This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCSII.2021.3137836, IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs
Induced L∞ Output Feedback Control For
Continuous-time Systems
Xiao-Heng Chang, Member, IEEE and Rong-Rong Liu
Abstract—This brief is concerned with the induced L∞ output
feedback control problem for continuous-time systems. And
the main task is to design a desired controller such that the
closed-loop system is asymptotically stable and satisfies the given
induced L∞ performance index. An induced L∞ performance
analysis criterion is proposed for the considered system via the
descriptor representation approach. Then, sufficient condition for
the induced L∞ controller is expressed in the form of the linear
matrix inequality (LMI). Finally, an integrating circuit is used
to explain the effectiveness and feasibility for the given induced
L∞ controller design strategy.
Index Terms: Continuous-time systems, induced L∞ per-
formance, output feedback control, linear matrix inequalities
(LMIs).
I. I NTRODUCTION
Due to the economic and operational limitations of measur-
ing equipment, it is unattainable to get the entire state variables
for actual systems in many cases. However, the whole state
of the system is required to be measured in the state feed-
back. Considering the cost, reliability and simplicity, output
feedback is always used to control the stability of the system.
Hence, the research of output feedback control for system has
more practical significance. In recent decades, a large number
of researchers have focused on output feedback control and got
a great many results [1] – [5]. In [1], tracking control method
of the adaptive fuzzy output-feedback was presented for un-
certain switched nonlinear systems with arbitrary switching
and given performance restrict. In [2], a new security control
concept was proposed, and a new event-triggered scheme
with decentralized output feedback control was designed by
Lyapunov stability theory and stochastic analysis technique.
In [3], the adaptive decentralized controller design problem
of observer-based for nonlinear systems was investigated. The
design problem of the dynamic output feedback control for
discrete-time semi-Markov jump systems was considered in
[4]. In [5], a new event-triggered adaptive dynamic output
feedback sliding mode control with actuator failure and output,
input quantization was proposed.
As we all know, external disturbances have attracted wide
attention in control theory and application, many popular algo-
rithms have been developed gradually. However, it is not easy
to know the statistical characteristics of external disturbances
This work was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of
China under Grant 61773298 and Grant 62173261. (Corresponding author:
Xiao-Heng Chang.)
X.-H. Chang and R.-R. Liu are with the School of Information Science and
Engineering, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430081,
China (e-mail: changxiaoheng@sina.com; qliurongrong@sina.com).
1549-7747 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Nantes. Downloaded on January 03,2022 at 14:19:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
in many cases. In order to get over this difficulty, some
alternative methods have been drawn into, like for instance
H∞ (energy-to-energy) performance [6] – [9], generalized
H2 (energy-to-peak) performance [10] – [12], and induced
L∞ (peak-to-peak) performance [13] – [16]. The induced L∞
control is to design a desired controller so that the induced
L∞ norm of the disturbance input and the controlled output
is designed to less than (or equal to) the given value or
can be minimized. The induced L∞ performance was first
proposed in [17], the problem of induced L∞ control (filtering)
got significant concern [13] – [16]. In [13], the induced L2
and L∞ output feedback control problem for discrete-time
systems was studied. The authors used the state feedback
control method to implement the design of output feedback
controller. In [14], the method of designing peak-to-peak filter
for the considered system with control output and performance
output quantization was given. In [15], the problem of peak-
to-peak filtering for nonlinear Markov jump systems was
considered. In [16], the design conditions of fuzzy filter with
gain uncertainty were studied. Until now, few works have
considered the induced L∞ output feedback control problem
based on descriptor representation approach.
In the mentioned results [13] – [16], the problem of induced
L∞ control (filtering) was investigated via LMIs. It should
be noted that if the above methods are applied to the output
feedback control system, nonlinear coupling terms between the
system matrices and the controller gain matrix will be difficult
to deal with. The above discussions become the research
motive of this brief, the contributions are concluded as follows:
1) The problem of the induced L∞ output feedback control
for the continuous-time systems is studied based on the
descriptor representation approach;
2) The semi-positive definite Lyapunov matrix on the main
diagonal is avoided, and the strictly controller design condition
is given via LMIs.
N otations: The symmetry matrix A > 0 (or A ≥ 0) means
that A is positive definite (or semi-positive definite). He{A} is
defined as He{A} = A + AT . diag{ · · · } denotes a diagonal
matrix. We use (∗) as an ellipsis for the terms that are intro-
duced by symmetry. L∞ [0, ∞) indicates the space p of bound
vector functions over [0, ∞). kz(t)k∞ = supt z T (t)z(t)
means the L∞ norm where supt z(t) signifies the supremum
of the vector z(t).
II. P ROBLEM S TATEMENT A ND P RELIMINARIES
Consider a continuous-time system described by the follow-
ing state-space equation:
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCSII.2021.3137836, IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs

where
ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + Bu(t) + F w(t) 1
He{P Â} + P E + 2Ĉ T Ĉ
Φ1 =
y(t) = C1 x(t) + Hw(t) (1) λ (7)
1
z(t) = C2 x(t) Ψ = 2 [ Â B̂ ]T Ĉ T Ĉ[ Â B̂ ].
λ
where x(t) ∈ Rn is the state variable, y(t) ∈ Rf is Proof: For the closed-loop system (4) obtained by de-
the measurement output, u(t) ∈ Rm is the control input, scriptor representation approach, the Lyapunov function with
z(t) ∈ Rq is the controlled output, and w(t) ∈ Rv is the semi-positive definite matrix is chosen as
disturbance belonging to L∞ [0, ∞). The matrices A ∈ Rn×n , V (ξ(t)) = ξ T (t)P Eξ(t), P E = E T P T ≥ 0 (8)
B ∈ Rn×m , F ∈ Rn×v , C1 ∈ Rf ×n , H ∈ Rf ×v , and
C2 ∈ Rq×n are system matrices. and then
The output feedback controller is described as V̇ (ξ(t)) = ξ T (t)P [Âξ(t) + B̂w(t)]
(9)
u(t) = Ky(t) (2) + [Âξ(t) + B̂w(t)]T P T ξ(t).
where K is controller gain matrix to be designed. Next, pre- and post-multiplying the (6) by [ ξ T (t) wT (t) ]
Substituting (2) into (1), it yields and its transposition, respectively, there exists
ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + BKy(t) + F w(t) 1
He{ξ T (t)P [Âξ(t) + B̂w(t)]} + ξ T (t)P Eξ(t)
(3) λ
0 · ẏ(t) = C1 x(t) − y(t) + Hw(t). 1
+ 2 [Âξ(t) + B̂w(t)]T Ĉ T Ĉ[Âξ(t) + B̂w(t)] (10)
Defining ξ(t) = [ x (t) T T
y (t) ] . Then, according to T λ
equations (1) and (3), the closed-loop system can be deduced + 2ξ T (t)Ĉ T Ĉξ(t) − γ 2 wT (t)w(t) < 0.
as follows: According to (8), (9), and (10), we know that if (6) holds,
˙ = Âξ(t) + B̂w(t)
E ξ(t)
(4) a conclusion can be easily identified as
z(t) = Ĉξ(t) 1 1
V̇ (ξ(t)) + V (ξ(t)) + 2 ż T (t)ż(t) + 2z T (t)z(t)
where λ λ (11)

In×n 0

A

BK
 < γ 2 wT (t)w(t).
E= , Â =
0 0 C1 −I Then, we can know that V̇ (ξ(t)) < 0 if w(t) = 0. Hence,
 
F if the inequality (6) is true, we can deem that the closed-loop
B̂ = , Ĉ = [ C2 0 ].
H system (4) is asymptotically stable with w(t) = 0.
Next, we are in a position to establish the induced L∞
Definition 1. [14] The closed-loop system (4) is asymptoti-
performance γ. First, for a scalar λ > 0, the well-known
cally stable and preserves the induced L∞ performance when
inequality conclusion is recalled as
the following two conditions are satisfied: 1) The closed-loop
system (4) is asymptotically stable when w(t) = 0; 2) Under 1 T 1 1
ż (t)z(t) + z T (t)ż(t) ≤ z T (t)z(t) + 2 ż T (t)ż(t).
zero initial conditions, for any nonzero w(t) ∈ L∞ and given λ λ λ
(12)
γ > 0, the induced L∞ norm satisfies kz(t)k∞ ≤ γkw(t)k∞ ,
According to (11) and (12), one gives
where γ is a prescribed performance index, z(t) is the
controlled output, and w(t) is the external disturbance input. 1 1 1
V̇ (ξ(t)) + V (ξ(t)) + z T (t)ż(t) + ż T (t)z(t)
λ λ λ (13)
+ z T (t)z(t) < γ 2 wT (t)w(t).
III. M AIN R ESULTS
We will commit to solving the problem of the induced L∞ With eλt > 0 is multiplied to both sides of the inequality
control for the closed-loop system (4) in this section. Firstly, (13), it will result in
we give a new induced L∞ performance analysis condition for 1
eλt [ V̇ (ξ(t)) + λV (ξ(t)) + z T (t)ż(t) + ż T (t)z(t)
the closed-loop system (4). Then, a set of LMIs are used to λ (14)
give the corresponding controller design condition under the + λz T (t)z(t) ] < eλt γ 2 wT (t)w(t).
specified induced L∞ performance criterion.
The inequality (14) can be transformed to
Theorem 1. Let γ > 0 be a given performance index, the
d{eλt [ V (ξ(t)) + z T (t)z(t) ]}
closed-loop system (4) is asymptotically stable and preserves < λeλt γ 2 wT (t)w(t). (15)
the specified induced L∞ performance, if there exist scalar dt
λ > 0 and matrix P ∈ R(n+f )×(n+f ) make the following Further, integrating both sides of the matrix inequality (15)
matrix inequalities hold: from 0 to t will deduce
Z t
P E = ET P T ≥ 0 (5) eλt [V (ξ(t)) + z T (t)z(t)] < γ 2 λeλs wT (s)w(s)ds
  0
Φ1 ∗ < eλt γ 2 k w(t) k2∞ .
1 T T +Ψ<0 (6)
λ B̂ P −γ 2 I (16)

1549-7747 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Nantes. Downloaded on January 03,2022 at 14:19:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCSII.2021.3137836, IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs

Then, we can rewrite the inequality (16) as  Substitutingthe structure matrices E, Â, B̂, Ĉ, and Q =
T 2
Q1 0
V (ξ(t)) + z (t)z(t) < γ k w(t) k2∞ . (17) Q2 R Q2
into the inequality (23), where R is a dimen-

Since V (ξ(t)) ≥ 0, from the inequality (17), we can obtain sion adjustment matrix, one gives
 
the following conclusion: Θ1 ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
1
 1 T − λ He{Q 2} ∗ ∗ ∗ 
 Θ2
k z(t) k∞ < γ k w(t) k∞ (18) 1 T 2

 F
 λ λ H −γ I ∗ ∗ <0

which is the induced L∞ performance condition. The closed-  Θ3 C2 BKQ2 C2 F −λ2 I ∗ 
loop system (4) satisfies the asymptotic stability and the C2 Q1 0 0 0 − 21 I
induced L∞ performance index is also guaranteed. Hence, (24)
the conditions given in Definition 1 are satisfied. Then, we where
complete the proof. 1
Θ1 = He{AQ1 + BKQ2 R} + Q1
λ
A criterion of the induced L∞ performance analysis has 1
Θ2 = (C1 Q1 − Q2 R + QT2 K T B T )
been formulated in Theorem 1. In fact, the above condition λ
is nonlinear matrix inequality, then we give the following Θ3 = C2 AQ1 + C2 BKQ2 R.
induced L∞ controller design result. By defining N = KQ2 , we can obtain (20). Then, we
Theorem 2. Let γ > 0 and λ > 0 be given performance complete the proof.
index and scalar, the closed-loop system (4) is asymptotically
stable and preserves the specified induced L∞ performance, Remark 1. In Theorem 2, we obtain the desired induced
if there exist the positive definite matrix Q1 ∈ Rn×n , matrices L∞ controller design condition, which meets the requirements
Q2 ∈ Rf ×f , and N ∈ Rm×f such that the following matrix of the Definition 1. It is worth noting that the generation
inequalities hold: of Q2 in (20) (the position of Ω2 ) is avoided by defining
EQ = QT E T ≥ 0 (19) Q1 0
Q= . Because the presence of Q2 will restrict
  Q2 R Q2
Ω1 ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ the dimension of the system matrices to square matrices, which

 Ω2 − λ1 He{Q2 } ∗ ∗ ∗ 
 is not acceptable in the design of controller. And the dimension
1 T 1 T

 λF λH −γ 2 I ∗ ∗ <0
 adjustment matrix R is to adjust the dimensions of system
 Ω3 C2 BN C2 F −λ2 I ∗  matrices. Its further explanation is shown in Remark 2.
C2 Q1 0 0 0 − 21 I
(20) IV. S IMULATION
where
1
Ω1 = He{AQ1 + BN R} + Q1 L1 L2
λ R1
1 1
Ω2 = (C1 Q1 − Q2 R + N T B T ) i1 i2
λ ic
Ω3 = C2 AQ1 + C2 BN R  
and the controller gain matrix K is chosen as us ĉ C uc Ċ R2 is
 
K = N Q−1
2 . (21)
Proof: By defining P = Q−T , pre- and post-multiplying 0
(5) by QT and Q, respectively, we can get (19).
Then, using Schur complement to the matrix inequality (6), Fig. 1. Integrating circuit.
one gives
 1 In this section, we will introduce an integrating circuit
∗ ∗ ∗

λ He{P Â} + P E and structure its dynamic model. The research plant is the
1 T T

 λ B̂ P −γ 2 I ∗ ∗   < 0. (22) integrating circuit which has been shown in Fig. 1. The two
 Ĉ Â Ĉ B̂ −λ2 I ∗  meshes I and II have been marked with counter clockwise
Ĉ 0 0 − 12 I detour; R1 and R2 are resistance elements; us is controlled
Multiplying the two sides of the inequality (22) by voltage source and its output voltage is controlled by the
diag{QT , I, I, I } and diag{Q, I, I, I }, respectively, it voltage or current of another branch; uc is capacitor and C
yields is capacitance component with zero initial energies; L1 and
 1 L2 are inductor elements; is is controlled current source and
∗ ∗ ∗

λ He{ÂQ} + EQ its output current is controlled by other branch currents or
1 T

λ B̂ −γ 2 I ∗ ∗   < 0. voltages; i1 , i2 , and ic represent the branch currents of the
 (23)
 Ĉ ÂQ Ĉ B̂ −λ2 I ∗  corresponding three branches, respectively; node 0 and 1 are
ĈQ 0 0 − 21 I reference node and independent node, respectively.

1549-7747 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Nantes. Downloaded on January 03,2022 at 14:19:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCSII.2021.3137836, IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs

Next, we can get the following related current and voltage 0.06
equations from Fig. 1: x1(t)
0.04 x2(t)
di1 duc
VR1 = i1 R1 , VL1 = L1 , ic = C x3(t)
dt dt (25) 0.02
di2
VR2 = (i2 + is )R2 , VL2 = L2 .
dt 0
According to KCL equation for node 1, we can easily obtain
-0.02
0 = i1 − ic − i2 . (26)
-0.04
From loops I and II, the corresponding KVL equations can 0 10 20 30 40 50
be written as Time (sec)

0 = us − uc − VR1 − VL1 , 0 = uc − VL2 − VR2 . (27) Fig. 2. History of the system states x(t).

Substituting (25) into (26) and (27), we can know that 0.1
duc
C = i1 − i2 0.08
dt
di1
L1 = −uc − i1 R1 + us (28) 0.06
dt
di2
L2 = uc − i2 R2 − is R2 . 0.04
dt
In Table I, the relevant parameters of the integrating circuit 0.02
are given , the following mathematical model can be obtained:
0
duc 0 10 20 30 40 50
= 5i1 − 5i2 Time (sec)
dt
di1
= −0.5uc − 10i1 + 0.5us + w(t)
p
Fig. 3. History of z T (t)z(t)/supt (wT (t)w(t)).
dt (29)
di2
= uc − 15i2 − 15is
dt The Fig. 2 shows the responses of the system states
y(t) = i2 + 0.3w(t), z(t) = uc . and the Fig. 3 shows the ratio for the simulation results
In the state space modeling, x(t) = [ uc i1 i2 ]T is of
p the controlled output to the external disturbance, i.e.,
chosen as state variable, u(t) = [ us T
is ] is chosen as z T (t)z(t)/supt (wT (t)w(t)), is 0.0944, less than the spec-
controlled input; i2 is chosen as measurement output; uc is ified bound γ = 1.0. The result of calculation and simulation
chosen as controlled output. Then, the above system (29) can shows that the condition presented in Theorem 2 is suitable
be represented in the form of system (1) with for the controller design for the above system (30). In other
    words, the induced L∞ performance index γ = 1.0 for the
0 5 −5 0 0 system (30) is guaranteed in the circumstances.
A =  −0.5 −10 0  , B =  0.5 0 
1 0 −15 0 −15 TABLE I
RELATED PARAMETERS OF THE INTEGRATING CIRCUIT.
T
C1 = [ 0 0 1 ], F = [ 0 1 0 ]
C2 = [ 1 0 0 ], H = 0.3. R1 Resistance of resistor 1 20 Ω
(30) R2 Resistance of resistor 2 15 Ω
L1 Inductance of inductor 1 2000 mH
Next, the controller gain matrix K will be designed for L2 Inductance of inductor 2 1000 mH
the continuous-time system (30) based on the design criterion C Capacitance of capacitor 1 200 mF
provided by Theorem 2.
Considering the induced L∞ performance for the system
(30), the controller gain matrix (21) is designed by the Remark 2. For the known dimension adjustment matrix
obtained result in Theorem 2. For the chosen scalars γ = 1.0, R ∈ Rf ×n , the inequality (20) which obtained by Theorem
λ = 0.6, and matrix R = [ 1 0 0 ], by using the LMI 2 can be used to settle the induced L∞ output feedback con-
Control Toolbox, it can calculate the induced L∞ controller troller design problem of continuous-time systems. It should
gain matrix K as be noticed that the form of dimension adjustment matrix is
R = [ If ×f 0f ×(n−f ) ] in this brief. Then, the inequality
K = [ −2.1978 − 0.0911 ]T . (31) (20) in Theorem 2 can be verified via the LMI Control Toolbox
in Matlab.
In the actual circuit system, we suppose the initial condition
of the states as x(0) = [ 0 0 0 ]T and the disturbance has the Remark 3. From the above we can see that the matrix
form of w(t) = 0.5e(−0.2t) cos t. inequality P E ≥ 0 is verified by the matrix inequality

1549-7747 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Nantes. Downloaded on January 03,2022 at 14:19:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCSII.2021.3137836, IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs
EQ ≥ 0. In order to process the semi-positive definite matrix
inequality
 EQ ≥ 0 by using the LMI Control Toolbox, defining
Q1 Q2
Q= with Q1 > 0 and Q2 = 0. Then, the semi-
Q3 Q4
positive definite matrix inequality EQ ≥ 0 can be expressed
by LMI Q1 > 0.
Remark 4. This brief is concerned with the induced L∞
output feedback control problem. The proposed method is
summarized as follows: 1) The output feedback system is given
by using the descriptor representation approach; 2) A new
induced L∞ performance analysis criterion is presented; 3)
The corresponding controller design condition is obtained; 4)
The effectiveness of the proposed method is verified by an
integrating circuit.
Comparative explanations: The control method proposed
for the induced L∞ output feedback control for continuous-
time systems is active in this brief. Compared with many
existing researches on the feedback control (filtering) design
[13] – [16], the main advantages for the presented control
method are summarized as follows:
1) The induced L∞ control problem is studied in this brief
based on the descriptor representation approach. Although the
output feedback control problem is discussed in [13], it is
studied based on state feedback control. Compared with the
methods of [13] – [16], the descriptor representation approach
will successfully avoid nonlinear coupling terms between the
system matrices and the controller gain matrix, which leads to
derive strictly controller design conditions easily;
2) The method proposed in this brief gives an effective way
to work on the problem of the induced L∞ controller design
for the system (4) via the LMIs. If the presented methods of
[13] – [16] are directly applied to the induced L∞ controller
design for the system (4), the Lyapunov matrix P E ≥ 0
will lead to unacceptable nonlinearities. This means that in
the methods proposed by [13] – [16], the Lyapunov matrix
P > 0 appearing on the main diagonal will be changed to
P E ≥ 0, and the result is infeasible for the induced L∞
controller design for the system (4). The method presented of
this brief avoids the semi-positive definite Lyapunov matrix
on the main diagonal.
V. C ONCLUSIONS
The problem of the induced L∞ output feedback control
for the continuous-time systems has been investigated via the
descriptor representation approach in this brief. The induced
L∞ performance for the control system has been considered,
and the controller design method has been proposed according
to LMIs to ensure the asymptotically stability of the considered
system. Finally, the example of integrating circuit has been
presented, and it explains the applicability and validity of
the proposed design method by the simulation calculation.
Admittedly, if the dimension adjustment matrix is free, the
design conservatism will be reduced. And the problem needs to
be further explored. In addition, considering that there always
exist nonlinearities or uncertainties for systems, the proposed
design method may be generalized to the robust control [18],
[19] or filtering [20], [21] in the future work.
1549-7747 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Nantes. Downloaded on January 03,2022 at 14:19:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
R EFERENCES
[1] Y. Wang, Y. Chang, A. F. Alkhateeb, and N. D. Alotaibi, “Adaptive
fuzzy output-feedback tracking control for switched nonstrict-feedback
nonlinear systems with prescribed performance,” Circuits, Systems, and
Signal Processing, vol, 40. no, 1, pp. 88–113, Apr. 2021.
[2] Z. Gu, J. H. Park, D. Yue, Z.-G. Wu, and X. Xie, “Event-triggered
security output feedback control for networked interconnected systems
subject to cyber-attacks,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics: Systems, vol, 51. no, 10, pp. 6197–6206, Oct. 2021.
[3] H. Wang, X. Liu, J. Bao, X.-J. Xie, and S. Li, “Adaptive neural output-
feedback decentralized control for large-scale nonlinear systems with
stochastic disturbances,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and
Learning Systems, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 972–983, Mar. 2020.
[4] Y. Tian, H. Yan, H. Zhang, X. Zhan, and Y. Peng, “Dynamic output-
feedback control of linear semi-Markov jump systems with incomplete
semi-Markov kernel,” Automatica, vol. 117, pp. 1–7, Jul. 2020.
[5] M. Li, M. Liu, and Y. Zhang, “Fault-tolerant output feedback sliding
mode control with event-triggered transmission and signal quantization,”
Journal of the Franklin Institute, vol. 357, no. 4, pp. 1987–2007, Mar.
2020.
[6] X.-H. Chang, R.-R. Liu, and J. H. Park, “A further study on output
feedback H∞ control for discrete-time systems,” IEEE Transactions on
Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs, vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 305–309,
Feb. 2020.
[7] Y. Wei, J. H. Park, J. Qiu, and H. Jung, “Reliable output feedback
control for piecewise affine systems with markov-type sensor failure,”
IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs, vol. 65,
no. 7, pp. 913–917, Jul. 2018.
[8] J. Dong and G.-H. Yang, “Reliable state feedback control of T-S fuzzy
systems with sensor faults,” IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, vol.
23, no. 2, pp. 421–433, Apr. 2015.
[9] N. Gasmi, M. Boutayeb, A. Thabet, and M. Aoun, “Sliding window
based nonlinear H∞ filtering: design and experimental results,” IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs, vol. 66, no. 2,
pp. 302–306, Feb. 2019.
[10] C. K. Ahn, S. Zhao, Y. S. Shmaliy, and H. Li, “On the l2 -l∞ and
H∞ performances of the continuous-time deadbeat H2 FIR filter,” IEEE
Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs, vol. 65, no. 11,
pp. 1798–1802, Nov. 2018.
[11] S. He, “Energy-to-peak filtering for T-S fuzzy systems with Markovian
jumping: The finite time case,” Neurocomputing, vol. 168, pp. 348–355,
Nov. 2015.
[12] L. Li and L. Zhong, “Generalised nonlinear l2 -l∞ filtering of discrete-
time Markov jump descriptor systems,” International Journal of Control,
vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 653–664, Mar. 2014.
[13] U. Shaked and I. Yaesh, “Robust servo synthesis by minimization
of induced L2 and L∞ norms,” IEEE International Symposium on
Industrial Electronics, pp. 24–29, Nov. 2007.
[14] X.-H. Chang and Y.-M. Wang, “Peak-to-peak filtering for networked
nonlinear DC motor systems with quantization,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Informatics, vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 5378–5388, Dec. 2018.
[15] S. He and F. Liu, “Robust peak-to-peak filtering for Markov jump
systems,” Signal Processing, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 513–522, Feb. 2010.
[16] X.-H. Chang, J. Xiong, and J. H. Park, “Estimation for a class of
parameter-controlled tunnel diode circuits,” IEEE Transactions on Sys-
tems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 4697–4707,
Nov. 2020.
[17] M. Vidyasagar, “Optimal rejection of persistent bounded disturbances,”
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 527–534,
Jun. 1986.
[18] L. Liu, A. Chen, and Y.-J. Liu, “Adaptive fuzzy output-feedback control
for switched uncertain nonlinear systems with full-state constraints,”
IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, to be published, doi: 10.1109/TCY-
B.2021.3050510.
[19] X. Yu, W. He, H. Li, and J. Sun, “Adaptive fuzzy full-state and output-
feedback control for uncertain robots with output constraint,” IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, vol. 51, no.
11, pp. 6994–7007, Nov. 2021.
[20] W. Ma, J. Qiu, J. Liang, and B. Chen, “Linear Kalman filtering algorithm
with noisy control input variable,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and
Systems II: Express Briefs, vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 1282–1286, Jul. 2019.
[21] S. Li, Y. Hu, L. Zheng, Z. Li, X. Chen, and T. Fernando, et al.,
“Stochastic event-triggered cubature Kalman filter for power system
dynamic state estimation,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems
II: Express Briefs, vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 1552–1556, Sep. 2019.