
This paper investigates iterative learning control for Caputo fractional-order systems with one-sided Lipschitz nonlinearity. Both open- and closed-loop P-type learning algorithms are proposed to achieve perfect tracking for the desired trajectory, and their convergence conditions are established. It is shown that the algorithms can make the output tracking error converge to zero along the iteration axis. A simulation example illustrates the application of the theoretical findings, and shows the effectiveness of the proposed approach.
Citation: Hanjiang Wu, Jie Huang, Kehan Wu, António M. Lopes, Liping Chen. Precise tracking control via iterative learning for one-sided Lipschitz Caputo fractional-order systems[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(2): 3095-3109. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024137
[1] | Chaoyue Wang, Zhiyao Ma, Shaocheng Tong . Adaptive fuzzy output-feedback event-triggered control for fractional-order nonlinear system. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(12): 12334-12352. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022575 |
[2] | Shixuan Yao, Xiaochen Liu, Yinghui Zhang, Ze Cui . An approach to solving optimal control problems of nonlinear systems by introducing detail-reward mechanism in deep reinforcement learning. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(9): 9258-9290. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022430 |
[3] | Yijie Zhang, Yuhang Cai . Adaptive dynamic self-learning grey wolf optimization algorithm for solving global optimization problems and engineering problems. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(3): 3910-3943. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024174 |
[4] | Zichen Wang, Xin Wang . Fault-tolerant control for nonlinear systems with a dead zone: Reinforcement learning approach. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(4): 6334-6357. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023274 |
[5] | Yufeng Qian . Exploration of machine algorithms based on deep learning model and feature extraction. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 7602-7618. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021376 |
[6] | Wei Zou, Yanxia Shen, Lei Wang . Design of robust fuzzy iterative learning control for nonlinear batch processes. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(11): 20274-20294. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023897 |
[7] | Chengxi Wu, Yuewei Dai, Liang Shan, Zhiyu Zhu, Zhengtian Wu . Data-driven trajectory tracking control for autonomous underwater vehicle based on iterative extended state observer. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(3): 3036-3055. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022140 |
[8] | Vladimir Djordjevic, Hongfeng Tao, Xiaona Song, Shuping He, Weinan Gao, Vladimir Stojanovic . Data-driven control of hydraulic servo actuator: An event-triggered adaptive dynamic programming approach. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(5): 8561-8582. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023376 |
[9] | Qing Wu, Chunjiang Zhang, Mengya Zhang, Fajun Yang, Liang Gao . A modified comprehensive learning particle swarm optimizer and its application in cylindricity error evaluation problem. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(3): 1190-1209. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019057 |
[10] | Haitao Gan, Zhi Yang, Ji Wang, Bing Li . $ \ell_{1} $-norm based safe semi-supervised learning. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 7727-7742. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021383 |
This paper investigates iterative learning control for Caputo fractional-order systems with one-sided Lipschitz nonlinearity. Both open- and closed-loop P-type learning algorithms are proposed to achieve perfect tracking for the desired trajectory, and their convergence conditions are established. It is shown that the algorithms can make the output tracking error converge to zero along the iteration axis. A simulation example illustrates the application of the theoretical findings, and shows the effectiveness of the proposed approach.
Recently, fractional calculus emerged as a crucial tool for describing the dynamics of real-world problems [1,2,3]. Indeed, many fractional-order systems (FOSs) have been reported in the literature, focusing on stability, fault tolerant control, and sliding mode control, among other issues (see [4,5,6] and references therein). Iterative learning control (ILC) is an interesting approach to obtain trajectory tracking of repetitive systems operated over finite-time [7]. In recent years, FOSs and ILC have been merged with the goal of increasing tracking performance. In [8], a Dα-type ILC scheme was designed and its convergence was addressed. In [9,10,11], both the P- and D-type learning schemes were adopted in FOSs with Lipschitz nonlinearities. In [12], fractional-order PID learning control was proposed for linear FOSs, and output convergence was analyzed using the Lebesgue-p norm. In [13], the ILC framework was adopted for FOSs with randomly varying trial lengths. In [14,15], ILC problems of multi-agent systems with fractional-order models were investigated. Despite many relevant contributions, it should be pointed out that the above mentioned works mainly address linear and Lipschitz FOSs. Moreover, a variety of control strategies have been proposed for nonlinear systems (NSs) to achieve the desired performance. In [16,17], the convergence analysis for locally Lipschitz NSs was addessed based on the contraction mapping approach. In [18], adaptive optimal control was investigated for NSs based on the policy iteration algorithm. In [19], zero-sum control for tidal turbine systems was studied though a reinforcement learning method.
Compared with classical Lipschitz nonlinearity, one-sided Lipschitz (OSL) nonlinearity possesses less conservatism. Therefore, in recent years, is has often been used in control systems. Moreover, in many practical problems, the OSL constant is much smaller than the Lipschitz one, which simplifies the estimation of the influence of nonlinearities. OSL systems are a wide class of NSs, which contain Lipschitz systems as particular cases. Practical examples are Chua's circuits, Lorenz systems, and electromechanical systems [20,21,22]. In [23,24,25], observer design issues for OSL NSs were investigated. In [26], the classical OSL was considered, and an observer was designed by introducing the quadratically inner-bounded (QIB) constraint. In recent years, observer design and control of OSL NSs has attracted considerable attention. In [27], full- and reduced-order observers were derived via the Riccati equation. In [28], exponential observer design was investigated. In [29], tracking control for OSL nonlinear differential inclusions was considered. In [30], H∞ attenuation control was considered for OSL NSs in the finite frequency domain. In [31], event-triggered sliding mode control was studied for OSL NSs with uncertainties. In [32,33], consensus control was discussed for OSL nonlinear multi-agent systems. Other meaningful results on ILC of OSL NSs have also been reported [34,35,36]. In particular, the QIB constraint was employed to reach perfect trajectory tracking [34,35]. Note that the above-mentioned results are about classical integer-order systems. To the best of the authors' knowledge, for FOSs with OSL nonlinearity, the problem of how to achieve exact trajectory tracking through appropriate ILC design has not yet been investigated, which motivates the present study.
This paper deals with the ILC of a family of Caputo FOSs, where the fractional derivative is in the interval 0 and 1. The considered nonlinearity satisfies the OSL condition, which encompasses the classical Lipschitz condition. Open- and closed-loop P-type learning control algorithms are adopted. The convergence of the tracking error is guaranteed with the generalized Gronwall inequality. The novelty of this paper is summarized in the next two points.
● Unlike the control methods in references [18,19,29,30,31,32,33], the ILC method proposed in this paper can lead OSL nonlinear Caputo FOSs to exhibit perfect tracking capability;
● In contrast to the works of [34,35,36], the ILC theory is extended from integer-order OSL NSs to fractional-order OSL NSs.
This paper is divided into 5 sections. Section 2 establishes some elemental assumptions and formulates the ILC problem of fractional OSL NSs. Section 3 constructs the open- and closed-loop P-type control algorithms, and presents the corresponding convergence results. Section 4 includes a numerical example to show the suitability of the algorithms. Finally, Section 5 summarizes the conclusions.
Some relevant lemmas and definitions are introduced. Afterwards, the problem to be tackled is formulated.
Definition 1 [37]. The Riemann-Liouville integral of order α>0 of a function x(t) is
Iα0,tx(t)=1Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1x(ξ)dξ,t∈[0,∞), |
where Γ(α) stands for the Gamma function.
Definition 2 [37]. The Caputo derivative of order 0<α<1 of a function x(t) is
CDα0,tx(t)=I1−α0,tddtx(t)=1Γ(1−α)∫t0(t−ξ)−α˙x(ξ)dξ,t∈[0,∞). |
Lemma 1 [38]. Consider the differentiable vector x(t)∈Rn. It follows that, for any time instant t≥0, we have
CDα0,t(xT(t)x(t))≤2xT(t)CDα0,tx(t),∀α∈(0,1), |
where the superscript T denotes the vector (or matrix) transpose.
Lemma 2. (Generalized Gronwall Inequality) [9] Consider that the function u(t) is continuous on the interval t∈[0,T], and let v(t−ξ) be nonnegative and continuous on 0≤ξ≤t≤T. Additionally, consider that the function w(t) is positive continuous and nondecreasing on t∈[0,T]. If
u(t)≤w(t)+∫t0v(t−ξ)u(ξ)dξ,t∈[0,T], |
then we have
u(t)≤w(t)e∫t0v(t−ξ)dξ,t∈[0,T]. |
To simplify the notation, in the following, we use Dα to refer to the Caputo derivative CDα0,t.
Let us consider the nonlinear FOS
{Dαxk(t)=Axk(t)+Buk(t)+f(xk(t)),yk(t)=Cxk(t)+Duk(t), | (2.1) |
where α∈(0,1), t∈[0,T], and k=0,1,2,⋅⋅⋅ is the repetition. Moreover, xk(t)∈Rn, uk(t)∈Rm, and yk(t)∈Rp represent the state, control, and output of (2.1), respectively; f(xk(t))∈Rn stands for a continuous nonlinear function; and A, B, C, and D are constant coefficients matrices.
Assumption 1. The nonlinear function f(⋅) is OSL, meaning that, for ∀x(t),ˆx(t)∈Rn,
⟨f(x(t))−f(ˆx(t)),x(t)−ˆx(t)⟩≤σ‖x(t)−ˆx(t)‖2, |
where ‖⋅‖ denotes the Euclidean norm, ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ represents the inner product, and σ∈R is the OSL constant.
Remark 1. Note that the above constant σ can assume any real value, while the Lipschitz constant is positive. From [26], a Lipschitz function is OSL (σ>0), but the converse may not hold.
Assumption 2. The desired trajectory yd(t) is possible, meaning that a control ud(t) exists, guaranteeing
{Dαxd(t)=Axd(t)+Bud(t)+f(xd(t)),yd(t)=Cxd(t)+Dud(t), |
with xd(t) being the desired state.
Assumption 3. The system defined by expression (2.1) meets the initial condition
xk(0)=xd(0),k=0,1,2,⋯, |
where xd(0) represents the desired initial state.
Remark 2. Assumption 2 is a representative condition for OSL Caputo FOSs in control law design. Assumption 3 is the identical initialization condition, which has been widely used in ILC design to obtain perfect tracking [7].
The main objective herein is to design a control sequence uk(t) so that the output yk(t) of (1) can track the specified trajectory yd(t), with t∈[0,T], as k→∞.
For the nonlinear FOS (2.1), we design an open-loop P-type learning control algorithm
uk+1(t)=uk(t)+Ψek(t), | (3.1) |
where the output tracking error at the kth iteration is defined as ek(t)=yd(t)−yk(t) and the learning gain matrix is Ψ∈Rm×p.
Theorem 1. Let us assume that Assumptions 1–3 hold for the FOS (2.1) with algorithm (3.1). If Ψ can be chosen such that
ρ1=‖I−DΨ‖<1, | (3.2) |
then yk(t) converges to yd(t) for t∈[0,T].
Proof. Let us use δ(⋅)k(t)=(⋅)k+1(t)−(⋅)k(t), where (⋅) stands for the variables x, u, and f. It follows from (2.1) and (3.1) that
Dα(δxk(t))=Aδxk(t)+Bδuk(t)+δfk(t)=Aδxk(t)+δfk(t)+BΨek(t). | (3.3) |
If we left-multiply (3.3) by (δxk(t))T and use Assumption 1, then we have
(δxk(t))TDα(δxk(t))=⟨Aδxk(t),δxk(t)⟩+⟨BΨek(t),δxk(t)⟩+⟨δfk(t),δxk(t)⟩≤(Aδxk(t))Tδxk(t)+(BΨek(t))Tδxk(t)+σ‖δxk(t)‖2≤(‖A‖+|σ|)‖δxk(t)‖2+‖BΨ‖‖δxk(t)‖‖ek(t)‖. | (3.4) |
According to Lemma 1,
Dα((δxk(t))Tδxk(t))≤2(δxk(t))TDα(δxk(t)). | (3.5) |
From (3.4) and (3.5), we get
Dα(‖δxk(t)‖2)≤2(‖A‖+|σ|)‖δxk(t)‖2+2‖BΨ‖‖δxk(t)‖‖ek(t)‖≤(2‖A‖+2|σ|+1)‖δxk(t)‖2+‖BΨ‖2‖ek(t)‖2=c1‖δxk(t)‖2+c2‖ek(t)‖2, | (3.6) |
where c1=2‖A‖+2|σ|+1 and c2=‖BΨ‖2. Applying the α-order integral on (3.6), we get
Iα0,tDα(‖δxk(t)‖2)≤Iα0,t(c1‖δxk(t)‖2+c2‖ek(t)‖2). | (3.7) |
It follows from Assumption 3 that ‖δxk(0)‖2=0, and we further get
Iα0,tDα(‖δxk(t)‖2)=Iα0,tI1−α0,tddt(‖δxk(t)‖2)=I10,tddt(‖δxk(t)‖2)=‖δxk(t)‖2−‖δxk(0)‖2=‖δxk(t)‖2, |
which, together with (3.7), leads to
‖δxk(t)‖2≤Iα0,t(c1‖δxk(t)‖2+c2‖ek(t)‖2)=c1Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1‖δxk(ξ)‖2dξ+c2Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1‖ek(ξ)‖2dξ=c1Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1‖δxk(ξ)‖2dξ+c2Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1e2λξ{e−2λξ‖ek(ξ)‖2}dξ≤c1Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1‖δxk(ξ)‖2dξ+c2Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1e2λξdξ‖ek‖2λ. | (3.8) |
We can see that
∫t0(t−ξ)α−1e2λξdξt−ξ=τ→∫t0τα−1e2λ(t−τ)dτ=e2λt∫t0τα−1e−2λτdτ2λτ=ξ→e2λt(2λ)α∫2λt0ξα−1e−ξdξ<e2λt(2λ)α∫+∞0ξα−1e−ξdξ=e2λt(2λ)αΓ(α). | (3.9) |
From (3.8) and (3.9), we have
‖δxk(t)‖2≤c1Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1‖δxk(ξ)‖2dξ+c2e2λt(2λ)α‖ek‖2λ. |
Setting
v(t−ξ)=c1Γ(α)(t−ξ)α−1,w(t)=c2e2λt(2λ)α‖ek‖2λ, |
and using Lemma 2, we get
‖δxk(t)‖2≤c2e2λt(2λ)αec1Γ(α)∫t0(t−ξ)α−1dξ‖ek‖2λ=c2e2λt(2λ)αec1Γ(α)tαα‖ek‖2λ≤c2e2λt(2λ)αec1TαΓ(α+1)‖ek‖2λ. |
Multiplying the above inequality by e−2λt, and using the λ-norm ‖⋅‖λ, we have
‖δxk‖2λ≤c2ec1TαΓ(α+1)(2λ)α‖ek‖2λ, |
where ‖⋅‖λ=supt∈[0,T]{e−λt‖⋅‖}.
Therefore, we get
‖δxk‖λ≤c3√λα‖ek‖λ, | (3.10) |
where
c3=√c2ec1TαΓ(α+1)2α. |
It is obvious that
ek+1(t)=ek(t)−Cδxk(t)−Dδuk(t)=(I−DΨ)ek(t)−Cδxk(t). | (3.11) |
It follows from (3.2), (3.10), and (3.11) that
‖ek+1‖λ≤‖I−DΨ‖‖ek‖λ+‖C‖‖δxk‖λ≤ρ1‖ek‖λ+‖C‖‖δxk‖λ≤ρ1‖ek‖λ+c3‖C‖√λα‖ek‖λ=ˆρ1‖ek‖λ, | (3.12) |
where
ˆρ1=ρ1+c3‖C‖√λα. |
As 0≤ρ1<1 by (3.2), we can select λ as large as needed so that ˆρ1<1. Thus, we obtain
limk→∞‖ek‖λ=0. |
Note that ‖ek‖s≤eλT‖ek‖λ, with ‖⋅‖s=supt∈[0,T]‖⋅‖ denoting the supremum norm. Therefore, limk→∞‖ek‖s=0, meaning that
limk→∞yk(t)=yd(t),t∈[0,T]. |
This ends the proof.
Now, we design a closed-loop P-type learning control algorithm, such that
uk+1(t)=uk(t)+Φek+1(t), | (3.13) |
where the learning gain is Φ∈Rm×p.
Theorem 2. Consider that Assumptions 1–3 hold for the FOS (2.1) with the learning algorithm (3.13). If the gain Φ can be chosen such that
ρ2=‖(I+DΦ)−1‖<1, | (3.14) |
then yk(t) converges to yd(t) for t∈[0,T].
Proof. From (2.1) and (3.13), we get
Dα(δxk(t))=Aδxk(t)+Bδuk(t)+δfk(t)=Aδxk(t)+δfk(t)+BΦek+1(t). | (3.15) |
Left multiplying (3.15) by (δxk(t))T and considering Assumption 1, we obtain
(δxk(t))TDα(δxk(t))=⟨Aδxk(t),δxk(t)⟩+⟨BΦek+1(t),δxk(t)⟩+⟨δfk(t),δxk(t)⟩≤(Aδxk(t))Tδxk(t)+(BΦek+1(t))Tδxk(t)+σ‖δxk(t)‖2≤(‖A‖+|σ|)‖δxk(t)‖2+‖BΦ‖‖δxk(t)‖‖ek+1(t)‖. | (3.16) |
Obviously, (3.16) together with (3.5) implies
Dα(‖δxk(t)‖2)≤2(‖A‖+|σ|)‖δxk(t)‖2+2‖BΦ‖‖δxk(t)‖‖ek+1(t)‖≤(2‖A‖+2|σ|+1)‖δxk(t)‖2+‖BΨ‖2‖ek+1(t)‖2=c1‖δxk(t)‖2+c4‖ek+1(t)‖2, | (3.17) |
where c4=‖BΦ‖2. Similarly to the procedure adopted in Theorem 1, we get
‖δxk‖λ≤c5√λα‖ek+1‖λ, | (3.18) |
where
c5=√c4ec1TαΓ(α+1)2α. |
From expressions (2.1) and (3.13), we have
ek+1(t)=ek(t)−Cδxk(t)−Dδuk(t)=ek(t)−Cδxk(t)−DΦek+1(t), |
that is
(I+DΦ)ek+1(t)=ek(t)−Cδxk(t), |
where the symbol I stands for the identity matrix. Since I+DΦ is nonsingular, we get
ek+1(t)=(I+DΦ)−1(ek(t)−Cδxk(t)). |
Furthermore, we derive
‖ek+1‖λ≤‖(I+DΦ)−1‖‖ek‖λ+‖(I+DΦ)−1C‖‖δxk‖λ≤ρ2‖ek‖λ+‖(I+DΦ)−1C‖‖δxk‖λ. | (3.19) |
Substituting (3.18) into (3.19) yields
‖ek+1‖λ≤ρ2‖ek‖λ+c5√λα‖(I+DΦ)−1C‖‖ek+1‖λ. |
Taking λ such that
c5√λα‖(I+DΦ)−1C‖<1, |
then we have
‖ek+1‖λ≤ˆρ2‖ek‖λ, | (3.20) |
where
ˆρ2=ρ21−c5√λα‖(I+DΦ)−1C‖. |
As 0≤ρ2<1, we can choose λ as large as needed so that ˆρ2<1. From expression (3.20), we can obtain
limk→∞‖ek‖λ=0. |
As ‖ek‖s≤eλT‖ek‖λ, we know that limk→∞‖ek‖s=0, and it follows that
limk→∞yk(t)=yd(t),t∈[0,T]. |
This completes the proof.
We illustrate the applicability of the P-type learning algorithms by means of a practical example.
Let us choose the following nonlinear FOS, which can be used to describe the motion of a moving object in Cartesian coordinates [39]
{D0.5xk(t)=Axk(t)+Buk(t)+f(xk(t)),yk(t)=Cxk(t)+Duk(t), |
where xk(t)=[x1k(t)x2k(t)]T, with t∈[0,1],
A=[1−2−11],B=[1021],C=[1002],D=[1001], |
f(xk(t))=[−x1k(t)(x21k(t)+x22k(t))−x2k(t)(x21k(t)+x22k(t))]. |
We know from [26] that the nonlinear function f(⋅) is globally OSL with σ=0 in R2. Let us use
yd(t)=[sin(3πt)te−0.1t], |
and consider
xk(0)=[00],u0(t)=[00]. |
i) Open-loop algorithm (3.1).
Using the gain matrix
Ψ=[0.5000.5], |
we then have
ρ1=‖I−DΨ‖=0.5<1. |
Figures 1 and 2 depict the desired trajectories y(1)d(t) and y(2)d(t), and the outputs y(1)k(t) and y(2)k(t), respectively, at the 3rd, 5th, and 7th iterations, obtained with the learning algorithm (3.1). Figure 3 represents the errors, showing that perfect tracking is reached as the number of iterations increases.
ii) Closed-loop algorithm (3.13).
Using the gain matrix
Φ=[1001], |
then we have
ρ2=‖(I+DΦ)−1‖=0.5<1, |
meaning that the convergence is verified. Figures 4 and 5 illustrate that y(1)k(t) and y(2)k(t) follow the desired trajectories from the 6th iteration. Figure 6 shows that the error converges under algorithm (3.13).
We also verify that, at the 10th iteration, ||e(i)k||s(i=1,2) {achieves} [1.4×10−3, 5.7×10−3] and [0.5×10−3, 1.4×10−3] when using algorithms (3.1) and (3.13), respectively. This confirms the results observed in Figures 3 and 6, meaning that algorithm (3.13) performs better than (3.1) in terms of convergence speed.
The ILC for a class of Caputo FOSs with OSL nonlinearity was investigated. Open- and closed-loop P-type learning algorithms were designed to guarantee perfect tracking of a desired trajectory, and their convergence was verified using the generalized Gronwall inequality. An example was provided to verify the theoretical results. It should be noted that the QIB constraint was used in the framework of ILC for OSL NSs with irregular dynamics [34,35]. To some extent, this limits the applicability of NSs due to their need to simultaneously satisfy the OSL and QIB constraints. Therefore, the ILC for irregular OSL nonlinear FOSs needs to be further investigated by relaxing or removing the QIB constraint.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 62073114 and 11971032) and Anhui Provincial Key Research and Development Project (202304a05020060).
The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.
[1] |
A. Maachou, R. Malti, P. Melchior, J. L. Battagliaand, A. Oustaloup, Nonlinear thermal system identification using fractional Volterra series, Control Eng. Pract., 29 (2014), 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2014.02.023 doi: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2014.02.023
![]() |
[2] |
P. E. Jacob, S. M. M. Alavi, A. Mahdi, S. J. Payne, D. A. Howey, Bayesian inference in non-Markovian state-space models with applications to battery fractional-order systems, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 26 (2018), 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2017.2672402 doi: 10.1109/TCST.2017.2672402
![]() |
[3] |
G. Tsirimokou, C. Psychalinos, A. S. Elwakil, K. N. Salama, Electronically tunable fully integrated fractional-order resonator, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs, 65 (2018), 166–170. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSII.2017.2684710 doi: 10.1109/TCSII.2017.2684710
![]() |
[4] |
E. S. A. Shahri, A. Alfi, J. A. T. Machado, Lyapunov method for the stability analysis of uncertain fractional-order systems under input saturation, Appl. Math. Modell., 81 (2020), 663–672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2020.01.013 doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2020.01.013
![]() |
[5] |
C. Hou, X. Liu, H. Wang, Adaptive fault tolerant control for a class of uncertain fractional-order systems based on disturbance observer, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 30 (2020), 3436–3450. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.4950 doi: 10.1002/rnc.4950
![]() |
[6] |
S. Kamal, R. K. Sharma, T. N. Dinh, H. MS, B. Bandyopadhyay, Sliding mode control of uncertain fractional-order systems: A reaching phase free approach, Asian J. Control, 23 (2021), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.2223 doi: 10.1002/asjc.2223
![]() |
[7] | J. X. Xu, Y. Tan, Linear and Nonlinear Iterative Learning Control, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44845-4 |
[8] | Y. Q. Chen, K. L. Moore, On Dα-type iterative learning control, in Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, IEEE, (2001), 4451–4456. https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.2001.980903 |
[9] | Y. Li, H. S. Ahn, Y. Q. Chen, Iterative learning control of a class of fractional order nonlinear systems, in Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control, IEEE, (2010), 779–782. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISIC.2010.5612935 |
[10] |
Y. H. Lan, Iterative learning control with initial state learning for fractional order nonlinear systems, Comput. Math. Appl., 64 (2012), 3210–3216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2012.03.086 doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2012.03.086
![]() |
[11] |
Y. Li, W. Jiang, Fractional order nonlinear systems with delay initerative learning control, Appl. Math. Comput., 257 (2015), 546–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2015.01.014 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2015.01.014
![]() |
[12] |
L. Li, Lebesgue-p norm convergence of fractional-order PID-type iterative learning control for linear systems, Asian J. Control, 20 (2018), 483–494. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.1561 doi: 10.1002/asjc.1561
![]() |
[13] |
S. Liu, J. R. Wang, Fractional order iterative learning control with randomly varying trial lengths, J. Franklin Inst., 354 (2017), 967–992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2016.11.004 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2016.11.004
![]() |
[14] |
D. Luo, J. R. Wang, D. Shen, PDα-type distributed learning control for nonlinear fractional-order multiagent systems, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 42 (2019), 4543–4553. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.5677 doi: 10.1002/mma.5677
![]() |
[15] |
D. Luo, J. R. Wang, D. Shen, Iterative learning control for locally Lipschitz nonlinear fractional-order multi-agent systems, J. Franklin Inst., 357 (2020), 6671–6693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2020.04.032 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2020.04.032
![]() |
[16] |
J. Zhang, D. Meng, Convergence analysis of saturated iterative learning control systems with locally Lipschitz nonlinearities, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst., 31 (2020), 4025–4035. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2951752 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2951752
![]() |
[17] |
D. Meng, K. L. Moore, Contraction mapping-based robust convergence of iterative learning control with uncertain, locally-Lipschitz nonlinearity, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern.: Syst., 50 (2020), 442–454. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2017.2780131 doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2017.2780131
![]() |
[18] |
S. He, H. Fang, M. Zhang, F. Liu, Z. Ding, Adaptive optimal control for a class of nonlinear systems: the online policy iteration approach, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst., 31 (2020), 549–558. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2905715 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2905715
![]() |
[19] |
H. Fang, M. Zhang, S. He, X. Luan, F. Liu, Z. Ding, Solving the zero-sum control problem for tidal turbine system: an online reinforcement learning approach, IEEE Trans. Cybern., 53 (2023), 7635–7647. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2022.3186886 doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2022.3186886
![]() |
[20] |
S. Raghavan, J. K. Hedrick, Observer design for a class of nonlinear systems, Int. J. Control, 59 (1994), 515–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207179408923090 doi: 10.1080/00207179408923090
![]() |
[21] |
W. Yu, P. DeLellis, G. Chen, M. di Bernardo, J. Kurths, Distributed adaptive control of synchronization in complex networks, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 57 (2012), 2153–2158. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2012.2183190 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2012.2183190
![]() |
[22] |
M. Hussain, M. Rehan, C. K. Ahn, M. Tufail, Robust antiwindup for one-sided Lipschitz systems subject to input saturation and applications, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 65 (2018), 9706–9716. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2018.2815950 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2018.2815950
![]() |
[23] |
G. Hu, Observers for one-sided Lipschitz non-linear systems, IMA J. Math. Control Inf., 23 (2006), 395–401. https://doi.org/10.1093/imamci/dni068 doi: 10.1093/imamci/dni068
![]() |
[24] |
M. Xu, G. Hu, Y. Zhao, Reduced-order observer for one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear systems, IMA J. Math. Control Inf., 26 (2009), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1093/imamci/dnp017 doi: 10.1093/imamci/dnp017
![]() |
[25] |
Y. Zhao, J. Tao, N. Z. Shi, A note on observer design for one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear systems, Syst. Control Lett., 59 (2010), 66–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sysconle.2009.11.009 doi: 10.1016/j.sysconle.2009.11.009
![]() |
[26] | M. Abbaszadeh, H. Marquez, Nonlinear observer design for one-sided Lipschitz systems, in Proceedings of the 2010 American Control Conference, IEEE, (2010), 5284–5289. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACC.2010.5530715 |
[27] |
W. Zhang, H. Su, H. Wang, Z. Han, Full-order and reduced-order observers for one-sided lipschitz nonlinear systems using Riccati equations, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 17 (2012), 4968–4977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.05.027 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.05.027
![]() |
[28] |
W. Zhang, H. Su, F. Zhu, S. P. Bhattacharyya, Improved exponential observer design for one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear systems, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 26 (2016), 3958–3973. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.3543 doi: 10.1002/rnc.3543
![]() |
[29] |
X. Cai, H. Gao, L. Liu, W. Zhang, Control design for one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear differential inclusions, ISA Trans., 53 (2014), 298–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isatra.2013.12.005 doi: 10.1016/j.isatra.2013.12.005
![]() |
[30] |
W. Saad, A. Sellami, G. Garcia, H∞ control for uncertain one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear systems in finite frequency domain, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 30 (2020), 5712–5727. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.5101 doi: 10.1002/rnc.5101
![]() |
[31] |
J. Ren, J. Sun, J. Fu, Finite-time event-triggered sliding mode control for one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear systems with uncertainties, Nonlinear Dyn., 103 (2021), 865–882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-020-06096-2 doi: 10.1007/s11071-020-06096-2
![]() |
[32] |
R. Agha, M. Rehan, C. K. Ahn, G. Mustafa, S. Ahmad, Adaptive distributed consensus control of one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear multiagents, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern.: Syst., 49 (2019), 568–578. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2017.2764521 doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2017.2764521
![]() |
[33] |
M. A. Razaq, M. Rehan, M. Tufail, C. K. Ahn, Multiple Lyapunov functions approach for consensus of one-sided Lipschitz multi-agents over switching topologies and input saturation, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs, 67 (2020), 3267–3271. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSII.2020.2986009 doi: 10.1109/TCSII.2020.2986009
![]() |
[34] |
P. Gu, S. Tian, Analysis of iterative learning control for one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear singular systems, J. Franklin Inst., 356 (2019), 196–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2018.10.014 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2018.10.014
![]() |
[35] |
P. Gu, S. Tian, D-type iterative learning control for one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear systems, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 29 (2019), 2546–2560. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.4511 doi: 10.1002/rnc.4511
![]() |
[36] |
P. Gu, S. Tian, P-type iterative learning control with initial state learning for one-sided Lipschitz nonlinear systems, Int. J. Control Autom. Syst., 17 (2019), 2203–2210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12555-018-0891-2 doi: 10.1007/s12555-018-0891-2
![]() |
[37] | I. Podlubny, Fractional Differential Equations, Academic Press, New York, 1999. |
[38] |
M. A. Duarte-Mermoud, N. Aguila-Camacho, J. A. Gallegos, R. Castro-Linares, Using general quadratic Lyapunov functions to prove Lyapunov uniform stability for fractional order systems, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 22 (2015), 650–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2014.10.008 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2014.10.008
![]() |
[39] |
Y. H. Lan, Y. Zhou, Non-fragile observer-based robust control for a class of fractional-order nonlinear systems, Syst. Control Lett., 62 (2013), 1143–1150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sysconle.2013.09.007 doi: 10.1016/j.sysconle.2013.09.007
![]() |