedback to force the angular velocity n
and the armature current la, to go to zero, while the magnetic flux <P, varies.
To achieve such a goal, assuming that the motor dynamics are unknown, we
first assume that the following first-order RHONN model describes, within a
degree of accuracy, the unknown dynamics.
il = -alzl + wtlS(Zt) + wt2s(Z2) + [wlltls~l(Z)Ul + [Wdt2s~2(Z)U2'
i2 = -a2z2 + W~lS(Zt) + W~2S(Z2) + [wll~lS'(Z)Ul + [wll~2S'(Z)U2'
(4.212)
where Zl = la and Z2 = n. Estimates are provided by update laws of the
form (4.182) and (4.192) with
( = -K( , (4.213)
2 2
~ = (- ~[Z~ + Z~ + U~ + U~ + L L wl;-J, (4.214)
2 i=lj=l
because the parameters wtl' wt2' w~l' W~2 and [wlltl' [WIltz, [wll~l' [wll52 are
unknown. The dynamic feedback is taken to be
'11 1 = -KUl - Zl[[WllllS~l(Z) + [WllnS~2(Z)l
-Z2[[WllllS~1(Z) + [wll21S~2(Z)l, (4.215)
'11 2 = - KU 2 - Zl[[Wlh2S~1(Z) + [wlhzS~2(z)l
-Z2[[Wlh2S~1(Z) + [wlh2S~2(Z)l, (4.216)
We simulated a 1KW DC motor with parameter values that can be seen
in Chapter 3. The parameters of the sigmoid functions were set to
k = 1.0,
1= 1.0,
A = -0.5.
Furthermore, we have chosen
S~l(Z) = S~l(Z) = S(Zt) ,
S~2(Z) = S~2(Z) = S(Z2)'
The above selection was motivated by the fact that it leads to a simpler
model structure, which in turn gives simpler adaptive laws, thus simplifying
the implementation issue. The initial values of all variables can be seen in
Table 4.13.
4.5 Extension to General Affine Systems 131
Ia 0.3
n 0.3
qi 0.98
WII = W12 0.0
W21 = Wn 0.0
[Wdll = [Wd12 0.0
[Wd21 = [Wd22 0.0
simulation results
0.35 ~------------------------------------------~
0.28
"0
~ 0.21
Q.
(/)
'-
....o
~ 0.14
0.07
Fig. 4.7. The evolution of motor speed with time, " = 550
132 4. Direct Adaptive Control
18.0
--c
(l)
'-
'-
:J
U
(l) 9 .0
'-
:J
....-
0
E
I....
<l::
0.0
-9.0 -r
l ~I_,~_.-.-.._,-~~~_,~~_._r._~
0.0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
time (in seconds)
Figures 4.7 and 4.8 give the evolution of the angular velocity and arma-
ture current respectively, when the design constant K, is chosen to be K, = 550.
It can be seen, that as desired, both Q and Ia converge to zero very fast.
We further assume the existence of both an additive and a multiplicative
external disturbance on the actual plant when Q and Ia have reached a steady
state. Thus the DC motor dynamics become:
rJ> = alf
1 + filf '
4.5 Extension to General Affine Systems 133
where da(t) and dm (t) are an additive and a multiplicative plant perturbation
respectively. It is well known [21] that a DC motor can be viewed as low pass
filters. Thus, if the input is affected by a deterministic signal of sufficient
frequency, then it will be suppressed not because of the control effort, but
owing to the system properties; therefore, in order to test the sensitivity of
our regulator to external disturbances we use step functions and in particular
da(t) = dm(t) = 0.1.
1
0.12
J 550
u
Q)
Q)
0..
j
~
VI
0.08
'-
0 750
.-
0
~
0.04 950
0.0 -+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fig. 4.9. The evolution of motor speed with time, various K; both additive and
multiplicative disturbances present
Figure 4.9 presents the evolution of motor speed for various K" when
both the additive and the multiplicative external disturbances are present.
Obviously, boundedness and attenuation are achieved as theory predicts. Fur-
thermore, we keep only the multiplicative disturbances. Figure 4.10 shows
134 4. Direct Adaptive Control
12.0
"t)
il)
il)
8 .0
a.
If)
'-
0
-'
0
~
4.0
0.0
1000
750
-4.0 I
0 .0 0.045 0 .09 0.135 0.18 0.225 0.27
time (in seconds)
Fig. 4.10. The evolution of motor speed with time, various 11:; only multiplicative
disturbances present.
the motor speed for various K. We observe that regulation of Q to zero can
still be achieved.
Summary
This chapter was devoted to the design of direct adaptive controllers for affine
in the control of nonlinear-dynamical systems with unknown nonlinearities.
To overcome the great amount of uncertainty present, RHONNs are used to
model the actual system dynamics. In the complete matching case we showed
that convergence to zero can be achieved while all other signals in the closed
loop remain bounded. Several instability mechanisms including modeling er-
rors, unmodeled dynamics and external disturbances were also considered.
Certain modifications to the control and update laws were provided to guar-
antee at least a uniform ultimate boundedness property. Both regulation
Summary 135
and tracking problems were treated. Even though most of the results of this
chapter were developed for systems having the number of measurable sys-
tem states (n) equal to the number of control inputs (m), it can be easily
verified that they also hold when n f- m. Simulation results were provided
throughout the chapter to visualize certain performance issues.
CHAPTERS
MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS SCHEDULING
The very low setup times experienced in FMS, allow unit production to ap-
proach the cost of batch production, with the secondary effect of reducing
the amount of finished component inventory to be carried.
Introduction of the aforementioned manufacturing system type, which
is naturally embedded in a CIM system, was also motivated by two main
objectives:
• providing full capability for random order production, i.e., permitting the
machining of any desired mixed of parts in a given period of time
• reduction of the work-in-process and the low utilization of machines expe-
rienced in small lot production.
For the reasons just cited, scheduling of components through the system
in a way as to avoids excessive queuing, while maintaining high machine
utilization, is a critical component in the overall success of system operation.
Consequently, research in production scheduling for FMS, has been ori-
ented towards the basis of units rather than to lots. Thus, it is obvious that
our approach is primarily involved in the scheduling problem of FMS, as it
provides a means of outputting discrete-part dispatching commands, in order
to achieve a certain production goal. The target of scheduling in manufac-
turing cells is identical to scheduling in FMS, as the latter manufacturing
systems paradigm is actually a building block of the cell. The proposed ap-
proach can be extended to cover the problem of scheduling a job shop, in
which the plant manufactures a variety of items, with different machinery
and routing requirements, using a process layout which requires machines of
the same functionality to be placed in close proximity in the plant.
Before proceeding to the detailed description of the proposed scheduling
methodology, a brief overview of current industrial practice in coping with the
scheduling problem and an enumeration of the various existing approaches,
traditional and new, is presented.
Scheduling Approaches
Approach Outline
As a brief introduction to some of the most important scheduling approaches
has been made, this subsection is devoted to the presentation of a neural-
network-based solution to the problem. Two of the most significant motives
that underline the basic idea of the proposed scheduling methodology are the
following:
• the need to perform scheduling in real time (i.e., the desire for a computa-
tionallyefficient method),
• the capability of coping with a manufacturing environment undergoing
various changes like alterations in production demands and fluctuations in
machine statuses, such as machine failures.
For the reasons cited above, in our approach to production scheduling, the
control aspect of the scheduling problem in manufacturing cells is addressed.
In this chapter, production scheduling is interpreted as a control regulation
problem. The goal is to achieve the driving of every buffer in the manu-
facturing system to a desired value. The derived solution realizes real time
scheduling in manufacturing cells by outputting the appropriate dispatch-
ing commands in real time, while respecting all manufacturing system con-
straints. The scheduling strategy is actually a non-myopic one, that achieves
production demands for short time horizons so job-shop scheduling, where a
predefined finished-products demand over some relatively small time horizon
is to be reached, is considered.
144 5. Manufacturing Systems Scheduling
~ ~ ~ ~
{~ 3
2 5 4
given above, the number of submachines per machine station are N(A) = 2,
N(B) = 1 and N(C) = 2. Similarily, the O(A), O(B) and O(C) sets denoting
machine subdivision equal {I, 2}, {5} and {3,4} respectively. The intercon-
nectivity sets B+(.) and B_(.) are equal to B+(I) ={I}, B+(2) =
{2},
= = = =
B+(3) {3}, B+(4) {6}, B+(5) {4,8} and B_(I) {3}, B_(2) {4}, =
= = =
B_ (3) {5}, B_ (4) {7}, B_ (5) {6}. The cardinallity of B+(5) equals 2
=
since an assembly operation takes place. Finally, M_(1) {I}, M_(2) =
{2},
M_(3) = {3}, M_(4) = M_(8) = {5}, M_(5) =M_(7) =
{0} and
M_(6) = {4}. The cardinallity NM(b) equals to one for all but the output
buffers 5 and 7. In this case NM(5) = NM(7) = O.
tim.
r I"'
I---t
Worki ng
Idling Idling
Equlv.lent
wo rtc 1118
frequency
I I
Um.
clause), plus the time it remains idle with respect to the processed part type
(indicated by the idling clause). It can be easily seen from Figure 5.2 that the
time interval between the first and second dispatching times is longer than
that between the second and the third command, thus leading to a lower
operating frequency for the first case.
Using this definition, frequencies range between zero and a fixed finite
value. The lower bound equal to zero, corresponds to an infinite period time.
The upper bound U max , corresponds to a minimum period time and is equal
to the reciprocal of machine operation time. Owing to the machine flexibility,
frequency is expected to be smaller than the upper bound, thus allowing time
for other submachines of the same machine to produce parts. Observe that
this definition is a crucial point in our work, since it enables the transition
from a discrete-event system to a continuous-time one.
Consider buffer i collecting output products from submachine SOi and feeding
submachines Slj,j E M_(i). Machine SOi is fed by buffers XOb : b E B+(SOi).
This topology is depicted in Figure 5.3. The i index will be dropped for the
sake of simplicity. Assuming that submachines Slj are idling, the increasing
rate of buffer i is a function of the feeding submachine frequency U' O and the
operation time T. o ' Thus, buffer i evolution can be described by a differential
equation of the form
(5.1)
148 5. Manufacturing Systems Scheduling
Machine mo
D c
Machine m,
0
0
B.(m o) 0
0
D
~, ... ~ e "
\ xo, } 1\
'''--"''
f--
I ~' S'l
U S11
,,r--,\
(~~
0
0
0
nJ=
r-;
So
us o
0
(
~ r /1
i. :"',
--'\
) 'L
0
c
5'2
1
II
0
US12
'~-\ , \
( XON / - _/
M.(i)
D
'---./ -"
0
C
0
Observe that under this modification, buffer i will not be fed if some of
the preceding buffers Xij are empty, no matter the value of Uso. A possible
selection for the fij(XOJ functions is the centered sigmoid given by
(5.5)
where
k
A= -"2. (5.6)
The dynamic equation becomes
1 1
2 2
3 1 1 3
4 2 2 5
5 3 3
6 4,8 4 4
7 6 5
8 5
Xl = fu(ut),
X2 = f12(U2),
X3 = f03(Xl, X3, Ul)Ul + f13(U3),
X4 = f04(X2, X4, U2)U2 + f14(U5),
X5 = f05(X3,X5,U3)U3,
X6 = f06(X4, X6, xs, U5)U5 + f16( U4),
X7 = f07(X6,X7,U4)U4,
xs = !ts( U5) .
Since both fOi(.) and fli(.) are unknown functions of their arguments,
neural networks of the form described in Chapter 2 are employed to obtain
an accurate model for the manufacturing cell. More precisely, there exist
weight values Wti and W[i such that the system (5.11) can be written as
Xi = wt/ Si(Xi, Ui)Ui+W;/ Sli(Ui)+Ei(Xi, Ui, Ui), i = 1,2, ... , B(5.12)
Where all symbols in (5.12) are as defined in Chapter 2. Observe that
fOi(Xi, Ui)Ui in (5.11) is positive since it represents a buffer increase rate,
thus rendering wt? Si(Xi, Ui) positive also. Now, owing to the positiveness of
Si(Xi, Ui) elements, we can assume that the elements of Wti are also positive.
For the modeling error term Ei (Xi, Ui, Ui) we pose the following assumption
that is common in the literature.
Assumption 5.1.1. There exists an arbitrarily small positive constant fi
such that IEi(Xi, Ui, ui)1 :::; fi for all i = 1,2, ... , B and for all Xi E [2, where [2
is the compact in which the approximation capabilities of the RHONN model
hold.
Example( continued). Assuming that up to fourth-order terms of each ar-
gument are required with no coupling terms of the form X xf' 1i ,
the dynamic
equations for the buffers 1 to 8 are given by
5.2 Continuous-time Control Law 151
with
S(Xd = [sex;) s2(Xi) S3(Xi) s\x;)(
S(U;) = [S(Ui) s2(Ui) s3(Ui) s4(u;)(
while Wti E ~12 for i E {1, 2, ... , 8} - {6}, Wt6 E ~16 for i E {6} and
Wii E ~4 for i E {1, 2, ... , 8} - {5, 7}.
and derive a basic control law. Afterwards, modeling errors will be allowed
and we shall examine their effect in the closed-loop system. Whenever neces-
sary modifications on the basic control law will be provided.
152 5. Manufacturing Systems Scheduling
After adding and subtracting the terms w6;Soi(xi, Ui)Ui and WESli(ud,
(5.13) becomes
Xi = -WJ;SOi(Xi, UdUi - WlS1i(Ui)
+WJ;SOi(Xi, Ui)Ui + WlSli(Ui), (5.14)
where WOi = WOi - Wti' Wli = Wli - Wii, and WOi, Wli, i = 1,2, .. . ,B
- L:. - L:.
are weight estimates of the unknown weight values Wti, Wti' i = 1,2, ... , B
respectively. Let Xip i = 1,2, ... , B denote the target value for each buffer,
which by definition is a positive constant. Define the control error e Ci , i =
1,2, ... , B as eCi ~ Xi - Xit, i = 1,2, ... , B. Differentiating ec, with respect
to time, we get the error equation:
fCi = -WJ;SOi(Xi, Ui)Ui - WlS1i(ud
+Wl;SOi(Xi, Ui)Ui + WlS1i(ud. (5.15)
To derive stable control and update laws, Lyapunov stability theory is em-
ployed. Thus, take the following Lyapunov function candidate .c = L,~=1 e~i + !
2 L,i=l WOi WOi + 2 L,i=l Wli Wli. Differentiating .c along the solution of
1 B -T- 1 B -T-
(5.15), we obtain
qi = 1 [T
-=- -
IWliIISli(Ui)I+,lec,1 1, (5.21)
Wi
-life c <O
sgn(e .) - { , - (5.23)
c, - 1 otherwise
5.2 Continuous-time Control Law 153
for all i = 1,2, ... , B, with I a strictly positive constant and wi as defined
in (5.24). Then (5.19) becomes £ = - L~=l ,e~; ::; 0 although in order for
(5.21) to be valid, the following must hold
(5.24)
By the definition of SOi(Xi, Ui), i = 1,2, ... , B we can select its entries to be
bounded from bellow, by a positive constant. Furthermore, since the actual
weight values Wti' i = 1,2, ... , B are positive, it is reasonable to employ
projection modification to guarantee that the weight estimates WOi, i =
1,2, ... , B remain positive also Vi ~ o. After these changes are made, (5.24)
is guaranteed. Observe further that (5.17) becomes Ui = -qis9n( ee;) since·
WJ;SOi(Xi,Ui) ~ o. Thus, the update law (5.17) is modified to
if WOi E WOi or
WOi E 8WOi and
ee;s6;(Xi,Ui)UiWOi ~ 0
WOi = ee,SOi(Xi, Ui)Ui (5.25)
ee; s6;( Xi, Ui)Uj WOi
Wo ;II)2 WOi if W Oi E 8WOi and
x (1+IIwo,
ee; s6;(Xi, Ui)Ui WOi <0
where WOi is a set that guarantees the positiveness of the entries of WOi and
8WOi is its boundary. More information regarding projection modification
can be found in the preceding chapters.
Theorem 5.2.1. Consider the system {5.13}. The control law {5.20}-
{5.23} together with the update laws {5.18}, {5.25} guarantees the following
properties:
• ee;, WOi, Wli,Xi,ee; E Loo
• limt ..... oo ef , (t) = 0, limt ..... oo WOi(t) = 0
• limt ..... oo W1i(i) = 0
Proof: Since £ ::; 0 we have that .c E .coo, hence ee;, WOi, Wli E .coo.
Since ee; = Xi - Xi, and Xi, is a constant we have that Xi E .coo. More-
over, since .c is a monotone decreasing function of time and bounded from
bellow, the limt ..... oo .c(t) = .coo exists so by integrating £ from 0 to 00 we
have fooo lee;J2 dt ::; ~ [.c(0) - .cool < 00, which implies that leci I E .c 2 • From
the above analysis and (5.15) we also have that ee; E .coo. Moreover, since
ee; E .c 2 n.c oo and ee; E L oo , applying Barbalat's Lemma we conclude that
limt ..... oo ee; (i) = o. Now, using the boundedness of S9 i (Xi,. Ui), S1i( Ui), Ui, WOi
and the convergence of ee; to zero, we obtain that WOi, Wli also converge to
~o. •
also incorporates modeling errors. In other words, the full model given by
(5.13) is employed in the analysis that follows. Hence, (5.19) now becomes:
B
.t = L ec; [WJ;SOi(X;, Ui)U; + W[;Sli(Ui) + Ei(Xi, Ui, Ui)] (5.26)
i=1
provided that lec; I > !.L. The above implies that the control error e c; possesses
a uniform ultimate bo~ndedness property with respect to the arbitrarily small
set fc; = {ecJt): lec;l::; ~'I > o}.
Theorem 5.2.2. Consider the system {5.13} with the modeling error term
fi(Xi, Ui, Uj) satisfying Assumption 5.1.1. The control law {5.20}-{5.23} to-
gether with the update laws {5.18}, {5.25} guarantees the uniform ultimate
boundedness of the control error with respect to the arbitrary small set
fc; = {ec;(t) : lec; I ::; ~, I> o} for all i = 1,2, ... , B.
Theorem 5.2.2 states nothing about the boundedness of the weights Wli, i =
1,2, ... , B. Again, in a projection modification can be used to satisfy Wlis are
confined within a set Wli = {Wli : IIWlil1 < Wli}. Hence, (5.22) is modified
to
if W1i E W 1;
or IIWlil1 = Wli and
ec;s[;(u)W1i 2: 0
ec;Sli(Ui) (5.27)
-eC;s[;(Ui)Wlie+l~lilfWli ifWli E W1i
and ec;s[;(u)Wli < 0
for all i = 1, 2, ... , B.
Remark 5.2.1. Theorem 5.2.2 practically states that if we start from in-
side the set f c ;, i = 1,2, ... , B then ec ; is bounded uniformly by ~. Other-
wise, there exists a finite time in which ec ; reaches the boundary of fc; and
remains therein for all time thereafter. It is obvious that the performance of
the continuous-time control law is controlled by fi and I' The first term fj is
strongly related to the continuous-time model developed in Section 5.2, while
the second one, 1 is a design constant which can be chosen arbitrarily.
5.3 Real-time Scheduling 155
The control input signal obtained by the control law (5.20)-(5.23), (5.25),
(5.27) is a continuous-frequency signal so some dispatching algorithm has to
be employed to determine the actual parts-dispatching times. The dispatching
algorithm used proceeds as follows:
Remark 5.3.1. The controller equations (5.20-5.23, 5.25 and 5.27) are
allowed to evolve in time, while the submachine state is left untouched until
the precalculated time interval is completed. This interval is greater than or
equal to the machine operation time since the control input frequency is less
than or equal to u max • Clearly, this control input discretization introduces
some modeling error, to be discussed in the following subsection.
PAl WorldllB
ES9 Idling
- Continuous signal
g - - Applied input
~ t Sampling point
...
.:::
·i..
!
cost when the corresponding buffer has reached its capacity. In this case,
giving priority to the route possessing the largest value of J. causes the WIP
cost reduction of the most burdened route.
10.-----------------~~~
---.. .......
' .0 ,.,....__:::--- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - ,
o.g
D. 0.8
0.7 0,7
...
! 0.6 ~ 06
;
~ D.' ~ 05
I D' ~ Q.4
U
03 0.3
02 0,2
01 0,1
DD ~-=~----------------~
0.0 L -_________________ --=-=-......>I
aun., Le.,.1(IHItts)
provided that lee, I > wpl;IW'(X'~il.,U;)I+f'. The above implies that the control
error ee. possesses a uniform ultimate boundedness property with respect
to the arbitrarily small (since i can be chosen arbitrarily large) set [c.
{ee. (t) : lee.1 :::; w;;Jw,(x'~il.,u;)l+f', i > 0 }.
lid x
FMS
Continuous u Discrete
xI Dispatching ~
Controller
Decision
xI
1 2,4 3 1 5
2 1 2
3 1 2 3
4 2 5 1,4 3
5 3 2 1
6 2 1 3 4
produced according to the predefined routes. In detail, all buffers are assumed
to be empty initially. A production demand of20 parts for each of the five-part
types, has to be achieved. Additionally, for all intermediate buffers a desired
state of one-part has been set. From Table 5.2, a new table is constructed,
describing the number of different products each machine may operate on, or
equivalently, the required number of submachines. Also, the operation times
of all submachines are included where, for simplicity, the operation of all
submachines of the same machine is considered of equal duration. The number
1 2,4,5 4 5
2 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 7 6
3 1,3,4,6 5 5
4 1,4,5,6 4 4
5 1,3,6 2 3
of submachines for the second machine equals seven instead of six, since it
serves part type 1 twice. The same holds for machine 3, where part type 4 is
also served twice, leading to a total of four submachines. However part types
1 and 6 share a common submachine on machine 5, owing to the assembly
nature of the operation, thus leading to a total of two submachines required.
After all, a total of 21 submachines and an equal number of controllers is
required. Furthermore, we consider that raw materials arrive in the cell at a
rate of 0.03 parts per time unit, implying that for each route a raw material
arrives every 33.33 sec, and is stored in the raw material buffer. All buffers
5.4 Simulation Results 161
in the cell, both those storing raw materials and semifinished products, are
considered to have 15 parts capacity. Raw materials arrive at the system at
the specified rate, for so long as the production of the respective product
is not complete, and the buffer storing raw materials has not reached its
capacity. For a buffer that has reached its capacity limit, a raw material
can be brought into it again, only after the succeeding submachine issues a
dispatching command and thus decrements its state.
For comparison purposes, we have simulated the application of two con-
ventional scheduling policies performed on the same cell structure. The poli-
cies used are described next:
Clear Largest Buffer (CLB): Select at time t, submachine s* to work for which
the following holds:
x;(t) 2: xs(t)V submachine s E O(m), where xs(t) is the level of the input
buffer of submachine s of machine m at time t.
Clear A Fraction(CAF): Select at time t, submachines s* to work that sat-
isfies x;(t) 2: fE~J;n) x.(t) where N(m) is the number of submachines of
machine m. The constant f has been selected equal to 1/6.
Note that the policies actually employed are variations of the above def-
initions, which incorporate the following modifications for stability reasons:
1) Selection is restricted to the set of submachines that participate in part
type routes for which production has not been fulfilled. 2) All dispatching
commands for submachines whose output buffers have reached their capacity
are ignored.
Before proceeding to the presentation of the simulation results, some
comments on the employed controller strucure are made: Total of eight and
four high-order terms for the SOi(Xi, Ui) and Sli(Ui) terms respectively are
used for each of the 21 controllers. All sigmoids share the same properties
jJ= = =
I A 1; thus, they are positive for any positive argument. The initial
weight values selected are 14 and -10 for the elements of the WOi and W1i
vectors respectively. The WOi and Wli projection-ball radius has been set
equal to 3. Concerning the estimation of wit w
and li so that (3.12) holds, we
require that 0 < wo; ~ Iwl;sOil ~wit. Since both SOi and WOi are positive,
the maximum (minimum) of Iwl;sOil is achieved only ifthe elements of both
vector arguments are maximum (minimum). The boundary values of the sig-
moidal vector are given by 0'[1,0',0'2,0'3] with 0' = J.l + A and 0' = J.l/2 + A
respectively. Furthermore, by continuity we conclude that the boundary val-
ues of WOi are obtained on 8WOi. Hence, the minimum and maximum values
of wl; SOi (Xi, Ui) can be easily computed as the solution of the quadratic op-
timization problems wo; ~ minwoi {Wl; [0',0'2, 0'3f :0' = (I + A)} subject
to WOi E 8WOi and wit 2: maxWOi {Wl; h 0'2, 0'3, 0'4f :0' = (jJ + A)}, sub-
ject to WOi E 8WOi. All Ai, At in (5.28) have been taken as equal to unity.
In Tables 5.4 5.5 & 5.6, a number of simulation results are summarized.
Employment of the RHONN scheduler fulfills the production demand in the
162 5. Manufacturing Systems Scheduling
shortest time interval (963 time units) compared with that required by the
conventional policies CLB and CAF which take 1083 and 1044 time units
respectively. Deviation of the achieved results from the unknown optimal so-
lution can be illustrated by deriving a lower bound for the achievement of
the production demand. This bound is closely related to the largest work
that has to be done by the cell bottleneck machine, i.e., machine 2. Specifi-
cally, its seven submachines must process 20 parts requiring 7 x 20 x 6=840
time units. As at time 1/0.03 the first raw material arrives in the cell and
a lower bound of 873.33 time units is derived. Thus, the RHONN method-
ology achieves the production goal with a deviation of 10.31 % from the
lower bound. Simulations with higher raw material arrival rates which pro-
vide higher raw material availability result in a makespan deviating less than
6% from a calculated lower bound.
An overview of the peak buffer states experienced in the intermediate
buffers is presented by means of the sum of the maximum state of every
intermediate buffer. For the case of the RHONN controller this sum equals
the number of intermediate buffers in the cell since the algorithm assigns a
target value of 1 for all intermediate buffers that cannot be exceeded owing
to the control law formulation. In the case of the conventional policies this
sum is five times higher, thus resulting in an increase of WIP cost.
The next column gives the sum of output buffer states which again shows
a precise achievement ofthe production goal for the RHONN scheduler, while
in the case of policies an excess of parts have been produced owing to the
clearing nature of the policies, thus resulting in increased inventory costs.
The next two columns represent cost measures of storing parts in buffers.
The cost for holding Xj parts at a buffer for T time units can be considered
equal to kjxjT, where kj is the cost of storing a single part in buffer i, per time
Summary 163
unit. Integrating the above quantity over the entire interval that production
lasts, yields the cost paid for storing parts in a single buffer. Hence, assuming
for simplicity, k j = 1, the cost measure evolves into a plain integral of the
respective buffer states. Specifically, measures for the Work In Process and
Inventory costs experienced in the cell, are provided by means of the average
integral of the intermediate and output buffer states l . Thus, a more efficient
WIP cost control is achieved by the RHONN algorithm that manages to keep
the intermediate buffer state as small as desired while guaranteeing system
stability. Inventory cost is also comparatively smaller than those deriving
from the employment of the conventional scheduling policies owing to the
overall faster fulfillment of the production demand.
The results concerning the achieved average lead times and average back-
logging costs over the entire cell are seemingly contradictory to the most
promising results thus far presented, since the RHONN algorithm yields av-
erage values notably worse than the conventional schedulers. Actually, this
result originates in the great variance of the lead times (i.e., the time elapsing
between the input of a raw material in the cell and the output of the appro-
priate final product), which is clearly demonstrated in Table 5.5. Concluding,
it must also be mentioned that considering its implementation, the RHONN
scheduler constitutes a real-time algorithm. Simulation of almost 1000 min-
utes cell operation took about 15 min on an Ultra 1 Sun WorkStation, while a
hardware implementation of the algorithm is expected to be characterized by
negligible computational delays, yielding a distributed real-time non-myopic
robust controller structure.
Summary
the selected cost measures. Thus, the derived characteristic simulation results
establish the proposed scheduler's applicability on the control of non-trivial
manufacturing cells.
To investigate, assess and establish the applicability and value of the pro-
posed approach to the scheduling problem, it has been considered necessary
to examine data taken from existing manufacturing systems, with all the
constraints, and complexity inherent in real-world cases. Thus an existing
industry has been chosen, and the algorithm's performance has been tested
on production processes crucial for the industrial operation.
The test case is derived from one of the oldest industrial enterprises in Ger-
many, SHW, of turnover of 400 Million DM per year, subdivided into 17
profit centers and employing more than 2000 men in 1994. Specifically, the
manufacturing system paradigm examined is part of the Machine Tool Divi-
sion, employing 120 people. Products are tools ranging from simple milling
machines to universal milling, boring and turning centers.
The production program of this division consists of 16 basic types of
products and although certain types of milling machines are produced regu-
larly, the majority of them are produced on demand so production must be
organized flexibly, to meet a number of customer requirements. Hence, con-
structed machining tools are made up of modules of a standardized building
block system, such as base, guideway, tool changer, control system, etc.
The layout of the machine tool division is pictured in Figure 6.1. It consists
of a warehouse for storing raw materials, a sawing section where material
preparation begins, a mechanical workshop where in-house preparation of
parts takes place, a painting department, a preassembly section for assembling
the parts of the machine tool modules and a final assembly and inspection
workshop where the whole machine tool is finally assembled.
The Mechanical Workshop of the machine tool division was chosen as the
test case upon which the applicability of the RHONN scheduler is investi-
gated.
0-;'11111
= = = = = =
arriving in the industry and the processing strategies adopted. Hence, before
proceeding to the detailed scheduling problem presentation, in order to obtain
a more thorough view of the industrial reality and the production planning
techniques employed and therefore, to evaluate and assess the vitality of the
scheduling task better, the basic steps of order processing are presented.
• Order Definition: Initial cost estimation, long term schedule and deadline
determination for the various manufacturing steps, take place.
• Design Phase: Product's main modules are defined, (i.e., it is decided which
parts will be supplied by external vendors and which will be built in-house).
The latter, are designed in the Mechanical Design Department and for each
part a work plan that defines all the necessary manufacturing operations is
generated by listing for every operation its name, the machine identification
number where it will be performed and the estimated production time.
Similar definitions are made for electrical tool components, that are to be
handled at the electrical design section. Hence, a number of documents
such as drawings, list of modules, work plans, etc., are outputted at this
order-processing phase.
• Disposal f3 Purchasing: Ordering and quality inspection of raw materials
and parts supplied externally takes place.
• Part Manufacturing performed in the mechanical workshop. The scheduling
problem that is to be solved by the RHONN scheduler is exactly this
one. In current industrial practice, the master of the mechanical workshop
168 6. Scheduling Test Case
No Machine ID Name
The different product-type routes are shown in Table 6.2. All numbers under
the label "Processing Route" are identification numbers of mechanical work-
170 6, Scheduling Test Case
shop machines and the assembly points external to the workshop visited.
In the tabulated set of part type routes, 18 different types of products are
produced in this cell of 18 processing locations, following non-acyclic routes,
while no assembly operations are involved. Each entry of the above table
represents a processing step of a specific duration. In Table 6.1, the (i, j)
entry being equal to m, means that the i-th product in its j-th processing
step, visits machine with label m. The specific submachine will be referred
to as Bi,j and controls the state of a buffer attached to its output which will
be noted as Xi,j' The output signal of the neural controller regulating the
state of the Xi,j buffer (i.e., the frequency signal controlling the operation
of submachine Bi,j), will be denoted as Ui,j' Also, the first submachine of
every product route, Bi,1> i = 1,2"",18 is preceeded by a buffer that stores
raw materials of the respective i-th product temporarily and which will be
referred to as Xi,O. Furthermore, L( i), i = 1,2, ' , " 18 will denote the number
of processing steps in route i, thus Xi,L(i) will be the output buffer collecting
the finished products of route i. Also, Xt(i,j) will stand for the target state of
buffer xi,j, so Xt(i,L(i)) will denote the demand for product type i. Any further
information necessary for the complete definition of the scheduling problem
will be presented with direct reference to the cell topology, as provided in
Table 6.2. Observe that a number of machine labels that are not contained
in the Table 6.1 are recorded in the production routes listed. These labels,
namely 777, 902, 966, 999 stand for processing steps performed outside the
workshop, at other departments of the Machine Tool Division and usually
involve assembly operations that occur at some intermediate steps of a part
process in the workshop. The duration in minutes of all processing steps un-
derlying the presented cell topology is tabulated next, where the value T( i, j)
of its (i, j) element stands for the duration of the (i, j) processing step.
The scheduling problem is completely defined by specifying the desired
target states, the capacity and the initial state values, for all buffers in the
system, as well as the rates under which raw materials for the different part
types arrive in the system. Specifically, all intermediate buffers' target states
have been set equal to one and their capacity values equal to nine-parts, with
the exception of buffers X8,1, X12,1, X13,1 where three-parts capacity is allowed.
All buffers, are considered to be empty initially. Raw material buffers have
two-part capacity, and when this capacity is reached, arrival of raw materials
is ceased until the raw material buffer level is decreased.
The formulated problem constitutes a reasonably complicated one, mainly
owing to the diversities and variability of part-processing times in the various
submachines, the inequalities in machines' workloads and their dimensions
as it involves 18 different final product types, visiting 18 machines, implying
the existence of 95 submachines, in the neural-network-scheduling algorithm.
The most extreme differences exist for the twelfth product type 2783, where
the processing times in the 11 submachines visited range from 8.4 to 1539
minutes.
6.1 Test Case Description 171
1 1331 737,753,773,704,737,704
2 1414 753,773,704
3 1623 753,773,704
4 2409 753,999,773,704
5 2420 753,999,999,736,704
6 1953 731,704,999,773,739,737,704,775
7 2422 773,783,704
8 2685 783,704
9 2766 708,731,774,739,783,783,774,704
10 3057 999,753,999,773,775,999,737,999,999,704
11 3061 753,966,773,736,704
12 2694 728,732,722,783,704,783
13 2783 732,752,731,777,999,777,731,722,783,783,704
14 2900 773,704
15 2904 966,966,704
16 1312 704,775,732,783,704
17 2916 753,773,704
18 3207 999,999,753,773,999,999,999,704
Moreover, the sets that define the route of the eleventh product type com-
pletely are given below:
Sets of input buffers:
172 6. Scheduling Test Case
with
S(Xi,j) = [S(Xi,j) S2(Xi,j) S3(Xi,j) S4(Xi,j )]T ,
S(Ui,j) = [S(Ui,j) S2(Ui,j) S3(Ui,j) S4(Ui,j)f ,
Sl(Ui,j) = [S(Ui,j) S2(Ui,j) S3(Ui,j) S4(Ui,j)]T ,
where Wt,j E lR8 Vj E {l, 2, ... , 5} and Wt,j E lR4 Vj E {l, 2, ... , 4}.
The above neural network model is used further in the development of
the RHONN scheduler, as indicated in Chapter 5.
Clearing methods process all parts of the selected buffer until it is empty.
It should be noted that the policies actually employed are variations of the
above definitions, which incorporate the following modifications, for stability
reasons:
• All dispatching commands for submachines whose output buffers have
reached their capacity are ignored.
• Selection is restricted to the set of submachines that participates in part-
type routes for which production has not been fulfilled.
174 6. Scheduling Test Case
f( x. .) -
"L(,) - °
{Xt(i,L(i» - Xi,L(i) if Xt(i,L(i»
otherwise
< Xi,L(i)
The 00 in the production time column is used to denote the transition of the
cell in a state of overall production paralysis or of continuous processing of
specific routes
From the above discussion, it becomes apparent that the second modifica-
tion has been employed to overcome such problems, by restricting production
scheduling to only those product types for which production has not been ful-
filled.
In what follows, we shall discuss the results obtained when demanding 15, 25,
20, 20, 25, 20, 20, 3, 10, 8, 15, 5, 2, 20, 20, 15, 10, 20 parts for the 18 product
types respectively, beginning from clear intermediate and output buffers.
6.2 Results & Comparisons 175
Table 6.4. Simulation Results for Schedulers Free from Modifications 1 & 2
More precicely, in Figure 6.2 the makespan (i.e., the time period elapsing
until the production goal is achieved for all product types) is plotted for
various raw material arrival rates.
r
x 10'
G----€l FIFO
4
~I NN
!1'- ------
(I_ . _ . Q CLB
)too - - )( CAF
- - -- - - - - -- -
-x_ - - ___
3.5 'f
----J+-----
+f
II
I
"'
!!
"
c::
~2.5
3
t
....,"'os cj
:;
2
1.5
t1
.. . . ..
Examination of this set of curves reveals that generally for all raw mate-
rial arrival rates the proposed neural network scheduling methodology results
in significant speedup of the achievement of production demand. Considering
the conventional but modified schedulers, the production goal achievement
requires longer time intervals. Owing to the potential instability of the se-
lected policies, the inability of CLB to terminate is observed for rates greater
than or equal to 0.002 parts per minute. Thus, in this and in all subsequent
figures, CLB values are plotted only for the range of rates for which the pro-
duction goal is achieved, (i.e., for rates less than 0.002). For low raw material
arrival rates 1 we observe similar performance for all the schedulers that were
compared. This originates from the fact that for lower raw material arrival
rates, makespan is dominated by the time required for the entrance to the
cell of all raw materials for the product types with the highest demand. It
has been assumed that initially, all raw material buffers contain a single part.
Since a maximum demand of 25 parts has been defined, and one part arrives
1 Rates lower than 0.0027 are defined as low, while greater than 0.0027 as high
6.2 Results & Comparisons 177
Tm = L Ti,j x Xt(i,L(i))'
si,jEO(m)
In the specific test case the lower bound has been found equal to 8947.3 min.
The neural network methodology achieves the production goal in 9778
minutes, thus obtaining a deviation from the lower bound equal to 9.29 % for
raw material arrival rates equal to or greater than 0.0027. Optimal perfor-
mance for the conventional schedulers FIFO, CAF and CLB occur at much
lower rates, specifically for 0.0018, 0.0009 and 0.0009 parts per minute, where
the lower bounds are provided by the formula 24 x ~ with corresponding devi-
ations 0.867%, 1.865%, 1.87% and makespans 13449, 27164 and 27165 minutes
respecti vely.
Simulations with higher raw material arrival rates which provide higher
raw material availability, resulted in no change of the makespan for either the
neural network or FIFO schedulers, while analogous performance is yielded
by CAF. Figure 6.2 also reveals the superior robustness of the neural network
algorithm with respect to variations in the raw material arrival rates.
An overview of the peak buffer states experienced by the intermediate
buffers is presented by means of the sum of the maximum state of all inter-
mediate buffers, which is plotted in Figure 6.3. For the case of the neural
network scheduler, this sum is equal to the number of intermediate buffers in
the cell (i.e., 77) since the algorithm assigns a target value of one for all in-
termediate buffers, which cannot be exceeded as the control law formulation
enforces the control signal to become zero whenever a buffer state reaches its
target value.
When the conventional policies are used, this sum becomes considerably
larger and as can be seen from Figure 6.3, it can be more than five times
higher in the case of CAF. Specifically, for very low rates, this sum slightly
exceeds the limit of 77 but a slight increase in the rate results in a consid-
erable increase in the sum of the maximum states that intermediate buffers
acquire, with the most extreme case that of CAF at 0.01 parts per minute.
The neural network scheduler provides a sufficient control for the maximum
possible states of the buffers. This is not the case for all conventional sched-
ulers studied, which at higher rates can even force the buffers to reach their
178 6. Scheduling Test Case
capacity limits. Thus, the neural network scheduler ensures the cell's stable
operation while requiring minimum buffer capacities.
FI FO
--
0--------()
400 I
~ NN
0- - (I CLB
I
I
,..--x CAF
I -,... -- - -
350 I
l!?
'"
"S I
S> I
~ 300
'6
§
.5'": 250 I
E I
~
'x I
'"
E 200 I
15
E
"
(/) I
,
I
150
f£.}
Figure 6.4 presents the sum of maximum output buffers states. The
achieved results for both FIFO and NN are identical and equal to the total
demand of 273 parts for all product types. This sum acquires slightly larger
values in the cases of the other schedulers, thus denoting the production of a
surplus of parts. This excess of parts originates in the clearing nature of the
employed policies (i.e., CAF, since CLB is not functioning for rates greater
than 0.002).
At low rates, all schedulers result in precise achievement of the production
goal, owing to the fact that all operations, even the clearing ones, empty
buffers containing very few parts, causing submachines that output finished
products, to process buffers which contain a single part only.
Both FIFO & NN emerge as schedulers guaranteeing accurate achieve-
ment of production.
The next two figures, represent cost measures for storing parts in inter-
mediate and output buffers respectively. The cost for holding Xi,j parts at
a buffer for T time units can be considered equal to ki,jXi,jT, where ki,j is
the cost for storing a single part in the output buffer of sub machine Si,j, per
time unit. Integrating the above quantity over the entire makespan, yields
6.2 Results & Comparisons 179
G------El FIFO
320 NN
0- - 0 CLB
,... - -x CAF
310
_...K-- ---
.,
~
---
'S
~300 I
,..--
il.
8 I
I
.1290 I
I
"0
E
" 280
(J)
I
I
270
the cost for storing parts in a single buffer. Thus, assuming for simplicity
that for all buffers in the system ki,j = 1, the cost measure evolves into a
plain integral of the respective buffer states. Specifically, measures for the
Work In Process and Inventory costs, are provided by means of the aver-
age integral of the intermediate and output buffer states, (i.e., the values
~i L:~l Lfiil- J::
1 xj,jdt and ~o L:~l
are the number of intermediate and output buffers in the cell and T is the
I::
Xi,L(i)dt where Ni = 77, No = 18
in makespan, which are sufficient justification of the very much greater, WIP
& Inventory costs in the cases of the conventional schedulers. For higher rates
the NN scheduler presents a far more robust-stable behavior when compared
with FIFO and CAF. Thus, NN superiority with respect to these popular
cost measures is obvious.
x 10'
5 G------O FIFO
NN
1)- _ . (z CLB
4.5 ,... - -x CAF
4 ,- - - - -- - --- -
_ __ _ __ __ __ >f----
3.5
I
.'"
Q.
§ 3 I
I
I
£ 25 f
~
Q
2
'ji
*
I
I
1.5
(~
t
~
I
Considering backlogging costs (i.e., the cost resulting from the delay in
achieving production targets) the NN scheduler reaches the production goal
with the minimum cost when compared with the rest of the policies exam-
ined. Specifically, the backlogging cost employed has been defined as fol-
J J
lows: o Lp 1f;p(t) = o Lp (3p(r)dr where (3p(t) = Ip(t) - Op(t) with f;
Ip (t), Op (t) the number of parts of type p that entered and exit the cell until
time t. As Figure 6.7 demonstrates, backlogging costs remain small for rela-
tively low rates, since buffers in the system contain few parts, less conflicts
among submachines occur and thus finished products are outputed with re-
duced delays. On the other hand, increased raw material arrival rates, leads
to overall increased buffer levels and conflicts, thus making the output of
finished products occur with a considerably larger delay. For any rate, the
NN is considerably less expensive (with respect to backlogging cost) than all
other policies examined.
6.2 Results & Comparisons 181
x 10'
6 G------€l FIFO
NN
0- - 0 CLB
5.5 I -"--
)I- --x CAF
'I'
5 I - - - -x- - - - -
. ",'"
4.5 *
+
1.5
Finally, Figure 6.8 gives the average lead time (i.e., the average of the time
elapsing between the input of a raw material in the cell and the output of
the respective finished product) for all product types and all parts produced
in the cell. Comparing this plot with backlogging cost curves, the impressive
similarity in slope and shape is immediately observed. Actually, all reasoning
about the causes of backlogging cost also applies in the case of product lead
times, where the superiority of the NN algorithm is justified once again by
the smaller production makespan.
Considering implementation issues, the NN scheduler constitutes a real
time algorithm. Simulation of almost 10000 minutes of cell operation lasted
about 20 minutes on a Solaris workstation, featuring a Pentium II/266 MHz
processor. Moreover a hardware implementation of the algorithm is expected
to be characterized by negligible computational delays, yielding a distributed
real-time non-myopic robust-controller structure.
The results presented reveal the capability of the proposed NN scheduler
of achieving scheduling in inherently complex manufacturing cells, proving
that the sound mathematical formulations developed in Chapter 5, constitute
an applicable and worthwhile scheduling methodology. The NN controller
guarantees stability of the manufacturing cells while production is achieved
in a time quite close to the optimal in the minimal makespan sense. Critical
182 6. Scheduling Test Case
x 10'
4.5~---.-----r----'---"'---r--;:==::::::::::::====~
FIFO
NN
4
1)- -- -* CLB
,)4. ______ _ )II- --x CAF
3.5
,, --- ----...c:-- - --
,,
,
2 ,, ...... ... . " .. ............ . . . ... ... . . .. . , .- . .. . , . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . .
G-----E> FIFO
NN
2500
,r-- - - - - ________ _ 1)- ' - '*
,..--x
CLB
, ---.----
- - -!-=- -- - - - '
CAF
2000
,,
~
!, 1500 ,, ........................ ............. ,. -..... -
<
costs like WIP and Inventory can be efficiently controlled, while backlogging
costs are also kept quite suppressed.
Summary
37. Ho Y.C., (1984) "Perturbation Analysis of Discrete Event Systems," Proc. 1st
ORSA/TIMS Conf. FMS, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
38. Hopfield J.J., (1982) "Neural Networks and Physical Systems with Emergent
Collective Computational abilities," in Proceedings of the National Academy of
Science, U.S.A., vol. 79, pp. 2554-255~.
39. Hopfield J.J., (1984) "Neurons with graded response have collective computa-
tional properties like those of two-state neurons" Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 81,
pp. 3088-3092.
40. Hornik KM., Stinchombe M., White H., (1989) "Multilayer feedforward net-
works are universal approximators", Neural Networks, vol. 2, pp. 359-366.
41. Hou Z., (1992) "Analysis of Auto Powertrain Dynamics and Modelling Using
Neural Networks," M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering, Univer-
sity of Notre Dame.
42. Hunt KJ., Sbarbaro D., Zbikowski R., and Gawthrop P.J., (1992) " Neural
Networks for Control Systems - A Survey", Automatica, vol. 28, no. 6, pp.
1083-1112.
43. Ioannou P.A., and Kokotovic P.V., (1983) Adaptive Systems with Reduced Mod-
els, Springer-Verlang, New-York, NY.
44. Ioannou P.A., and Tsakalis K.S., (1986) "A robust direct adaptive controller",
IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. AC-31, no. 11, pp. 1033-1043.
45. Ioannou P.A., Datta A., (1991) "Robust adaptive control: a unified approach,"
Proceedings of the IEEE, December.
46. Ioannou P.A., and Sun J., (1996) Robust Adaptive Control, Upper Saddle River,
NJ, Prentice Hall.
47. Isidori A., (1989) Nonlinear Control Systems, New York, NY, Springer-Verlag.
48. Jacobs F.R., (1983) "The OPT scheduling system: A Review of A New Pro-
duction Scheduling System", Product. Inventory Management, vol.24, pp.47-51.
49. Jackson J.R., (1963) "Jobshop-like Queuing Systems", Management Science,
Vo1.10, No.1, pp.131-142.
50. James D.J., (1971) "Stability of a model reference control system", AIAA Jour-
nal, vol. 9, no. 5.
51. Kamp Y., Hasler M., (1990) Recursive Neural Networks for Associative Mem-
ory, J. Wiley & Sons.
52. Kanellakopoulos I., Kokotovic P.V., and Marino R., (1991) "An Extended Di-
rect Scheme for Robust Adaptive Nonlinear Control", Automatica, vol. 27, no.
2, pp. 247-255.
53. Kanellakopoulos I., Kokotovic P.V., and Morse A.S., "Systematic Design of
Adaptive Controllers for Feedback Linearizable Systems", IEEE Trans. Au-
tomat. Contr., vol. 36, no. 11, pp. 1241-1253.
54. Kanellakopoulos I., Kokotovic P.V., and Morse A.S., (1992) " Adaptive Output
Feedback Control of Systems with Output Nonlinearities", IEEE Trans. on
Automatic Control, vol. 37, no. 11, pp. 1666-1682.
55. Kohonen T., (1980) Content-Addressable Memories. New York, NY: Springer-
Verlag.
56. Kokotovic P.V., Khalil H.K, and O'Reilly J., (1986) Singular Perturbation
Methods in Control: Analysis and Design, Academic Press, New York.
57. Kosmatopoulos E.B., Polycarpou M., Christodoulou M.A., Ioannou P.A.,
(1995) "High-order neural network structures for identification of dynamical
systems", IEEE Trans. Neural Networks, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 422-431.
58. Krause P.C., (1987) Analysis of Electric Machinery, Singapore, McGraw-Hill.
59. Kusiak A., (1987) "Designing Expert Systems for Scheduling of Automated
Manufacturing," Ind. Eng. pp.42-46.
60. Leonhard W., (1985) Control of Electrical Drives, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.
188 References
61. Lewis F.L., Liu K., Yesildirek A., (1995) "Neural net robot controller with
guaranteed tracking performance", IEEE Trans. Neural Networks, vol. 6, no. 3.
pp. 703-715.
62. Lewis F.L., Jagannathan S., Yesildirek A., (1999) Neural Network Control of
Robot Manipulators and Nonlinear Systems, Taylor and Francis, London, UK.
63. Liou R., Azimi-Sadjadi M.R., Dent R., (1991) "Detection of dim targets in
high cluttered background using high order correlation neural network," Proc.
of Inter. Joint Conf. on Neural Networks, IJCNN91, Vol. I, pp. 701-706.
64. Marino R., and Tomei P., (1993) "Global Adaptive Output Feedback Control
of Nonlinear Systems, Part I: Linear Parameterization", IEEE Trans. Automat.
Contr., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 17-32.
65. Marino R., and Tomei P., (1993) "Global Adaptive Output Feedback Control
of Nonlinear Systems, Part II: Nonlinear Parameterization", IEEE Trans. Au-
tomat. Contr., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 33-48.
66. Margaris N., Goutas T., Doulgeri Z., and Paschali A., (1991) "Loss Minimiza-
tion in DC Drives", IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 328-336,
1991.
67. Michel A.N., and Miller R.K, (1977) Qualitative Analysis of Large Scale Dy-
namic Systems, Academic Press, New-York.
68. Morse A.S., (1980) "Global Stability of Parameter Adaptive Control Systems",
IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. AC-25, pp. 433-439.
69. Moody J., Darken D.J., (1989) "Fast Learning in Networks of Locally-Tuned
Processing Units," in Neural Computation, vol. 1, pp. 281-294.
70. Nam K, and Arapostathis A., (1988) "A Model Reference Adaptive Control
Scheme for Pure Feedback Nonlinear Systems", IEEE Trans. on Automatic
Control, vol. 33, pp. 803-811.
71. Narendra KS., Lin Y.H., and Valavani L.S., (1980) "Stable adaptive controller
design, Part II: Proof of stability", IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. AC-25,
pp. 440-448.
72. Narendra K.S., and Annaswamy A.M., (1987) "A new adaptive law for robust
adaptation with persistent excitation", IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. AC-
32, no. 2, pp. 134-145.
73. Narendra KS., Annaswamy A.M., (1989) Stable Adaptive Systems, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
74. Narendra KS., Parthasarathy K., (1990) "Identification and control of dynam-
ical systems using neural networks," IEEE Trans. on Neural Networks, vol.l,
no.l, pp. 4-27.
75. Narendra KS. ,Parthasarathy K, (1991) "Gradient methods for the optimiza-
tion of dynamical systems containing neural networks," IEEE Transactions on
Neural Networks, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 252-262.
76. Nijmeijer H., and van der Schaft A.J., (1989) Nonlinear Dynamical Control
Systems, New York, NY, Springer-Verlag.
77. Paretto P., Niez J.J., (1986) "Long term memory storage capacity of multicon-
nected neural networks," Bioi. Cybern., vol. 54, pp. 53-63.
78. Parks P.C., (1966) "Lyapunov redesign of model reference adaptive control
systems" ,IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. AC-ll, pp. 362-367.
79. Perkins J .R., Kumar P.R., (1990) "Stable ,Distributed, Real-Time Scheduling
of Manufacturing Systems", IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, vol. 35,
no. 3, pp. 289-298.
80. Pineda F.J., (1988) "Generalization of back propagation to recurrent net-
works," Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 59, no. 19, pp. 2229-2232.
References 189
81. Polycarpou M.M., Ioannou P.A., (1991) "Identification and control of nonlinear
systems using neural network models: design and stability analysis," Tech. Rep.
91-09-01, Univ. of Southern Cal., Los Angeles.
82. Polycarpou M.M., Ioannou P.A., (1994) "On the existence and uniqueness of
solutions in adaptive control systems," IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, vol.
30, no. 3, pp. 474-479.
83. Pomet J.-B., and Praly L., (1992) " Adaptive Nonlinear Regulation: Estimation
from the Lyapunov Equation", IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. 37, no. 6,
pp.729-740.
84. Rouche N., Habets P., and Laloy M., (1997) Stability Theory by Liapunov's
Direct Method, New York, Springer-Verlag.
85. Rovithakis G.A., Christodoulou M.A., (1994) "Adaptive Control of Unknown
Plants using Dynamical Neural Networks", IEEE Trans. Systems Man Cyber-
netics, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 400-412.
86. Rovithakis G.A., and Christodoulou M.A., (1995) "Direct Adaptive Regulation
of Unknown Nonlinear Dynamical Systems via Dynamic Neural Networks",
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 1578-
1594.
87. Rovithakis G.A., and Christodoulou M.A., (1997) "Neural Adaptive Regulation
of Unknown Nonlinear Dynamical Systems", IEEE Transactions on Systems,
Man and Cybernetics-Part B: Cybernetics, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 810-822.
88. Rovithakis G.A., and Christodoulou M.A., (1994) "Model Reference Adaptive
Control of Unknown Plants using Dynamic Neural Networks", Journal of Ap-
plied Mathematics and Computer Science, vol. 4, no. 3,pp. 433-446.
89. Rovithakis G.A., and Christodoulou M.A., (1995) "Regulation of Unknown
Nonlinear Dynamical Systems via Dynamical Neural Networks", Journal of
Intelligent and Robotic Systems, vol. 12, pp. 259-275.
90. Rovithakis G.A., and Christodoulou M.A., (1996) "Neural Adaptive Track-
ing Control of Unknown Plants via Recurrent Neural Networks", International
Journal of Intelligent Control and Systems, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 211-222.
91. Rovithakis G.A., and Christodoulou M.A., (1996) "Direct Adaptive Regulation
using Dynamic Neural Networks: Application to Dc Motor Speed Control",
IMACS International Journal: Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, vol.
41, pp. 53-62.
92. Rovithakis G.A., and Cristodoulou M.A., (1996) "On using Recurrent Neural
Network Models to Develop Direct Robust Adaptive Regulators for Unknown
Systems", Journal of Intelligent Automation and Soft Computing, vol. 2, no. 4,
pp. 321-338.
93. Rovithakis G.A., Gaganis V.I., Perrakis S.E. and Christodoulou M.A., (1999)
"Real Time Control of Manufacturing Cells using Dynamic Neural Networks",
Automatica, vol. 35, pp. 139-149.
94. Rovithakis G.A., (1999) "Robust Neural Adaptive Stabilization of Unknown
Systems with Measurement Noise", IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and
Cybernetics, vol. 29, no. 3, pp.453-458.
95. Rovithakis G.A., (1999) "Robustifying Nonlinear Systems using High Order
Neural Network Controllers", IEEE Trans. Automatic. Control., vol. 44, no. 1,
pp. 102-108.
96. Rovithakis G.A., (1999) "Tracking Control of Multi Input Affine Nonlinear
Dynamical Systemswith Unknown Nonlinearities using Dynamical Neural Net-
works", IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetic-Part B: Cybernet-
ics, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 179-189.
190 References
97. Rumelhart D., Hinton D., Williams G., (1986) "Learning internal representa-
tions by error propagation," in Parallel Distributed Processing, D. Rumelhart
and F. McClelland, Eds, Vol. 1, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
98. Sadegh N., (1991) "Nonlinear identification and control via neural networks",
Control Systems with Inexact Dynamic Models, DSC-vol. 33, ASME Winter
Annual Meeting.
99. Sadegh N., (1993) "A percept ron network for functional identification using
radial gaussian networks", IEEE Trans. Neural Networks, vol. 4, no. 6, pp.
982-988.
100. Sanner R.M., Slotine J.-J.E., (1992) "Gaussian neural networks for direct
adaptive control", IEEE Trans. Neural Networks, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 837-863.
101. Sastry S., and Bodson M., (1989) Adaptive Control: Stability, Convergence
and Robustness, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
102. Sastry S. and Isidori A., (1989) "Adaptive Control of Linearizable Systems",
IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. 34, no. 11, pp. 1123-1131.
103. Schonberger R.J., (1984) "Just-In-Time Production Systems: Replacing Com-
plexi.ty with Simplicity in Manufacturing Management", Ind. Eng., pp.52-63.
104. Sharifnia A., (1994) "Stability and Performance of Distributed Production
Control Methods based on Continuous-Flow Models", IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 725-737.
105. Taylor D.G., Kokotovic P.V., Marino R., and Kanellakopoulos I., (1989)
"Adaptive Regulation of Nonlinear Systems with Unmodeled Dynamics", IEEE
Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 405-412.
106. Werbos P.J., (1990) "Backpropagation through time: what it does and how
to do it", Proc. IEEE, vol. 78, pp. 1550-1560.
107. Williams R.J., Zipser D., (1989) "A learning algorithm for continually running
fully recurrent neural networks," Neural Computation, vol. 1, pp. 270-280.
INDEX
error fitering method 54, 62, 100, 124 longest processing time first (LPT) 141
error equation 36 longest processing time remaining
e:-modification algorithm 118 (LPR) 141
existence of solution of differential logistic function 12
equations 30 Lyapunov function 18, 20, 22, 34, 36,
expert systems 143 54, 63, 73, 86, 101
knowledge-based, 143 Lyapunov equation 34, 36
rule-based, 143
machine starvation 148
feedback linearization tecniques 6 Machine Tool Division 166
feedforward multilayer neural network machine parts inspection 169
2 machine tool storage & pre-adjustment
first-in-first-out (FIFO) 141, 173 169
flexible manufacturing systems (FMS) machine sawing 169
138-139 machine marking 169
forward modeling 2 machine large planing 169
Frobenius matrix norm 8 machine jig drill 169
machine milling 169
Gantt charts 139 machine manual drilling 169
gradient method 17 machine circular grinding 169
gaussian node network 1 machine surface grinding 169
grammatical inference 10 machine manual turning 169
machine turning CNC 169
Hopfield neural network 2, 12 machine small planing 169
machine boring center CNC 169
identification problem 10 machine de burring 169
identification model 10 makespan 162, 163
idling clause 147 manufacturing systems 137
indicator function 23, 68 manufacturing cell dynamic model 147
industrial databases 139 Mechanical Workshop 166
integer programming 141 modeling error 15, 61
intermediate buffer 160 Monte Carlo 141
inververce dynamics modeling 3 multiplicative disturbance 123