This article addresses the hostile-based bipartite containment control of nonlinear fractional multi-agent systems (FMASs) with input delays. Several fundamental algebraic criteria have been offered by the use of signed graph theory. To make the controller design more realistic, we assumed that the controller was under some disturbance. For the analysis of bipartite containment control, we used a fixed and switching signed network. The commonly used Lyapunov function approach and the Razumikhin technique were used. The use of these techniques can conquer the challenge brought on by switching, temporal delays, and fractional mathematics. To better elucidate the theoretical results, two examples are provided.
Citation: Asad Khan, Azmat Ullah Khan Niazi, Saadia Rehman, Sidra Ahmed. Hostile-based bipartite containment control of nonlinear fractional multi-agent systems with input delays: a signed graph approach under disturbance and switching networks[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 12678-12699. doi: 10.3934/math.2024620
[1] | Aziz Belmiloudi . Time-varying delays in electrophysiological wave propagation along cardiac tissue and minimax control problems associated with uncertain bidomain type models. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 928-983. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.928 |
[2] | Zuliang Lu, Xiankui Wu, Fei Huang, Fei Cai, Chunjuan Hou, Yin Yang . Convergence and quasi-optimality based on an adaptive finite element method for the bilinear optimal control problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(9): 9510-9535. doi: 10.3934/math.2021553 |
[3] | Zahra Pirouzeh, Mohammad Hadi Noori Skandari, Kamele Nassiri Pirbazari, Stanford Shateyi . A pseudo-spectral approach for optimal control problems of variable-order fractional integro-differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 23692-23710. doi: 10.3934/math.20241151 |
[4] | Xin Yi, Rong Liu . An age-dependent hybrid system for optimal contraception control of vermin. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(2): 2619-2633. doi: 10.3934/math.2025122 |
[5] | Yuanyuan Cheng, Yuan Li . A novel event-triggered constrained control for nonlinear discrete-time systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20530-20545. doi: 10.3934/math.20231046 |
[6] | Xiang Wu, Yuzhou Hou, Kanjian Zhang . Optimal feedback control for a class of fed-batch fermentation processes using switched dynamical system approach. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 9206-9231. doi: 10.3934/math.2022510 |
[7] | Woocheol Choi, Young-Pil Choi . A sharp error analysis for the DG method of optimal control problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 9117-9155. doi: 10.3934/math.2022506 |
[8] | Qian Li, Zhenghong Jin, Linyan Qiao, Aichun Du, Gang Liu . Distributed optimization of nonlinear singularly perturbed multi-agent systems via a small-gain approach and sliding mode control. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 20865-20886. doi: 10.3934/math.20241015 |
[9] | Tainian Zhang, Zhixue Luo . Optimal harvesting for a periodic competing system with size structure in a polluted environment. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14696-14717. doi: 10.3934/math.2022808 |
[10] | Asaf Khan, Gul Zaman, Roman Ullah, Nawazish Naveed . Optimal control strategies for a heroin epidemic model with age-dependent susceptibility and recovery-age. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(2): 1377-1394. doi: 10.3934/math.2021086 |
This article addresses the hostile-based bipartite containment control of nonlinear fractional multi-agent systems (FMASs) with input delays. Several fundamental algebraic criteria have been offered by the use of signed graph theory. To make the controller design more realistic, we assumed that the controller was under some disturbance. For the analysis of bipartite containment control, we used a fixed and switching signed network. The commonly used Lyapunov function approach and the Razumikhin technique were used. The use of these techniques can conquer the challenge brought on by switching, temporal delays, and fractional mathematics. To better elucidate the theoretical results, two examples are provided.
In structural mechanics, particularly in the field of elasticity, there are equations that describe the behavior of thin plates under loads. These equations are often partial differential equations that govern the displacement of a thin plate. The plate equation depends on factors like material properties, geometry, and boundary conditions. In the context of geophysics, "plate equation" could refer to the equations that describe the movement and interaction of tectonic plates on the Earth's surface. Plate tectonics is a theory that explains the movement of the Earth's lithosphere (the rigid outer layer of the Earth) on the more fluid asthenosphere beneath it. In mathematics, specifically in the field of differential equations, the term "plate equation" might be used to refer to certain types of equations. For instance, in polar coordinates, Laplace's equation takes a specific form that is sometimes informally referred to as the "plate equation". Plate equation models are hyperbolic systems that arise in several areas in real-life problems, (see, for instance, Kizilova et al.[1], Lasiecka et al. [2] and Huang et al.[3]). The theory of plates is the mathematical formulation of the mechanics of flat plates. It is defined as flat structural components with a low thickness compared to plane dimensions. The advantage of the theory of plates comes from the disparity of the length scale to reduce the problem of the mechanics of three-dimensional solids to a two-dimensional problem. The purpose of this theory is to compute the stresses and deformation in a loaded plate. The equation of plates results from the composition of different subsets of plates: The equilibrium equations, constitutive, kinematic, and force resultant, [4,5,6].
Following this, there are a wide number of works devoted to the analysis and control of the academic model of hyperbolic systems, the so-called plate equations, For example, the exact and the approximate controllability of thermoelastic plates given by Eller et al. [7] and Lagnese and Lions in [8] treated the control of thin plates and Lasiecka in [9] considered the controllability of the Kirchoff plate. Zuazua [10] treated the exact controllability for semi-linear wave equations. Recently many problems involving a plate equations were considered by researchers. Let us cite as examples the stabilization of the damped plate equation under general boundary conditions by Rousseau an Zongo [11]; the null controllability for a structurally damped stochastic plate equation studied by Zhao [12], Huang et al. [13] considerrd a thermal equation of state for zoisite: Implications for the transportation of water into the upper mantle and the high-velocity anomaly in the Farallon plate. Kaplunov et al. [14] discussed the asymptotic derivation of 2D dynamic equations of motion for transversely inhomogeneous elastic plates. Hyperbolic systems have recently continued to be of interest to researchers and many results have been obtained. We mention here the work of Fu et al. [15] which discusses a class of mixed hyperbolic systems using iterative learning control. Otherwise, for a class of one-dimension linear wave equations, Hamidaoui et al. stated in [16] an iterative learning control. Without forgetting that for a class of second-order nonlinear systems Tao et al. proposed an adaptive control based on an disturbance observer in [17] to improve the tracking performance and compensation. In addition to these works, the optimal control of the Kirchoff plate using bilinear control was considered by Bradly and Lenhart in [18], and Bradly et al. in [19]. In fact, in this work we will talk about a bilinear plate equation and we must cite the paper of Zine [20] which considers a bilinear hyperbolic system using the Riccati equation. Zine and Ould Sidi [19,22] that introduced the notion of partial optimal control of bilinear hyperbolic systems. Li et al. [23] give an iterative method for a class of bilinear systems. Liu, et al. [24] extended a gradient-based iterative algorithm for bilinear state-space systems with moving average noises by using the filtering technique. Furthermore, flow analysis of hyperbolic systems refers to the problems dealing with the analysis of the flow state on the system domain. We can refer to the work of Benhadid et al. on the flow observability of linear and semilinear systems [25], Bourray et al. on treating the controllability flow of linear hyperbolic systems [26] and the flow optimal control of bilinear parabolic systems are considered by Ould Sidi and Ould Beinane on [27,28].
For the motivation the results proposed in this paper open a wide range of applications. We cite the problem of iterative identification methods for plate bilinear systems [23], as well as the problem of the extended flow-based iterative algorithm for a plate systems [24].
This paper studies the optimal control problem governed by an infinite dimensional bilinear plate equation. The objective is to command the flow state of the bilinear plate equation to the desired flow using different types of bounded feedback. We show how one can transfer the flow of a plate equation close to the desired profile using optimization techniques and adjoint problems. As an application, we solve the partial flow control problem governed by a plate equation. The results open a wide way of applications in fractional systems. We began in section two by the well-posedness of our problem. In section three, we prove the existence of an optimal control solution of (2.3). In section four, we state the characterization of the optimal control. In section five we debate the case of time bilinear optimal control. Section six, proposes a method for solving the flow partial optimal control problem governed by a plate equation.
Consider Θ an open bounded domain of IR2 with C2 boundary, for a time m, and Γ=∂Θ×(0,m). The control space time set is such that
Q∈Up={Q∈L∞([0,m];L∞(Θ)) such that −p≤Q(t)≤p}, | (2.1) |
with p as a positive constant. Let the plate bilinear equation be described by the following system
{∂2u∂t2+Δ2u=Q(t)ut,(0,m)×Θ,u(x,0)=u0(x),∂u∂t(x,0)=u1(x),Θ,u=∂u∂ν=0,Γ, | (2.2) |
where ut=∂u∂t is the velocity. The state space is H20(Θ)×L2(Θ), (see Lions and Magenes [29] and Brezis [30]). We deduce the existence and uniqueness of the solution for (2.2) using the classical results of Pazy [31]. For λ>0, we define ∇u as the flow control problem governed by the bilinear plate equation (2.2) as the following:
minQ ∈UpCλ(Q), | (2.3) |
where Cλ, is the flow penalizing cost defined by
Cλ(Q)=12‖∇u−ud‖2(L2(0,m;L2(Θ)))n+λ2∫m0∫ΘQ2(x,t)dxdt=12n∑i=1‖∂u∂xi−udi‖2L2(0,m;L2(Θ))+λ2∫m0∫ΘQ2(x,t)dxdt, | (2.4) |
where ud=(ud1,....udn) is the flow target in L2(0,m;L2(Θ)). One of the important motivations when considering the problem (2.3) is the isolation problems, where the control is maintained to reduce the flow temperature on the surface of a thin plate (see El Jai et al. [32]).
Lemma 3.1. If (u0,u1)∈H20(Θ)×L2(Θ) and Q∈Up, then the solution (u,ut) of (2.2) satisfies the following estimate:
‖(u,ut)‖C(0,m;H20(Θ)×L2(Θ))≤T(1+ηm)eηKm, |
where T=‖(u0,u1)‖H20(Θ)×L2(Θ) and K is a positive constant [18,19].
Using the above Lemma 3.1, we prove the existence of an optimal control solution of (2.3).
Theorem 3.1. (u∗,Q∗)∈C([0,m];H20(Θ)×Up), is the solution of (2.3), where u∗ is the output of (2.2) and Q∗ is the optimal control function.
Proof. Consider the minimizing sequence (Qn)n in Up verifying
C∗=limn→+∞Cλ(Qn)=infQ∈L∞(0,m;L∞(Θ))Cλ(Q). |
We choose ˉun=(un,∂un∂t) to be the corresponding state of Eq (2.2). Using Lemma 3.1, we deduce
‖un(x,t)‖2H20(Θ)+‖unt(x,t)‖2L2(Θ)≤T1eηKm for 0≤t≤m and T1∈IR+. | (3.1) |
Furthermore, system (2.2) gives
‖untt(x,t)‖2H−2(Θ)≤T2‖unt(x,t)‖2L2(Θ) with T2∈IR+. |
Then easily from (3.1), we have
‖untt(x,t)‖2H−2(Θ)≤T3eηKm for 0≤t≤m and T3∈IR+. | (3.2) |
Using (3.1) and (3.2), we have the following weak convergence:
Qn⇀Q∗,L2(0,m;L2(Θ)),un⇀u∗,L∞(0,m;H20(Θ)),unt⇀u∗t,L∞(0,m;L2(Θ)),untt⇀u∗tt,L∞(0,m;H−2(Θ)), | (3.3) |
From the first convergence property of (3.3) with a control sequence Qn∈Up, easily one can deduce that Q∗∈Up [20].
In addition, the mild solution of (2.2) verifies
∫m0unttf(t)dt+∫m0∫ΘΔunΔf(t)dxdt=∫m0Q∗untf(t)dt,∀f∈H20(Θ). | (3.4) |
Using (3.3) and (3.4), we deduce that
∫m0u∗ttf(t)dt+∫m0∫ΘΔu∗Δf(t)dxdt=∫m0Q∗u∗tf(t)dt,∀f∈H20(Θ), | (3.5) |
which implies that u∗=u(Q∗) is the output of (2.2) with command function Q∗.
Fatou's lemma and the lower semi-continuous property of the cost Cλ show that
Cλ(Q∗)≤12limk→+∞‖∇uk−ud‖2(L2(0,m;L2(Θ)))n+λ2limk→+∞∫m0∫ΘQ2k(x,t)dxdt≤lim infk→+∞Cλ(Qn)=infQ∈UpCλ(Q), | (3.6) |
which allows us to conclude that Q∗ is the solution of problem (2.3).
We devote this section to establish a characterization of solutions to the flow optimal control problem (2.3).
Let the system
{∂2v∂t2=−Δ2v(x,t)+Q(x,t)vt+d(x,t)vt,(0,m)×Θ,v(x,0)=vt(x,0)=v0(x)=0,Θ,v=∂v∂ν=0,Γ, | (4.1) |
with d∈L∞(0,m;L∞(Θ)) verify Q+δd∈Up,∀δ>0 is a small constant. The functional defined by Q∈Up↦ˉu(Q)=(u,ut)∈C(0,m;H20(Θ)×L2(Θ)) is differentiable and its differential ¯v=(v,vt) is the solution of (4.1) [21].
The next lemma characterizes the differential of our flow cost functional Cλ(Q) with respect to the control function Q.
Lemma 4.1. Let Q∈Up and the differential of Cλ(Q) can be written as the following:
limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=n∑i=1∫Θ∫m0∂v(x,t)∂xi(∂u∂xi−udi)dtdx+ε∫Θ∫m0dQdtdx. | (4.2) |
Proof. Consider the cost Cλ(Q) defined by (2.4), which is
Cλ(Q)=12n∑i=1∫Θ∫m0(∂u∂xi−udi)2dtdx+λ2∫Θ∫m0Q2(t)dtdx. | (4.3) |
Put uk=z(Q+kd), u=u(Q), and using (4.3), we have
limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=limβ⟶0n∑i=112∫Θ∫m0(∂uk∂xi−udi)2−(∂u∂xi−udi)2kdtdx+limk⟶0λ2∫Θ∫m0(Q+kd)2−Q2k(t)dtdx. | (4.4) |
Consequently
limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=limk⟶0n∑i=112∫Θ∫m0(∂uk∂xi−∂u∂xi)k(∂uk∂xi+∂u∂xi−2udi)dtdx+limk⟶0∫Θ∫m0(λdQ+kλd2)dtdx=n∑i=1∫Θ∫m0∂v(x,t)∂xi(∂u(x,t)∂xi−udi)dtdx+∫Θ∫m0λdQdtdx. | (4.5) |
{∂2wi∂t2+Δ2wi=Q∗(x,t)(wi)t+(∂u∂xi−udi),(0,m)×Θ,wi(x,m)=(wi)t(x,m)=0,Θ,wi=∂wi∂ν=0,Γ. | (4.6) |
Such systems allow us to characterize the optimal control solution of (2.3).
Theorem 4.1. Consider Q∈Up, and u=u(Q) its corresponding state space solution of (2.2), then the control solution of (2.3) is
Q(x,t)=max(−p,min(−1λ(ut)(n∑i=1∂wi∂xi),p)), | (4.7) |
where w=(w1....wn) with wi∈C([0,T];H20(Θ)) is the unique solution of (4.6).
Proof. Choose d∈Up such that Q+kd∈Up with k>0. The minimum of Cλ is realized when the control Q, verifies the following condition:
0≤limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k. | (4.8) |
Consequently, Lemma 4.1 gives
0≤limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=n∑i=1∫Θ∫m0∂v(x,t)∂xi(∂u(x,t)∂xi−udi)dtdx+∫Θ∫m0λdQdtdx. | (4.9) |
Substitute by equation (4.6) and we find
0≤n∑i=1∫Θ∫m0∂v(x,t)∂xi(∂2wi(x,t)∂t2+Δ2wi(x,t)−Q(x,t)(wi)t(x,t))dtdx+∫Θ∫m0λdQdtdx=n∑i=1∫Θ∫m0∂∂xi(∂2v∂t2+Δ2v−Q(x,t)vt)wi(x,t)dtdx+∫Θ∫m0λdQdtdx=n∑i=1∫Θ∫m0∂∂xi(d(x,t)ut)widtdx+∫Θ∫m0λdQdtdx=∫Θ∫m0d(x,t)[ut(n∑i=1∂wi(x,t)∂xi)+λQdtdx]. | (4.10) |
It is known that if d=d(t) in a chosen function with Q+kd∈Up, using Bang-Bang control properties, one can conclude that
Q(x,t)=max(−p,min(−utλ(n∑i=1∂wi∂xi),p))=max(−p,min(−utλDiv(w),p)), | (4.11) |
with Div(w)=n∑i=1∂wi∂xi.
Now, we are able to discuss the case of bilinear time control of the type Q=Q(t). We want to reach a flow spatial state target prescribed on the whole domain Θ at a fixed time m.
In such case, the set of controls (2.1) becomes
Q∈Up={Q∈L∞([0,m]) such that −p≤Q(t)≤p for t∈(0,m)}, | (5.1) |
with p as a positive constant.
The cost to minimize is
Cλ(Q)=12‖∇u(x,m)−ud‖2(L2(Θ))n+λ2∫m0Q2(t)dt=12n∑i=1‖∂u∂xi(x,m)−udi‖2L2(Θ)+λ2∫m0Q2(t)dt, | (5.2) |
where ud=(ud1,....udn) is the flow spatial target in L2(Θ). The flow control problem is
minQ ∈UpCλ(Q), | (5.3) |
where Cλ is the flow penalizing cost defined by (5.2), and Up is defined by (5.1).
Corollary 5.1. The solution of the flow time control problem (5.3) is
Q(t)=max(−p,min(∫Θ−utλ(n∑i=1∂wi∂xi)dx,p)) | (5.4) |
with u as the solution of (2.2) perturbed by Q(t) and wi as the solution of
{∂2wi∂t2+Δ2wi=Q(t)(wi)t,(0,m)×Θ,wi(x,m)=(∂u∂xi(x,m)−udi),Θ,(wi)t(x,m)=0,Θ,wi=∂wi∂ν=0,Γ. | (5.5) |
Proof. Similar to the approach used in the proof of Theorem 4.1, we deduce that
0≤∫m0d(t)[∫Θut(n∑i=1∂wi(x,t)∂xi)dx+λQ]dt, | (5.6) |
where d(t)∈L∞(0,m), a control function such that Q+kd∈Up with a small positive constant k.
Remark 5.1. (1) In the case of spatiotemporal target, we remark that the error (∂u∂xi(x,t)−udi) between the state and the desired one becomes a the change of velocity induced by the known forces acting on system (4.6).
(2) In the case of a prescribed time m targets, we remark that the error (∂u∂xi(x,m)−udi) between the state and the desired one becomes a Dirichlet boundary condition in the adjoint equation (5.5).
This section establishes the flow partial optimal control problem governed by the plate equation (2.2). Afterward we characterize the solution. Let θ⊂Θ be an open subregion of Θ and we define
~Pθ:(L2(Θ))⟶(L2(θ))u⟶˜Pθu=u|θ, |
and
Pθ:(L2(Θ))n⟶(L2(θ))nu⟶Pθu=u|θ. |
We define the adjoint of Pθ by
P∗θu={uinΘ,0∈Θ∖θ. |
Definition 6.1. The plate equation (2.2) is said to flow weakly partially controllable on θ⊂Θ, if for ∀β>0, one can find an optimal control Q∈L2(0,m) such that
|Pθ∇uQ(m)−ud||(L2(θ))n≤β, |
where ud=(zd1,....,udn) is the desired flow in (L2(θ))n.
For Up defined by (5.1), we take the partial flow optimal control problem
minQ∈UpCλ(Q), | (6.1) |
and the partial flow cost Cλ is
Cλ(Q)=12‖Pθ∇u(m)−ud‖2(L2(θ))n+λ2∫m0Q2(t)dt=12n∑i=1‖˜Pθ∂u(T)∂xi−udi‖2(L2(θ))+λ2∫m0Q2(t)dt. | (6.2) |
Next, we consider the family of optimality systems
{∂2wi∂t2=Δ2wi+Q(t)(wi)t,(0,m)×Θ,wi(x,m)=(∂u(m)∂xi−˜P∗θudi),Θ,(wi)t(x,m)=0,Θ,wi(x,t)=∂wi(x,t)∂ν=0,Γ. | (6.3) |
Lemma 6.1. Let the cost Cλ(Q) defined by (6.2) and the control Q(t)∈Up be the solution of (6.1). We can write
limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=n∑i=1∫θ˜P∗θ˜Pθ[∫m0∂2wi∂t2∂v(x,t)∂xidt+∫m0wi∂∂xi(∂2v∂t2)dt]dx+∫m0λdQdt, | (6.4) |
where the solution of (4.1) is v, and the solution of (6.3) is wi.
Proof. The functional Cλ(Q) given by (6.2), is of the form:
Cλ(Q)=12n∑i=1∫θ(˜Pθ∂u∂xi−udi)2dx+λ2∫m0Q2(t)dt. | (6.5) |
Choose uk=u(Q+kd) and u=u(Q). By (6.5), we deduce
limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=limk⟶0n∑i=112∫θ(˜Pθ∂uk∂xi−udi)2−(˜Pθ∂u∂xi−udi)2kdx+limk⟶0λ2∫m0(Q+kd)2−Q2kdt. | (6.6) |
Furthermore,
limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=limk⟶0n∑i=112∫θ˜Pθ(∂uk∂xi−∂u∂xi)k(˜Pθ∂uk∂xi+˜Pθ∂u∂xi−2udi)dx+limk⟶012∫m0(2λdQ+kλd2)dt=n∑i=1∫θ˜Pθ∂v(x,m)∂xi˜Pθ(∂u(x,m)∂xi−˜P∗θudi)dx+∫m0λdQdt=n∑i=1∫θ˜Pθ∂v(x,m)∂xi˜Pθwi(x,m)dx+λ∫m0dQdt. | (6.7) |
Using (6.3) to (6.7), we conclude
limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=n∑i=1∫θ˜P∗θ˜Pθ[∫m0∂2wi∂t2∂v(x,t)∂xidt+∫m0wi∂∂xi(∂2v∂t2)dt]dx+∫m0λdQdt. | (6.8) |
Theorem 6.1. Consider the set Up, of partial admissible control defined as (5.1) and u=u(Q) is its associate solution of (2.2), then the solution of (6.1) is
Qε(t)=max(−p,min(−1λ˜Pθ(ut)(˜PθDiv(w)),p)), | (6.9) |
where Div(w)=n∑i=1∂wi∂xi.
Proof. Let d∈Up and Q+kd∈Up for k>0. The cost Cλ at its minimum Q, verifies
0≤limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k. | (6.10) |
From Lemma 6.1, substituting ∂2v∂t2, by its value in system (4.1), we deduce that
0≤limk⟶0Cλ(Q+kd)−Cλ(Q)k=n∑i=1∫θ˜P∗θ˜Pθ[∫m0∂v∂xi∂2wi∂t2dt+∫m0(−Δ2∂v∂xi+Q(t)∂∂xi(vt)+d(t)∂∂xi(ut))widt]dx+∫m0λdQdt, | (6.11) |
and system (6.3) gives
0≤n∑i=1∫θ˜P∗θ˜Pθ[∫m0∂v∂xi(∂2wi∂t2−Δ2wi−Q(t)(wi)t)dt+d(t)∂∂xi(ut)widt]dx+∫m0λdQdt.=n∑i=1∫θ˜P∗θ˜Pθ∫m0(h(t)ut)∂wi∂xidt+∫m0λdQdt.=∫m0h(t)∫θ[ut˜P∗θ˜Pθn∑i=1∂wi∂xi+λQ]dxdt, | (6.12) |
which gives the optimal control
Qε(t)=max(−p,min(−1λ˜Pθ(ut)(˜PθDiv(w)),p)). | (6.13) |
This paper studied the optimal control problem governed by an infinite dimensional bilinear plate equation. The objective was to command the flow state of the bilinear plate equation to the desired flow using different types of bounded feedback. The problem flow optimal control governed by a bilinear plate equation was considered and solved in two cases using the adjoint method. The first case considered a spatiotemporal control function and looked to reach a flow target on the whole domain. The second case considered a time control function and looks to reach a prescribed target at a fixed final time. As an application, the partial flow control problem was established and solved using the proposed method. More applications can be examined, for example. the case of fractional hyperbolic systems.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
This work was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Jouf University under Grant Number (DSR2022-RG-0119).
The authors affirm that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
[1] | W. Ren, R. W. Beard, Distributed consensus in multi-vehicle cooperative control: theory and applications, London: Springer, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-015-5 |
[2] |
P. Ogren, E. Fiorelli, N. E. Leonard, Cooperative control of mobile sensor networks: adaptive gradient climbing in a distributed environment, IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 49 (2004), 1292–1302. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2004.832203 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2004.832203
![]() |
[3] |
V. Gazi, K. M. Passino, Stability analysis of swarms, IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 48 (2003), 692–697. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2003.809765 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2003.809765
![]() |
[4] |
R. Olfati-Saber, Flocking for multi-agent dynamic systems: algorithms and theory, IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 51 (2006), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2005.864190 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2005.864190
![]() |
[5] |
D. Meng, Y. Jia, Robust consensus algorithms for multiscale coordination control of multivehicle systems with disturbances, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 63 (2015), 1107–1119. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2015.2478740 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2015.2478740
![]() |
[6] |
C. Altafini, Dynamics ofpinion forming in structurally balanced social networks, PloS One, 7 (2012), e38135. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038135 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0038135
![]() |
[7] |
Z. Meng, G. Shi, K. H. Johansson, M. Cao, Y. Hong, Behaviors of networks with antagonistic interactions and switching topologies, Automatica, 73 (2016), 110–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2016.06.022 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2016.06.022
![]() |
[8] |
S. Gao, G. Wen, X. Zhai, P. Zheng, Finite-/fixed-time bipartite consensus for first-order multi-agent systems via impulsive control, Appl. Math. Comput., 442 (2023), 127740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2022.127740 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2022.127740
![]() |
[9] |
Q. Wang, W. Zhong, J. Xu, W. He, D. Tan, Bipartite tracking consensus control of nonlinear high-order multi-agent systems subject to exogenous disturbances, IEEE Access, 7 (2019), 145910–145920. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2944759 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2944759
![]() |
[10] |
Y. Xu, J. Wang, Y. Zhang, Y. Xu, Event-triggered bipartite consensus for high-order multi-agent systems with input saturation, Neurocomputing, 379 (2020), 284–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2019.10.095 doi: 10.1016/j.neucom.2019.10.095
![]() |
[11] | M. A. Haque, M. Egerstedt, C. F. Martin, First-order, networked control models of swarming silkworm moths, 2008 American Control Conference, IEEE, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACC.2008.4587085 |
[12] | S. Bayraktar, G. E. Fainekos, G. J. Pappas, Experimental cooperative control of fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles, 2004 43rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), IEEE, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.2004.1429426 |
[13] |
I. Navarro, F. Matía, An introduction to swarm robotics, ISRN Robotics, 2013 (2013), 608164. https://doi.org/10.5402/2013/608164 doi: 10.5402/2013/608164
![]() |
[14] |
J. Hu, J. Yu, J. Cao, Distributed containment control for nonlinear multi‐agent systems with time‐delayed protocol, Asian J. Control, 18 (2016), 747–756. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.1131 doi: 10.1002/asjc.1131
![]() |
[15] |
H. Zhang, J. Chen, Bipartite consensus of multi‐agent systems over signed graphs: state feedback and output feedback control approaches, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 27 (2017), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.3552 doi: 10.1002/rnc.3552
![]() |
[16] |
Q. Deng, J. Wu, T. Han, Q. S. Yang, X. S. Cai, Fixed-time bipartite consensus of multi-agent systems with disturbances, Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl., 516 (2019), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2018.09.066 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2018.09.066
![]() |
[17] |
H. Wang, W. Yu, G. Wen, G. Chen, Finite-time bipartite consensus for multi-agent systems on directed signed networks, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, 65 (2018), 4336–4348. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSI.2018.2838087 doi: 10.1109/TCSI.2018.2838087
![]() |
[18] | M. Ahsan, Q. Ma, Bipartite containment control of multi-agent systems, 2019 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM), IEEE, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/AIM.2019.8868456 |
[19] |
L. Wang, T. Han, X. S. Zhan, J. Wu, H. Yan, Bipartite containment for linear multi‐agent systems subject to unknown exogenous disturbances, Asian J. Control, 24 (2022), 1836–1845. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.2580 doi: 10.1002/asjc.2580
![]() |
[20] |
S. Zuo, Y. Song, F. L. Lewis, A. Davoudi, Bipartite output containment of general linear heterogeneous multi‐agent systems on signed digraphs, IET Control Theory Appl., 12 (2018), 1180–1188. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-cta.2017.0686 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2017.0686
![]() |
[21] |
Q. Zhou, W. Wang, H. Liang, M. V. Basin, B. Wang, Observer-based event-triggered fuzzy adaptive bipartite containment control of multiagent systems with input quantization, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 29 (2019), 372–384. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2019.2953573 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2019.2953573
![]() |
[22] |
L. Xing, C. Wen, Z. Liu, H. Su, J. Cai, Event-triggered output feedback control for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems, IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 64 (2018), 290–297. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2018.2823386 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2018.2823386
![]() |
[23] |
Y. H. Choi, S. J. Yoo, Event-triggered output-feedback tracking of a class of nonlinear systems with unknown time delays, Nonlinear Dyn., 96 (2019), 959–973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-019-04832-x doi: 10.1007/s11071-019-04832-x
![]() |
[24] |
X. Liu, Z. Zhang, H. Liu, Consensus control of fractional‐order systems based on delayed state fractional order derivative, Asian J. Control, 19 (2017), 2199–2210. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.1493 doi: 10.1002/asjc.1493
![]() |
[25] |
J. Liu, K. Qin, W. Chen, P. Li, M. Shi, Consensus of fractional-order multiagent systems with nonuniform time delays, Math. Probl. Eng., 2018 (2018), 2850757. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/2850757 doi: 10.1155/2018/2850757
![]() |
[26] |
J. Shen, J. Cao, J. Lu, Consensus of fractional-order systems with non-uniform input and communication delays, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part I: J. Syst. Control Eng., 226 (2012), 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959651811412132 doi: 10.1177/0959651811412132
![]() |
[27] |
J. Shen, J. Cao, Necessary and sufficient conditions for consensus of delayed fractional‐order systems, Asian J. Control, 14 (2012), 1690–1697. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.492 doi: 10.1002/asjc.492
![]() |
[28] |
S. K. Panda, V. Vijayakumar, A. M. Nagy, Complex-valued neural networks with time delays in the Lp sense: numerical simulations and finite time stability, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 177 (2023), 114263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.114263 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2023.114263
![]() |
[29] |
S. K. Panda, A. M. Nagy, V. Vijayakumar, B. Hazarika, Stability analysis for complex-valued neural networks with fractional order, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 175 (2023), 114045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.114045 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2023.114045
![]() |
[30] | Y. Cao, A. Chandrasekar, T. Radhika, V. Vijayakumar, Input-to-state stability of stochastic Markovian jump genetic regulatory networks, Math. Comput. Simul., 2023, In press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2023.08.007 |
[31] | W. J. Lin, G. Tan, Q. G. Wang, J. Yu, Fault-tolerant state estimation for Markov jump neural networks with time-varying delays, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSII.2023.3332390 |
[32] | J. Sun, J. Zhang, L. Liu, Y. Wu, Q. Shan, Output consensus control of multi-agent systems with switching networks and incomplete leader measurement, IEEE Trans. Automat. Sci. Eng., 2023, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2023.3328897 |
[33] |
N. Sakthivel, Y. K. Ma, M. Mounika Devi, G. Manopriya, V. Vijayakumar, M. Huh, Nonuniform sampled-data control for synchronization of semi-Markovian jump stochastic complex dynamical networks with time-varying delays, Complexity, 2022 (2022), 2006947. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2006947 doi: 10.1155/2022/2006947
![]() |
[34] |
T. Radhika, A. Chandrasekar, V. Vijayakumar, Q. Zhu, Analysis of Markovian jump stochastic Cohen-Grossberg BAM neural networks with time delays for exponential input-to-state stability, Neural Process. Lett., 55 (2023), 11055–11072. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11063-023-11364-4 doi: 10.1007/s11063-023-11364-4
![]() |
[35] |
J. Hu, G. Tan, L. Liu, A new result on H∞ state estimation for delayed neural networks based on an extended reciprocally convex inequality, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II, 2023, 1181–1185. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSII.2023.3323834 doi: 10.1109/TCSII.2023.3323834
![]() |
[36] |
J. Yuan, T. Chen, Observer‐based adaptive neural network dynamic surface bipartite containment control for switched fractional order multi‐agent systems, Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process., 36 (2022), 1619–1646. https://doi.org/10.1002/acs.3413 doi: 10.1002/acs.3413
![]() |
[37] | M. I. Troparevsky, S. A. Seminara, M. A. Fabio, A review on fractional differential equations and a numerical method to solve some boundary value problems, In: W. Legnani, T. E. Moschandreou, Nonlinear systems: theoretical aspects and recent applications, IntechOpen, 2019, 3–22. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86273 |
[38] |
S. Liu, R. Yang, X. F. Zhou, W. Jiang, X. Li, X. W. Zhao, Stability analysis of fractional delayed equations and its applications on consensus of multi-agent systems, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 73 (2019), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2019.02.019 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2019.02.019
![]() |
[39] |
G. Shi, Y. Hong, K. H. Johansson, Connectivity and set tracking of multi-agent systems guided by multiple moving leaders, IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 57 (2011), 663–676. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2011.2164733 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2011.2164733
![]() |
[40] |
J. Yu, X. Dong, Q. Li, Z. Ren, Practical time-varying formation tracking for second-order nonlinear multiagent systems with multiple leaders using adaptive neural networks, IEEE Trans. Neural Net. Learn. Syst., 29 (2018), 6015–6025. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2018.2817880 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2018.2817880
![]() |
[41] |
J. Hu, P. Bhowmick, A. Lanzon, Distributed adaptive time-varying group formation tracking for multiagent systems with multiple leaders on directed graphs, IEEE Trans. Control Net. Syst., 7 (2019), 140–150. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCNS.2019.2913619 doi: 10.1109/TCNS.2019.2913619
![]() |
[42] |
S. Liu, R. Yang, X. Li, J. Xiao, Global attractiveness and consensus for Riemann-Liouville's nonlinear fractional systems with mixed time-delays, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 143 (2021), 110577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110577 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110577
![]() |
[43] |
R. Yang, S. Liu, Y. Y. Tan, Y. J. Zhang, W. Jiang, Consensus analysis of fractional-order nonlinear multi-agent systems with distributed and input delays, Neurocomputing, 329 (2019), 46–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2018.10.045 doi: 10.1016/j.neucom.2018.10.045
![]() |
1. | Fatima Hussain, Suha Shihab, Transforming Controlled Duffing Oscillator to Optimization Schemes Using New Symmetry-Shifted G(t)-Polynomials, 2024, 16, 2073-8994, 915, 10.3390/sym16070915 |