Davey–Stewartson equation: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
en>Helpful Pixie Bot
m ISBNs (Build KC)
 
en>Yobot
m External links: WP:CHECKWIKI error fixes - Replaced endash with hyphen in sortkey per WP:MCSTJR using AWB (9100)
Line 1: Line 1:
<br><br>Moving to the UK from France? Fully Insured & Member of British Association of Removers (B. Cars & Motorcycles Transported<br>We offer containerised storage in Kent and a complete packing & wrapping service.<br><br>If you’re looking for a professional company for your forthcoming removal to France or removal from France, then Anglo French Removals have been operating since 1984…<br><br>We only carry out removals to & from France, making us the French specialist! We concentrate solely on France, which makes us very knowledgeable of all of the regions.<br><br>We are an independent, family run firm and our experience in removals to and from France started in 1984…<br>We have built our business up from being honest, reliable and caring for our customers’ needs. We operate a fast and efficient weekly service to and from Normandy, Loire, Charente, Limousin, Aquitaine & Midi Pyrenees and a fortnightly service to the rest of France. Full or Part Load Removals To & From France<br>We provide weekly services to & from France.<br><br>) and Guild of Removers & Storers<br>WEEKLY SERVICES TO & FROM FRANCE<br>FULL HOUSEHOLD<br>PACKING SERVICE<br>PART LOAD<br>CONTAINERISED STORAGE<br>30 + YEARS OF MOVING EXPERIENCEs<br><br>Why Choose Anglo French Removals? We cover removals to all regions of France, including: Normandy, Brittany, Loire, Charente, Dordogne, Lot, Tarn, Limousin and other major French towns.<br><br>These are trading standards and are ombudsman approved. We are members of the BAR & National Guild of Removers. Please refer to their respective websites for more information on the advantages of using a BAR & Guild member for your forthcoming move to or from France: www. uk<br>We can offer a full or part packing service, as well as insurance cover up to £1000,000 in transit.<br><br>The length of our vehicles ranges from 6m (transit van) to 18m (truck and trailer). Your effects are handled very carefully by our experienced staff. We can organise a shuttle van if the access is a problem for one of our large trucks.<br><br>We do not offer gimmicks or false promises. We have undertaken so many successful moves to and from France. Our vehicles range from 15m3 up to 110m3 so we can basically cover any size household, from part to full households. All of our modern vehicles have air suspension, which safe guards any breakages in transit. Try to relax and let us take the strain.<br><br>Our company has to undergo yearly inspections from The Guild & BAR who check our insurances, vehicles, storage facilities and our staff. Instead, we offer good value and stress free service, which is second to none. To us, it is ‘just like moving you around the corner’.<br><br>Should you cherished this post and also you would like to receive more details with regards to [http://www.anglofrench.co.uk/ removals to france] i implore you to pay a visit to the web site.
In [[control theory]], backstepping is a technique developed [[circa]] 1990 by [[Petar V. Kokotovic]] and others<ref name=Kokotovic1992>{{cite journal
| last = Kokotovic
| first = P.V.
| authorlink = Petar V. Kokotovic
| year = 1992
| title = The joy of feedback: nonlinear and adaptive
| journal = Control Systems Magazine, IEEE
| volume = 12
| issue = 3
| pages = 7–17
| url = http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=165507
| accessdate = 2008-04-13
| doi = 10.1109/37.165507
}}</ref><ref name=LB92>{{cite journal | first1=R.|last1=Lozano| first2=B.|last2=Brogliato | year=1992 | title=Adaptive control of robot manipulators with flexible joints | journal= IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, | volume=37 | issue=2 | pages=174–181 | doi=10.1109/9.121619}}</ref> for designing [[Lyapunov stability|stabilizing]] controls for a special class of [[nonlinear system|nonlinear]] [[dynamical system]]s. These systems are built from subsystems that radiate out from an irreducible subsystem that can be stabilized using some other method. Because of this [[recursion|recursive]] structure, the designer can start the design process at the known-stable system and "back out" new controllers that progressively stabilize each outer subsystem. The process terminates when the final external control is reached. Hence, this process is known as ''backstepping.<ref name="Khalil">{{cite book
| last = Khalil
| first = H.K.
| authorlink = Hassan K. Khalil
| year = 2002
| edition = 3rd
| url = http://www.egr.msu.edu/~khalil/NonlinearSystems/
| isbn = 0-13-067389-7
| title = Nonlinear Systems
| publisher = [[Prentice Hall]]
| location = Upper Saddle River, NJ}}</ref>''
 
==Backstepping approach==
The backstepping approach provides a [[recursion|recursive]] method for [[Lyapunov stability|stabilizing]] the [[origin (mathematics)|origin]] of a system in [[strict-feedback form]]. That is, consider a [[dynamical system|system]] of the form<ref name="Khalil"/>
 
:<math>\begin{cases} \dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = f_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) + g_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) z_2\\
\dot{z}_2 = f_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2) + g_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2) z_3\\
\vdots\\
\dot{z}_i = f_i(\mathbf{x},z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{i-1}, z_i) + g_i(\mathbf{x},z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{i-1}, z_i) z_{i+1} \quad \text{ for } 1 \leq i < k-1\\
\vdots\\
\dot{z}_{k-1} = f_{k-1}(\mathbf{x},z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-1}) + g_{k-1}(\mathbf{x},z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-1}) z_k\\
\dot{z}_k = f_k(\mathbf{x},z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-1}, z_k) + g_k(\mathbf{x},z_1, z_2, \dots, z_{k-1}, z_k) u\end{cases}</math>
 
where
* <math>\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^n</math> with <math>n \geq 1</math>,
* <math>z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_i, \ldots, z_{k-1}, z_k</math> are [[scalar (mathematics)|scalar]]s,
* <math>u</math> is a [[scalar (mathematics)|scalar]] input to the system,
* <math>f_x, f_1, f_2, \ldots, f_i, \ldots, f_{k-1}, f_k</math> [[vanish (mathematics)|vanish]] at the [[origin (mathematics)|origin]] (i.e., <math>f_i(0,0,\dots,0) = 0</math>),
* <math>g_1, g_2, \ldots, g_i, \ldots, g_{k-1}, g_k</math> are nonzero over the domain of interest (i.e., <math>g_i(\mathbf{x},z_1,\ldots,z_k) \neq 0</math> for <math>1 \leq i \leq k</math>).
 
Also assume that the subsystem
:<math>\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) u_x(\mathbf{x})</math>
is [[Lyapunov stability|stabilized]] to the [[origin (mathematics)|origin]] (i.e., <math> \mathbf{x} = \mathbf{0}\,</math>) by some '''known''' control <math>u_x(\mathbf{x})</math> such that <math>u_x(\mathbf{0}) = 0</math>. It is also assumed that a [[Lyapunov function]] <math>V_x</math> for this stable subsystem is known. That is, this <math>\mathbf{x}</math> subsystem is stabilized by some other method and backstepping extends its stability to the <math>\textbf{z}</math> shell around it.
 
In systems of this ''strict-feedback form'' around a stable <math>\mathbf{x}</math> subsystem,
* The backstepping-designed control input <math>u</math> has its most immediate stabilizing impact on state <math>z_n</math>.
* The state <math>z_n</math> then acts like a stabilizing control on the state <math>z_{n-1}</math> before it.
* This process continues so that each state <math>z_i</math> is stabilized by the ''fictitious'' "control" <math>z_{i+1}</math>.
The '''backstepping''' approach determines how to stabilize the <math>\mathbf{x}</math> subsystem using <math>z_1</math>, and then proceeds with determining how to make the next state <math>z_2</math> drive <math>z_1</math> to the control required to stabilize <math>\mathbf{x}</math>. Hence, the process "steps backward" from <math>\mathbf{x}</math> out of the strict-feedback form system until the ultimate control <math>u</math> is designed.
 
==Recursive Control Design Overview==
 
# It is given that the smaller (i.e., lower-order) subsystem
#::<math>\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) u_x(\mathbf{x})</math>
#:is already stabilized to the origin by some control <math>u_x(\mathbf{x})</math> where <math>u_x(\mathbf{0}) = 0</math>. That is, choice of <math>u_x</math> to stabilize this system must occur using ''some other method.'' It is also assumed that a [[Lyapunov function]] <math>V_x</math> for this stable subsystem is known. Backstepping provides a way to extend the controlled stability of this subsystem to the larger system.
# A control <math>u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math> is designed so that the system
#::<math>\dot{z}_1 = f_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) + g_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math>
#:is stabilized so that <math>z_1</math> follows the desired <math>u_x</math> control. The control design is based on the augmented Lyapunov function candidate
#::<math>V_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) = V_x(\mathbf{x}) + \frac{1}{2}( z_1 - u_x(\mathbf{x}) )^2</math>
#:The control <math>u_1</math> can be picked to bound <math>\dot{V}_1</math> away from zero.
# A control <math>u_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2)</math> is designed so that the system
#::<math>\dot{z}_2 = f_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2) + g_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2) u_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2)</math>
#:is stabilized so that <math>z_2</math> follows the desired <math>u_1</math> control. The control design is based on the augmented Lyapunov function candidate
#::<math>V_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2) = V_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) + \frac{1}{2}( z_2 - u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) )^2</math>
#:The control <math>u_2</math> can be picked to bound <math>\dot{V}_2</math> away from zero.
# This process continues until the actual <math>u</math> is known, and
#* The ''real'' control <math>u</math> stabilizes <math>z_k</math> to ''fictitious'' control <math>u_{k-1}</math>.
#* The ''fictitious'' control <math>u_{k-1}</math> stabilizes <math>z_{k-1}</math> to ''fictitious'' control <math>u_{k-2}</math>.
#* The ''fictitious'' control <math>u_{k-2}</math> stabilizes <math>z_{k-2}</math> to ''fictitious'' control <math>u_{k-3}</math>.
#* ...
#* The ''fictitious'' control <math>u_2</math> stabilizes <math>z_2</math> to ''fictitious'' control <math>u_1</math>.
#* The ''fictitious'' control <math>u_1</math> stabilizes <math>z_1</math> to ''fictitious'' control <math>u_x</math>.
#* The ''fictitious'' control <math>u_x</math> stabilizes <math>\mathbf{x}</math> to the origin.
 
This process is known as '''backstepping''' because it starts with the requirements on some internal subsystem for stability and progressively ''steps back'' out of the system, maintaining stability at each step. Because
* <math>f_i</math> vanish at the origin for <math>0 \leq i \leq k</math>,
* <math>g_i</math> are nonzero for <math>1 \leq i \leq k</math>,
* the given control <math>u_x</math> has <math>u_x(\mathbf{0}) = 0</math>,
then the resulting system has an equilibrium at the '''origin''' (i.e., where <math> \mathbf{x}=\mathbf{0}\,</math>, <math>z_1=0</math>, <math>z_2=0</math>, ..., <math>z_{k-1}=0</math>, and <math>z_k=0</math>) that is [[Lyapunov function#Globally asymptotically stable equilibrium|globally asymptotically stable]].
 
==Integrator Backstepping==
 
Before describing the backstepping procedure for general [[strict-feedback form]] [[dynamical system]]s, it is convenient to discuss the approach for a smaller class of strict-feedback form systems. These systems connect a series of integrators to the input of a
system with a known feedback-stabilizing control law, and so the stabilizing approach is known as ''integrator backstepping.'' With a small modification, the integrator backstepping approach can be extended to handle all strict-feedback form systems.
 
===Single-integrator Equilibrium===
 
Consider the [[dynamical system]]
:{| border="0", width="75%"
|-
|align="left"|<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = u_1
\end{cases}</math>
|align="right"|<math> (1)\,</math>
|-
|}
where <math>\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^n</math> and <math>z_1</math> is a scalar. This system is a [[cascade connection]] of an [[integrator]] with the <math>\mathbf{x}</math> subsystem (i.e., the input <math>u</math> enters an integrator, and the [[integral]] <math>z_1</math> enters the <math>\mathbf{x}</math> subsystem).
 
We assume that <math>f_x(\mathbf{0})=0</math>, and so if <math>u_1=0</math>, <math> \mathbf{x} = \mathbf{0}\,</math> and <math>z_1 = 0</math>, then
:<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\underbrace{\mathbf{0}}_{\mathbf{x}}) + ( g_x(\underbrace{\mathbf{0}}_{\mathbf{x}}) )(\underbrace{0}_{z_1}) = 0 + ( g_x(\mathbf{0}) )(0) = \mathbf{0} & \quad \text{ (i.e., } \mathbf{x} = \mathbf{0} \text{ is stationary)}\\
\dot{z}_1 = \overbrace{0}^{u_1} & \quad \text{ (i.e., } z_1 = 0 \text{ is stationary)}
\end{cases}</math>
So the [[origin (mathematics)|origin]] <math>(\mathbf{x},z_1) = (\mathbf{0},0)</math> is an equilibrium (i.e., a [[stationary point]]) of the system. If the system ever reaches the origin, it will remain there forever after.
 
===Single-integrator Backstepping===
 
In this example, backstepping is used to [[Lyapunov stability|stabilize]] the single-integrator system in Equation&nbsp;(1) around its equilibrium at the origin. To be less precise, we wish to design a control law <math>u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math> that ensures that the states <math>(\mathbf{x}, z_1)</math> return to <math>(\mathbf{0},0)</math> after the system is started from some arbitrary initial condition.
 
* First, by assumption, the subsystem
 
::<math>\dot{\mathbf{x}} = F(\mathbf{x}) \qquad \text{where} \qquad F(\mathbf{x}) \triangleq f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) u_x(\mathbf{x})</math>
 
:with <math>u_x(\mathbf{0}) = 0</math> has a [[Lyapunov function]] <math>V_x(\mathbf{x}) > 0</math> such that
 
::<math>\dot{V}_x=\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}(f_x(\mathbf{x})+g_x(\mathbf{x})u_x(\mathbf{x})) \leq - W(\mathbf{x})</math>
 
:where <math>W(\mathbf{x})</math> is a [[positive-definite function]]. That is, we '''assume''' that we have '''already shown''' that this '''existing simpler''' <math>\mathbf{x}</math> '''subsystem''' is '''[[Lyapunov stability|stable (in the sense of Lyapunov)]].''' Roughly speaking, this notion of stability means that:
** The function <math>V_x</math> is like a "generalized energy" of the <math>\mathbf{x}</math> subsystem. As the <math>\mathbf{x}</math> states of the system move away from the origin, the energy <math>V_x(\mathbf{x})</math> also grows.
** By showing that over time, the energy <math>V_x(\mathbf{x}(t))</math> decays to zero, then the <math>\mathbf{x}</math> states must decay toward <math> \mathbf{x}=\mathbf{0}\,</math>. That is, the origin <math> \mathbf{x}=\mathbf{0}\,</math> will be a '''stable equilibrium''' of the system – the <math>\mathbf{x}</math> states will continuously approach the origin as time increases.
** Saying that <math>W(\mathbf{x})</math> is positive definite means that <math>W(\mathbf{x}) > 0</math> everywhere except for <math> \mathbf{x}=\mathbf{0}\,</math>, and <math>W(\mathbf{0})=0</math>.
** The statement that <math>\dot{V}_x \leq -W(\mathbf{x})</math> means that <math>\dot{V}_x</math> is bounded away from zero for all points except where <math> \mathbf{x} = \mathbf{0}\,</math>. That is, so long as the system is not at its equilibrium at the origin, its "energy" will be decreasing.
** Because the energy is always decaying, then the system must be stable; its trajectories must approach the origin.
:Our task is to find a control <math>u</math> that makes our cascaded <math>(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math> system also stable. So we must find a ''new'' Lyapunov function '''candidate''' for this new system. That candidate will depend upon the control <math>u</math>, and by choosing the control properly, we can ensure that it is decaying everywhere as well.
 
* Next, by ''adding'' '''and''' ''subtracting'' <math>g_x(\mathbf{x}) u_x(\mathbf{x})</math> (i.e., we don't change the system in any way because we make no ''net'' effect) to the <math>\dot{\mathbf{x}}</math> part of the larger <math>(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math> system, it becomes
 
::<math>\begin{cases}\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1 + \mathord{\underbrace{\left( g_x(\mathbf{x})u_x(\mathbf{x}) - g_x(\mathbf{x})u_x(\mathbf{x}) \right)}_{0}}\\\dot{z}_1 = u_1\end{cases}</math>
 
:which we can re-group to get
 
::<math>\begin{cases}\dot{x} = \mathord{\underbrace{\left( f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x})u_x(\mathbf{x}) \right)}_{F(\mathbf{x})}} + g_x(\mathbf{x}) \underbrace{\left( z_1 - u_x(\mathbf{x}) \right)}_{z_1 \text{ error tracking } u_x}\\\dot{z}_1 = u_1\end{cases}</math>
 
:So our cascaded supersystem encapsulates the known-stable <math>\dot{\mathbf{x}} = F(\mathbf{x})</math> subsystem plus some error perturbation generated by the integrator.
 
* We now can change variables from <math>(\mathbf{x}, z_1)</math> to <math>(\mathbf{x}, e_1)</math> by letting <math>e_1 \triangleq z_1 - u_x(\mathbf{x})</math>. So
 
::<math>\begin{cases}\dot{\mathbf{x}} = (f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) u_x(\mathbf{x})) +
g_x(\mathbf{x}) e_1\\\dot{e}_1 = u_1 - \dot{u}_x\end{cases}</math>
 
: Additionally, we let <math>v_1 \triangleq u_1 - \dot{u}_x</math> so that <math>u_1 = v_1 + \dot{u}_x</math> and
 
::<math>\begin{cases}\dot{\mathbf{x}} = (f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) u_x(\mathbf{x}))+g_x(\mathbf{x}) e_1\\\dot{e}_1 = v_1\end{cases}</math>
 
: We seek to stabilize this '''error system''' by feedback through the new control <math>v_1</math>. By stabilizing the system at <math>e_1 = 0</math>, the state <math>z_1</math> will track the desired control <math>u_x</math> which will result in stabilizing the inner <math>\mathbf{x}</math> subsystem.
 
* From our existing Lyapunov function <math>V_x</math>, we define the ''augmented'' Lyapunov function ''candidate''
 
::<math>V_1(\mathbf{x}, e_1) \triangleq V_x(\mathbf{x}) + \frac{1}{2} e_1^2</math>
 
: So
 
::<math>\dot{V}_1
= \dot{V}_x(\mathbf{x}) + \frac{1}{2}\left( 2 e_1 \dot{e}_1 \right)
= \dot{V}_x(\mathbf{x}) + e_1 \dot{e}_1
= \dot{V}_x(\mathbf{x}) + e_1 \overbrace{v_1}^{\dot{e}_1}
= \overbrace{\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}} \underbrace{\dot{\mathbf{x}}}_{\text{(i.e., }\frac{\operatorname{d}\mathbf{x}}{\operatorname{d}t}\text{)}}}^{\dot{V}_x\text{ (i.e.,} \frac{\operatorname{d}V_x}{\operatorname{d}t}\text{)}} + e_1 v_1
= \overbrace{\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}} \underbrace{\left( (f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x})u_x(\mathbf{x})) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) e_1 \right)}_{\dot{\mathbf{x}}}}^{\dot{V}_x} + e_1 v_1</math>
 
: By distributing <math>\partial V_x/\partial \mathbf{x}</math>, we see that
 
::<math>\dot{V}_1 = \overbrace{\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}(f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) u_x(\mathbf{x}))}^{{} \leq -W(\mathbf{x})} + \frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}g_x(\mathbf{x}) e_1 + e_1 v_1 \leq -W(\mathbf{x})+ \frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}} g_x(\mathbf{x}) e_1 + e_1 v_1</math>
 
: To ensure that <math>\dot{V}_1 \leq -W(\mathbf{x}) < 0</math> (i.e., to ensure stability of the supersystem), we '''pick''' the control law
 
::<math>v_1 = -\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}g_x(\mathbf{x})- k_1 e_1</math>
 
: with <math>k_1 > 0</math>, and so
 
::<math>\dot{V}_1
= -W(\mathbf{x}) + \frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}} g_x(\mathbf{x}) e_1 + e_1\overbrace{\left( -\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}g_x(\mathbf{x})-k_1 e_1 \right)}^{v_1}</math>
 
: After distributing the <math>e_1</math> through,
 
::<math>\dot{V}_1
=
-W(\mathbf{x}) + \mathord{\overbrace{\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}} g_x(\mathbf{x}) e_1
- e_1 \frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}g_x(\mathbf{x})}^{0}} - k_1 e_1^2
= -W(\mathbf{x})-k_1 e_1^2 \leq -W(\mathbf{x})
< 0</math>
 
: So our ''candidate'' Lyapunov function <math>V_1</math> '''is''' a true [[Lyapunov function]], and our system is '''stable''' under this control law <math>v_1</math> (which corresponds the control law <math>u_1</math> because <math>v_1 \triangleq u_1 - \dot{u}_x</math>). Using the variables from the original coordinate system, the equivalent Lyapunov function
::{| border="0", width="75%"
|-
|align="left"|<math>V_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1) \triangleq V_x(\mathbf{x}) + \frac{1}{2} ( z_1 - u_x(\mathbf{x}) )^2</math>
|align="right"|<math> (2)\,</math>
|-
|}
: As discussed below, this Lyapunov function will be used again when this procedure is applied iteratively to multiple-integrator problem.
 
* Our choice of control <math>v_1</math> ultimately depends on all of our original state variables. In particular, the actual feedback-stabilizing control law
::{| border="0", width="75%"
|-
|align="left"|<math>\underbrace{u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1)=v_1+\dot{u}_x}_{\text{By definition of }v_1}=\overbrace{-\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}g_x(\mathbf{x})-k_1(\underbrace{z_1-u_x(\mathbf{x})}_{e_1})}^{v_1} \, + \, \overbrace{\frac{\partial u_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}(\underbrace{f_x(\mathbf{x})+g_x(\mathbf{x})z_1}_{\dot{\mathbf{x}} \text{ (i.e., } \frac{\operatorname{d}\mathbf{x}}{\operatorname{d}t} \text{)}})}^{\dot{u}_x \text{ (i.e., } \frac{ \operatorname{d}u_x }{\operatorname{d}t} \text{)}}</math>
|align="right"|<math> (3)\,</math>
|-
|}
: The states <math>\mathbf{x}</math> and <math>z_1</math> and functions <math>f_x</math> and <math>g_x</math> come from the system. The function <math>u_x</math> comes from our known-stable <math>\dot{\mathbf{x}}=F(\mathbf{x})</math> subsystem. The '''gain''' parameter <math>k_1 > 0</math> affects the convergence rate or our system. Under this control law, our system is [[Lyapunov stability|stable]] at the origin <math>(\mathbf{x},z_1)=(\mathbf{0},0)</math>.
 
: Recall that <math>u_1</math> in Equation&nbsp;(3) drives the input of an integrator that is connected to a subsystem that is feedback-stabilized by the control law <math>u_x</math>. Not surprisingly, the control <math>u_1</math> has a <math>\dot{u}_x</math> term that will be integrated to follow the stabilizing control law <math>\dot{u}_x</math> plus some offset. The other terms provide damping to remove that offset and any other perturbation effects that would be magnified by the integrator.
 
So because this system is feedback stabilized by <math>u_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1)</math> and has Lyapunov function <math>V_1(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math> with <math>\dot{V}_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1) \leq -W(\mathbf{x}) < 0</math>, it can be used as the upper subsystem in another single-integrator cascade system.
 
===Motivating Example: Two-integrator Backstepping===
Before discussing the recursive procedure for the general multiple-integrator case, it is instructive to study the recursion present in the two-integrator case. That is, consider the [[dynamical system]]
:{| border="0", width="75%"
|-
|align="left"|<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = z_2\\
\dot{z}_2 = u_2
\end{cases}</math>
|align="right"|<math> (4)\,</math>
|-
|}
where <math>\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^n</math> and <math>z_1</math> and <math>z_2</math> are scalars. This system is a cascade connection of the single-integrator system in Equation&nbsp;(1) with another integrator (i.e., the input <math>u_2</math> enters through an integrator, and the output of that integrator enters the system in Equation&nbsp;(1) by its <math>u_1</math> input).
 
By letting
* <math>\mathbf{y} \triangleq \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{x} \\ z_1 \end{bmatrix}\,</math>,
* <math>f_y(\mathbf{y}) \triangleq \begin{bmatrix} f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix}\,</math>,
* <math>g_y(\mathbf{y}) \triangleq \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{0}\\ 1 \end{bmatrix},\,</math>
then the two-integrator system in Equation&nbsp;(4) becomes the single-integrator system
:{| border="0", width="75%"
|-
|align="left"|<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{y}} = f_y(\mathbf{y}) + g_y(\mathbf{y}) z_2 &\quad \text{( where this } \mathbf{y} \text{ subsystem is stabilized by } z_2 = u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_2 = u_2.
\end{cases}</math>
|align="right"|<math> (5)\,</math>
|-
|}
By the single-integrator procedure, the control law <math>u_y(\mathbf{y}) \triangleq u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math> stabilizes the upper <math>z_2</math>-to-<math>\mathbf{y}</math> subsystem using the Lyapunov function <math>V_1(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math>, and so Equation&nbsp;(5) is a new single-integrator system that is structurally equivalent to the single-integrator system in Equation&nbsp;(1). So a stabilizing control <math>u_2</math> can be found using the same single-integrator procedure that was used to find <math>u_1</math>.
 
===Many-integrator backstepping===
 
In the two-integrator case, the upper single-integrator subsystem was stabilized yielding a new single-integrator system that can be similarly stabilized. This recursive procedure can be extended to handle any finite number of integrators. This claim can be formally proved with [[mathematical induction]]. Here, a stabilized multiple-integrator system is built up from subsystems of already-stabilized multiple-integrator subsystems.
 
* First, consider the [[dynamical system]]
::<math>\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) u_x</math>
:that has scalar input <math>u_x</math> and output states <math>\mathbf{x} = [x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n]^{\text{T}} \in \mathbb{R}^n</math>. Assume that
**<math>f_x(\mathbf{x}) = \mathbf{0}</math> so that the zero-input (i.e., <math>u_x = 0</math>) system is [[stationary point|stationary]] at the origin <math> \mathbf{x} = \mathbf{0}\,</math>. In this case, the origin is called an ''equilibrium'' of the system.
**The feedback control law <math>u_x(\mathbf{x})</math> stabilizes the system at the equilibrium at the origin.
**A [[Lyapunov function]] corresponding to this system is described by <math>V_x(\mathbf{x})</math>.
:That is, if output states <math>\mathbf{x}</math> are fed back to the input <math>u_x</math> by the control law <math>u_x(\mathbf{x})</math>, then the output states (and the Lyapunov function) return to the origin after a single perturbation (e.g., after a nonzero initial condition or a sharp disturbance). This subsystem is '''stabilized''' by feedback control law <math>u_x</math>.
 
* Next, connect an [[integrator]] to input <math>u_x</math> so that the augmented system has input <math>u_1</math> (to the integrator) and output states <math>\mathbf{x}</math>. The resulting augmented dynamical system is
::<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = u_1
\end{cases}</math>
:This "cascade" system matches the form in Equation&nbsp;(1), and so the single-integrator backstepping procedure leads to the stabilizing control law in Equation&nbsp;(3). That is, if we feed back states <math>z_1</math> and <math>\mathbf{x}</math> to input <math>u_1</math> according to the control law
::<math>u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1)=-\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}g_x(\mathbf{x})-k_1(z_1-u_x(\mathbf{x})) + \frac{\partial u_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}(f_x(\mathbf{x})+g_x(\mathbf{x})z_1)</math>
: with gain <math>k_1 > 0</math>, then the states <math>z_1</math> and <math>\mathbf{x}</math> will return to <math>z_1 = 0</math> and <math> \mathbf{x}=\mathbf{0}\,</math> after a single perturbation. This subsystem is '''stabilized''' by feedback control law <math>u_1</math>, and the corresponding Lyapunov function from Equation&nbsp;(2) is
::<math>V_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) = V_x(\mathbf{x}) + \frac{1}{2}( z_1 - u_x(\mathbf{x}) )^2</math>
:That is, under feedback control law <math>u_1</math>, the Lyapunov function <math>V_1</math> decays to zero as the states return to the origin.
 
* Connect a new integrator to input <math>u_1</math> so that the augmented system has input <math>u_2</math> and output states <math>\mathbf{x}</math>. The resulting augmented dynamical system is
::<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = z_2\\
\dot{z}_2 = u_2
\end{cases}</math>
:which is equivalent to the ''single''-integrator system
::<math>\begin{cases}
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \dot{\mathbf{x}}\\ \dot{z}_1 \end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, \dot{\mathbf{x}}_1}
=
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, f_1(\mathbf{x}_1)}
+
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{0}\\ 1\end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, g_1(\mathbf{x}_1)} z_2 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_1, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_1(\textbf{x}_1) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_2 = u_2
\end{cases}</math>
:Using these definitions of <math>\mathbf{x}_1</math>, <math>f_1</math>, and <math>g_1</math>, this system can also be expressed as
::<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}}_1 = f_1(\mathbf{x}_1) + g_1(\mathbf{x}_1) z_2 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_1, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_1(\textbf{x}_1) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_2 = u_2
\end{cases}</math>
:This system matches the single-integrator structure of Equation&nbsp;(1), and so the single-integrator backstepping procedure can be applied again. That is, if we feed back states <math>z_1</math>, <math>z_2</math>, and <math>\mathbf{x}</math> to input <math>u_2</math> according to the control law
::<math>u_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2)=-\frac{\partial V_1}{\partial \mathbf{x}_1 } g_1(\mathbf{x}_1)-k_2(z_2-u_1(\mathbf{x}_1)) + \frac{\partial u_1}{\partial \mathbf{x}_1}(f_1(\mathbf{x}_1)+g_1(\mathbf{x}_1)z_2)</math>
:with gain <math>k_2 > 0</math>, then the states <math>z_1</math>, <math>z_2</math>, and <math>\mathbf{x}</math> will return to <math>z_1 = 0</math>, <math>z_2 = 0</math>, and <math> \mathbf{x}=\mathbf{0}\,</math> after a single perturbation. This subsystem is '''stabilized''' by feedback control law <math>u_2</math>, and the corresponding Lyapunov function is
::<math>V_2(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2) = V_1(\mathbf{x}_1) + \frac{1}{2}( z_2 - u_1(\mathbf{x}_1) )^2</math>
:That is, under feedback control law <math>u_2</math>, the Lyapunov function <math>V_2</math> decays to zero as the states return to the origin.
 
* Connect an integrator to input <math>u_2</math> so that the augmented system has input <math>u_3</math> and output states <math>\mathbf{x}</math>. The resulting augmented dynamical system is
::<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = z_2\\
\dot{z}_2 = z_3\\
\dot{z}_3 = u_3
\end{cases}</math>
:which can be re-grouped as the ''single''-integrator system
::<math>\begin{cases}
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \dot{\mathbf{x}}\\ \dot{z}_1\\ \dot{z}_2 \end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, \dot{\mathbf{x}}_2}
=
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_2 \\ z_2 \\ 0\end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, f_2(\mathbf{x}_2)}
+
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{0}\\ 0\\ 1\end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, g_2(\mathbf{x}_2)} z_3 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_2, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_2(\textbf{x}_2) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_3 = u_3
\end{cases}</math>
:By the definitions of <math>\mathbf{x}_1</math>, <math>f_1</math>, and <math>g_1</math> from the previous step, this system is also represented by
::<math>\begin{cases}
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \dot{\mathbf{x}}_1\\ \dot{z}_2 \end{bmatrix} }^{\dot{\mathbf{x}}_2}
=
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} f_1(\mathbf{x}_1) + g_1(\mathbf{x}_1) z_2 \\ 0\end{bmatrix} }^{f_2(\mathbf{x}_2)}
+
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{0}\\ 1\end{bmatrix} }^{g_2(\mathbf{x}_2)} z_3 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_2, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_2(\textbf{x}_2) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_3 = u_3
\end{cases}</math>
:Further, using these definitions of <math>\mathbf{x}_2</math>, <math>f_2</math>, and <math>g_2</math>, this system can also be expressed as
::<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}}_2 = f_2(\mathbf{x}_2) + g_2(\mathbf{x}_2) z_3 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_2, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_2(\textbf{x}_2) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_3 = u_3
\end{cases}</math>
:So the re-grouped system has the single-integrator structure of Equation&nbsp;(1), and so the single-integrator backstepping procedure can be applied again. That is, if we feed back states <math>z_1</math>, <math>z_2</math>, <math>z_3</math>, and <math>\mathbf{x}</math> to input <math>u_3</math> according to the control law
::<math>u_3(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2,z_3)=-\frac{\partial V_2}{\partial \mathbf{x}_2 } g_2(\mathbf{x}_2)-k_3(z_3-u_2(\mathbf{x}_2)) + \frac{\partial u_2}{\partial \mathbf{x}_2}(f_2(\mathbf{x}_2)+g_2(\mathbf{x}_2)z_3)</math>
:with gain <math>k_3 > 0</math>, then the states <math>z_1</math>, <math>z_2</math>, <math>z_3</math>, and <math>\mathbf{x}</math> will return to <math>z_1 = 0</math>, <math>z_2 = 0</math>, <math>z_3 = 0</math>, and <math> \mathbf{x}=\mathbf{0}\,</math> after a single perturbation. This subsystem is '''stabilized''' by feedback control law <math>u_3</math>, and the corresponding Lyapunov function is
::<math>V_3(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2,z_3) = V_2(\mathbf{x}_2) + \frac{1}{2}( z_3 - u_2(\mathbf{x}_2) )^2</math>
:That is, under feedback control law <math>u_3</math>, the Lyapunov function <math>V_3</math> decays to zero as the states return to the origin.
 
* This process can continue for each integrator added to the system, and hence any system of the form
::<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_x, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_x(\textbf{x}) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_1 = z_2\\
\dot{z}_2 = z_3\\
\vdots\\
\dot{z}_i = z_{i+1}\\
\vdots\\
\dot{z}_{k-2} = z_{k-1}\\
\dot{z}_{k-1} = z_k\\
\dot{z}_k = u
\end{cases}</math>
:has the recursive structure
::<math>\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_x, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_x(\textbf{x}) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_1 = z_2
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_2 = z_3
\end{cases}\\
\vdots
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_i = z_{i+1}
\end{cases}\\
\vdots
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_{k-2} = z_{k-1}
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_{k-1} = z_k
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_k = u
\end{cases}</math>
:and can be feedback stabilized by finding the feedback-stabilizing control and Lyapunov function for the single-integrator <math>(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math> subsystem (i.e., with input <math>z_2</math> and output <math>\mathbf{x}</math>) and iterating out from that inner subsystem until the ultimate feedback-stabilizing control <math>u</math> is known. At iteration <math>i</math>, the equivalent system is
::<math>\begin{cases}
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \dot{\mathbf{x}}\\ \dot{z}_1\\ \dot{z}_2 \\ \vdots \\ \dot{z}_{i-2} \\ \dot{z}_{i-1} \end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, \dot{\mathbf{x}}_{i-1}}
=
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} f_{i-2}(\mathbf{x}_{i-2}) + g_{i-2}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1}) z_{i-2} \\ 0 \end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, f_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})}
+
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{0}\\ 1\end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, g_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})} z_i &\quad \text{ ( by Lyap. func. } V_{i-1}, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_{i-1}(\textbf{x}_{i-1}) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_i = u_i
\end{cases}</math>
:The corresponding feedback-stabilizing control law is
::<math>u_i(\overbrace{\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2,\dots,z_i}^{\triangleq \, \mathbf{x}_i})=-\frac{\partial V_{i-1}}{\partial \mathbf{x}_{i-1} } g_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1}) \, - \, k_i(z_i \, - \, u_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})) \, + \, \frac{\partial u_{i-1}}{\partial \mathbf{x}_{i-1}}(f_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1}) \, + \, g_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})z_i)</math>
:with gain <math>k_i > 0</math>. The corresponding Lyapunov function is
::<math>V_i(\mathbf{x}_i) = V_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1}) + \frac{1}{2}( z_i - u_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1}) )^2</math>
:By this construction, the ultimate control <math>u(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2,\ldots,z_k) = u_k(\mathbf{x}_k)</math> (i.e., ultimate control is found at final iteration <math>i=k</math>).
Hence, any system in this special many-integrator strict-feedback form can be feedback stabilized using a straightforward procedure that can even be automated (e.g., as part of an [[adaptive control]] algorithm).
 
==Generic Backstepping==
 
Systems in the special [[strict-feedback form]] have a recursive structure similar to the many-integrator system structure. Likewise, they are stabilized by stabilizing the smallest cascaded system and then ''backstepping'' to the next cascaded system and repeating the procedure. So it is critical to develop a single-step procedure; that procedure can be recursively applied to cover the many-step case. Fortunately, due to the requirements on the functions in the strict-feedback form, each single-step system can be rendered by feedback to a single-integrator system, and that single-integrator system can be stabilized using methods discussed above.
 
===Single-step Procedure===
 
Consider the simple [[strict-feedback form|strict-feedback]] [[dynamical system|system]]
:{| border="0", width="75%"
|-
|align="left"|<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = f_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1) + g_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1) u_1
\end{cases}</math>
|align="right"|<math> (6)\,</math>
|-
|}
where
* <math>\mathbf{x} = [x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n]^{\text{T}} \in \mathbb{R}^n</math>,
* <math>z_1</math> and <math>u_1</math> are [[scalar (mathematics)|scalar]]s,
* For all <math>\mathbf{x}</math> and <math>z_1</math>, <math>g_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) \neq 0</math>.
Rather than designing feedback-stabilizing control <math>u_1</math> directly, introduce a new control <math>u_{a1}</math> (to be designed ''later'') and use control law
:<math>u_1( \mathbf{x}, z_1 )
=
\frac{ 1 }{ g_1( \mathbf{x}, z_1 ) }
\left( u_{a1} - f_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) \right)</math>
which is possible because <math>g_1 \neq 0</math>. So the system in Equation&nbsp;(6) is
:<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = f_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1) + g_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1) \overbrace{\frac{ 1 }{ g_1( \mathbf{x}, z_1 ) }
\left( u_{a1} - f_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) \right)}^{u_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1)}
\end{cases}</math>
which simplifies to
:<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1\\
\dot{z}_1 = u_{a1}
\end{cases}</math>
This new <math>u_{a1}</math>-to-<math>\mathbf{x}</math> system matches the ''single-integrator cascade system'' in Equation&nbsp;(1). Assuming that a feedback-stabilizing control law <math>u_x(\mathbf{x})</math> and [[Lyapunov function]] <math>V_x(\mathbf{x})</math> for the upper subsystem is known, the feedback-stabilizing control law from Equation&nbsp;(3) is
:<math>u_{a1}(\mathbf{x},z_1)=-\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}g_x(\mathbf{x})-k_1(z_1-u_x(\mathbf{x})) + \frac{\partial u_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}(f_x(\mathbf{x})+g_x(\mathbf{x})z_1)</math>
with gain <math>k_1 > 0</math>. So the final feedback-stabilizing control law is
:{| border="0", width="75%"
|-
|align="left"|<math>u_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) = \frac{1}{ g_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) } \left( \overbrace{-\frac{\partial V_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}g_x(\mathbf{x})-k_1(z_1-u_x(\mathbf{x})) + \frac{\partial u_x}{\partial \mathbf{x}}(f_x(\mathbf{x})+g_x(\mathbf{x})z_1)}^{u_{a1}(\mathbf{x},z_1)} \, - \, f_1(\mathbf{x}, z_1) \right)</math>
|<math> (7)\,</math>
|-
|}
with gain <math>k_1 > 0</math>. The corresponding Lyapunov function from Equation&nbsp;(2) is
:{| border="0", width="75%"
|-
|align="left"|<math>V_1(\mathbf{x},z_1) = V_x(\mathbf{x}) + \frac{1}{2} ( z_1 - u_x(\mathbf{x}) )^2</math>
|<math> (8)\,</math>
|-
|}
Because this ''strict-feedback system'' has a feedback-stabilizing control and a corresponding Lyapunov function, it can be cascaded as part of a larger strict-feedback system, and this procedure can be repeated to find the surrounding feedback-stabilizing control.
 
===Many-step Procedure===
 
As in many-integrator backstepping, the single-step procedure can be completed iteratively to stabilize an entire strict-feedback system. In each step,
# The smallest "unstabilized" single-step strict-feedback system is isolated.
# Feedback is used to convert the system into a single-integrator system.
# The resulting single-integrator system is stabilized.
# The stabilized system is used as the upper system in the next step.
That is, any ''strict-feedback system''
:<math>\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_x, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_x(\textbf{x}) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_1 = f_1( \mathbf{x}, z_1 ) + g_1( \mathbf{x}, z_1 ) z_2\\
\dot{z}_2 = f_2( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2 ) + g_2( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2 ) z_3\\
\vdots\\
\dot{z}_i = f_i( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_i ) + g_i( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_i ) z_{i+1}\\
\vdots\\
\dot{z}_{k-2} = f_{k-2}( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots z_{k-2} ) + g_{k-2}( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-2} ) z_{k-1}\\
\dot{z}_{k-1} = f_{k-1}( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots z_{k-2}, z_{k-1} ) + g_{k-1}( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-2}, z_{k-1} ) z_k\\
\dot{z}_k = f_k( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots z_{k-1}, z_k ) + g_k( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-1}, z_k ) u
\end{cases}</math>
has the recursive structure
:<math>\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\begin{cases}
\dot{\mathbf{x}} = f_x(\mathbf{x}) + g_x(\mathbf{x}) z_1 &\qquad \text{ ( by Lyapunov function } V_x, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_x(\textbf{x}) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_1 = f_1( \mathbf{x}, z_1 ) + g_1( \mathbf{x}, z_1 ) z_2
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_2 = f_2( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2 ) + g_2( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2 ) z_3
\end{cases}\\
\vdots\\
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_i = f_i( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_i ) + g_i( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_i ) z_{i+1}
\end{cases}\\
\vdots
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_{k-2} = f_{k-2}( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots z_{k-2} ) + g_{k-2}( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-2} ) z_{k-1}
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_{k-1} = f_{k-1}( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots z_{k-2}, z_{k-1} ) + g_{k-1}( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-2}, z_{k-1} ) z_k
\end{cases}\\
\dot{z}_k = f_k( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots z_{k-1}, z_k ) + g_k( \mathbf{x}, z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{k-1}, z_k ) u
\end{cases}</math>
and can be feedback stabilized by finding the feedback-stabilizing control and Lyapunov function for the single-integrator <math>(\mathbf{x},z_1)</math> subsystem (i.e., with input <math>z_2</math> and output <math>\mathbf{x}</math>) and iterating out from that inner subsystem until the ultimate feedback-stabilizing control <math>u</math> is known. At iteration <math>i</math>, the equivalent system is
:<math>\begin{cases}
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \dot{\mathbf{x}}\\ \dot{z}_1\\ \dot{z}_2 \\ \vdots \\ \dot{z}_{i-2} \\ \dot{z}_{i-1} \end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, \dot{\mathbf{x}}_{i-1}}
=
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} f_{i-2}(\mathbf{x}_{i-2}) + g_{i-2}(\mathbf{x}_{i-2}) z_{i-2} \\ f_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_i) \end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, f_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})}
+
\overbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{0}\\ g_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_i)\end{bmatrix} }^{\triangleq \, g_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})} z_i &\quad \text{ ( by Lyap. func. } V_{i-1}, \text{ subsystem stabilized by } u_{i-1}(\textbf{x}_{i-1}) \text{ )}\\
\dot{z}_i = f_i(\mathbf{x}_i) + g_i(\mathbf{x}_i) u_i
\end{cases}</math>
By Equation&nbsp;(7), the corresponding feedback-stabilizing control law is
:<math>u_i(\overbrace{\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2,\dots,z_i}^{\triangleq \, \mathbf{x}_i})
=
\frac{1}{g_i(\mathbf{x}_i)}
\left( \overbrace{-\frac{\partial V_{i-1}}{\partial \mathbf{x}_{i-1} }
g_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})
\, - \,
k_i\left( z_i \, - \, u_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1}) \right)
\, + \,
\frac{\partial u_{i-1}}{\partial \mathbf{x}_{i-1}}(f_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})
\, + \,
g_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1})z_i) }^{\text{Single-integrator stabilizing control } u_{a\;\!i}(\mathbf{x}_i)}
\, - \,
f_i( \mathbf{x}_{i-1} )
\right)</math>
with gain <math>k_i > 0</math>. By Equation&nbsp;(8), the corresponding Lyapunov function is
:<math>V_i(\mathbf{x}_i) = V_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1}) + \frac{1}{2} ( z_i - u_{i-1}(\mathbf{x}_{i-1}) )^2</math>
By this construction, the ultimate control <math>u(\mathbf{x},z_1,z_2,\ldots,z_k) = u_k(\mathbf{x}_k)</math> (i.e., ultimate control is found at final iteration <math>i=k</math>).
Hence, any strict-feedback system can be feedback stabilized using a straightforward procedure that can even be automated (e.g., as part of an [[adaptive control]] algorithm).
 
==See also==
* [[Nonlinear control]]
* [[Strict-feedback form]]
* [[Robust control]]
* [[Adaptive control]]
 
==References==
{{Reflist}}
 
[[Category:Control theory]]
[[Category:Nonlinear control]]

Revision as of 23:17, 20 April 2013

In control theory, backstepping is a technique developed circa 1990 by Petar V. Kokotovic and others[1][2] for designing stabilizing controls for a special class of nonlinear dynamical systems. These systems are built from subsystems that radiate out from an irreducible subsystem that can be stabilized using some other method. Because of this recursive structure, the designer can start the design process at the known-stable system and "back out" new controllers that progressively stabilize each outer subsystem. The process terminates when the final external control is reached. Hence, this process is known as backstepping.[3]

Backstepping approach

The backstepping approach provides a recursive method for stabilizing the origin of a system in strict-feedback form. That is, consider a system of the form[3]

{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=f1(x,z1)+g1(x,z1)z2z˙2=f2(x,z1,z2)+g2(x,z1,z2)z3z˙i=fi(x,z1,z2,,zi1,zi)+gi(x,z1,z2,,zi1,zi)zi+1 for 1i<k1z˙k1=fk1(x,z1,z2,,zk1)+gk1(x,z1,z2,,zk1)zkz˙k=fk(x,z1,z2,,zk1,zk)+gk(x,z1,z2,,zk1,zk)u

where

Also assume that the subsystem

x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x)

is stabilized to the origin (i.e., x=0) by some known control ux(x) such that ux(0)=0. It is also assumed that a Lyapunov function Vx for this stable subsystem is known. That is, this x subsystem is stabilized by some other method and backstepping extends its stability to the z shell around it.

In systems of this strict-feedback form around a stable x subsystem,

  • The backstepping-designed control input u has its most immediate stabilizing impact on state zn.
  • The state zn then acts like a stabilizing control on the state zn1 before it.
  • This process continues so that each state zi is stabilized by the fictitious "control" zi+1.

The backstepping approach determines how to stabilize the x subsystem using z1, and then proceeds with determining how to make the next state z2 drive z1 to the control required to stabilize x. Hence, the process "steps backward" from x out of the strict-feedback form system until the ultimate control u is designed.

Recursive Control Design Overview

  1. It is given that the smaller (i.e., lower-order) subsystem
    x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x)
    is already stabilized to the origin by some control ux(x) where ux(0)=0. That is, choice of ux to stabilize this system must occur using some other method. It is also assumed that a Lyapunov function Vx for this stable subsystem is known. Backstepping provides a way to extend the controlled stability of this subsystem to the larger system.
  2. A control u1(x,z1) is designed so that the system
    z˙1=f1(x,z1)+g1(x,z1)u1(x,z1)
    is stabilized so that z1 follows the desired ux control. The control design is based on the augmented Lyapunov function candidate
    V1(x,z1)=Vx(x)+12(z1ux(x))2
    The control u1 can be picked to bound V˙1 away from zero.
  3. A control u2(x,z1,z2) is designed so that the system
    z˙2=f2(x,z1,z2)+g2(x,z1,z2)u2(x,z1,z2)
    is stabilized so that z2 follows the desired u1 control. The control design is based on the augmented Lyapunov function candidate
    V2(x,z1,z2)=V1(x,z1)+12(z2u1(x,z1))2
    The control u2 can be picked to bound V˙2 away from zero.
  4. This process continues until the actual u is known, and
    • The real control u stabilizes zk to fictitious control uk1.
    • The fictitious control uk1 stabilizes zk1 to fictitious control uk2.
    • The fictitious control uk2 stabilizes zk2 to fictitious control uk3.
    • ...
    • The fictitious control u2 stabilizes z2 to fictitious control u1.
    • The fictitious control u1 stabilizes z1 to fictitious control ux.
    • The fictitious control ux stabilizes x to the origin.

This process is known as backstepping because it starts with the requirements on some internal subsystem for stability and progressively steps back out of the system, maintaining stability at each step. Because

then the resulting system has an equilibrium at the origin (i.e., where x=0, z1=0, z2=0, ..., zk1=0, and zk=0) that is globally asymptotically stable.

Integrator Backstepping

Before describing the backstepping procedure for general strict-feedback form dynamical systems, it is convenient to discuss the approach for a smaller class of strict-feedback form systems. These systems connect a series of integrators to the input of a system with a known feedback-stabilizing control law, and so the stabilizing approach is known as integrator backstepping. With a small modification, the integrator backstepping approach can be extended to handle all strict-feedback form systems.

Single-integrator Equilibrium

Consider the dynamical system

{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=u1 (1)

where xn and z1 is a scalar. This system is a cascade connection of an integrator with the x subsystem (i.e., the input u enters an integrator, and the integral z1 enters the x subsystem).

We assume that fx(0)=0, and so if u1=0, x=0 and z1=0, then

{x˙=fx(0x)+(gx(0x))(0z1)=0+(gx(0))(0)=0 (i.e., x=0 is stationary)z˙1=0u1 (i.e., z1=0 is stationary)

So the origin (x,z1)=(0,0) is an equilibrium (i.e., a stationary point) of the system. If the system ever reaches the origin, it will remain there forever after.

Single-integrator Backstepping

In this example, backstepping is used to stabilize the single-integrator system in Equation (1) around its equilibrium at the origin. To be less precise, we wish to design a control law u1(x,z1) that ensures that the states (x,z1) return to (0,0) after the system is started from some arbitrary initial condition.

  • First, by assumption, the subsystem
x˙=F(x)whereF(x)fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x)
with ux(0)=0 has a Lyapunov function Vx(x)>0 such that
V˙x=Vxx(fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x))W(x)
where W(x) is a positive-definite function. That is, we assume that we have already shown that this existing simpler x subsystem is stable (in the sense of Lyapunov). Roughly speaking, this notion of stability means that:
    • The function Vx is like a "generalized energy" of the x subsystem. As the x states of the system move away from the origin, the energy Vx(x) also grows.
    • By showing that over time, the energy Vx(x(t)) decays to zero, then the x states must decay toward x=0. That is, the origin x=0 will be a stable equilibrium of the system – the x states will continuously approach the origin as time increases.
    • Saying that W(x) is positive definite means that W(x)>0 everywhere except for x=0, and W(0)=0.
    • The statement that V˙xW(x) means that V˙x is bounded away from zero for all points except where x=0. That is, so long as the system is not at its equilibrium at the origin, its "energy" will be decreasing.
    • Because the energy is always decaying, then the system must be stable; its trajectories must approach the origin.
Our task is to find a control u that makes our cascaded (x,z1) system also stable. So we must find a new Lyapunov function candidate for this new system. That candidate will depend upon the control u, and by choosing the control properly, we can ensure that it is decaying everywhere as well.
  • Next, by adding and subtracting gx(x)ux(x) (i.e., we don't change the system in any way because we make no net effect) to the x˙ part of the larger (x,z1) system, it becomes
{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1+(gx(x)ux(x)gx(x)ux(x))0z˙1=u1
which we can re-group to get
{x˙=(fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x))F(x)+gx(x)(z1ux(x))z1 error tracking uxz˙1=u1
So our cascaded supersystem encapsulates the known-stable x˙=F(x) subsystem plus some error perturbation generated by the integrator.
{x˙=(fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x))+gx(x)e1e˙1=u1u˙x
Additionally, we let v1u1u˙x so that u1=v1+u˙x and
{x˙=(fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x))+gx(x)e1e˙1=v1
We seek to stabilize this error system by feedback through the new control v1. By stabilizing the system at e1=0, the state z1 will track the desired control ux which will result in stabilizing the inner x subsystem.
  • From our existing Lyapunov function Vx, we define the augmented Lyapunov function candidate
V1(x,e1)Vx(x)+12e12
So
V˙1=V˙x(x)+12(2e1e˙1)=V˙x(x)+e1e˙1=V˙x(x)+e1v1e˙1=Vxxx˙(i.e., dxdt)V˙x (i.e.,dVxdt)+e1v1=Vxx((fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x))+gx(x)e1)x˙V˙x+e1v1
By distributing Vx/x, we see that
V˙1=Vxx(fx(x)+gx(x)ux(x))W(x)+Vxxgx(x)e1+e1v1W(x)+Vxxgx(x)e1+e1v1
To ensure that V˙1W(x)<0 (i.e., to ensure stability of the supersystem), we pick the control law
v1=Vxxgx(x)k1e1
with k1>0, and so
V˙1=W(x)+Vxxgx(x)e1+e1(Vxxgx(x)k1e1)v1
After distributing the e1 through,
V˙1=W(x)+Vxxgx(x)e1e1Vxxgx(x)0k1e12=W(x)k1e12W(x)<0
So our candidate Lyapunov function V1 is a true Lyapunov function, and our system is stable under this control law v1 (which corresponds the control law u1 because v1u1u˙x). Using the variables from the original coordinate system, the equivalent Lyapunov function
V1(x,z1)Vx(x)+12(z1ux(x))2 (2)
As discussed below, this Lyapunov function will be used again when this procedure is applied iteratively to multiple-integrator problem.
  • Our choice of control v1 ultimately depends on all of our original state variables. In particular, the actual feedback-stabilizing control law
u1(x,z1)=v1+u˙xBy definition of v1=Vxxgx(x)k1(z1ux(x)e1)v1+uxx(fx(x)+gx(x)z1x˙ (i.e., dxdt))u˙x (i.e., duxdt) (3)
The states x and z1 and functions fx and gx come from the system. The function ux comes from our known-stable x˙=F(x) subsystem. The gain parameter k1>0 affects the convergence rate or our system. Under this control law, our system is stable at the origin (x,z1)=(0,0).
Recall that u1 in Equation (3) drives the input of an integrator that is connected to a subsystem that is feedback-stabilized by the control law ux. Not surprisingly, the control u1 has a u˙x term that will be integrated to follow the stabilizing control law u˙x plus some offset. The other terms provide damping to remove that offset and any other perturbation effects that would be magnified by the integrator.

So because this system is feedback stabilized by u1(x,z1) and has Lyapunov function V1(x,z1) with V˙1(x,z1)W(x)<0, it can be used as the upper subsystem in another single-integrator cascade system.

Motivating Example: Two-integrator Backstepping

Before discussing the recursive procedure for the general multiple-integrator case, it is instructive to study the recursion present in the two-integrator case. That is, consider the dynamical system

{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=z2z˙2=u2 (4)

where xn and z1 and z2 are scalars. This system is a cascade connection of the single-integrator system in Equation (1) with another integrator (i.e., the input u2 enters through an integrator, and the output of that integrator enters the system in Equation (1) by its u1 input).

By letting

then the two-integrator system in Equation (4) becomes the single-integrator system

{y˙=fy(y)+gy(y)z2( where this y subsystem is stabilized by z2=u1(x,z1) )z˙2=u2. (5)

By the single-integrator procedure, the control law uy(y)u1(x,z1) stabilizes the upper z2-to-y subsystem using the Lyapunov function V1(x,z1), and so Equation (5) is a new single-integrator system that is structurally equivalent to the single-integrator system in Equation (1). So a stabilizing control u2 can be found using the same single-integrator procedure that was used to find u1.

Many-integrator backstepping

In the two-integrator case, the upper single-integrator subsystem was stabilized yielding a new single-integrator system that can be similarly stabilized. This recursive procedure can be extended to handle any finite number of integrators. This claim can be formally proved with mathematical induction. Here, a stabilized multiple-integrator system is built up from subsystems of already-stabilized multiple-integrator subsystems.

x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)ux
that has scalar input ux and output states x=[x1,x2,,xn]Tn. Assume that
    • fx(x)=0 so that the zero-input (i.e., ux=0) system is stationary at the origin x=0. In this case, the origin is called an equilibrium of the system.
    • The feedback control law ux(x) stabilizes the system at the equilibrium at the origin.
    • A Lyapunov function corresponding to this system is described by Vx(x).
That is, if output states x are fed back to the input ux by the control law ux(x), then the output states (and the Lyapunov function) return to the origin after a single perturbation (e.g., after a nonzero initial condition or a sharp disturbance). This subsystem is stabilized by feedback control law ux.
  • Next, connect an integrator to input ux so that the augmented system has input u1 (to the integrator) and output states x. The resulting augmented dynamical system is
{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=u1
This "cascade" system matches the form in Equation (1), and so the single-integrator backstepping procedure leads to the stabilizing control law in Equation (3). That is, if we feed back states z1 and x to input u1 according to the control law
u1(x,z1)=Vxxgx(x)k1(z1ux(x))+uxx(fx(x)+gx(x)z1)
with gain k1>0, then the states z1 and x will return to z1=0 and x=0 after a single perturbation. This subsystem is stabilized by feedback control law u1, and the corresponding Lyapunov function from Equation (2) is
V1(x,z1)=Vx(x)+12(z1ux(x))2
That is, under feedback control law u1, the Lyapunov function V1 decays to zero as the states return to the origin.
  • Connect a new integrator to input u1 so that the augmented system has input u2 and output states x. The resulting augmented dynamical system is
{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=z2z˙2=u2
which is equivalent to the single-integrator system
{[x˙z˙1]x˙1=[fx(x)+gx(x)z10]f1(x1)+[01]g1(x1)z2 ( by Lyapunov function V1, subsystem stabilized by u1(x1) )z˙2=u2
Using these definitions of x1, f1, and g1, this system can also be expressed as
{x˙1=f1(x1)+g1(x1)z2 ( by Lyapunov function V1, subsystem stabilized by u1(x1) )z˙2=u2
This system matches the single-integrator structure of Equation (1), and so the single-integrator backstepping procedure can be applied again. That is, if we feed back states z1, z2, and x to input u2 according to the control law
u2(x,z1,z2)=V1x1g1(x1)k2(z2u1(x1))+u1x1(f1(x1)+g1(x1)z2)
with gain k2>0, then the states z1, z2, and x will return to z1=0, z2=0, and x=0 after a single perturbation. This subsystem is stabilized by feedback control law u2, and the corresponding Lyapunov function is
V2(x,z1,z2)=V1(x1)+12(z2u1(x1))2
That is, under feedback control law u2, the Lyapunov function V2 decays to zero as the states return to the origin.
  • Connect an integrator to input u2 so that the augmented system has input u3 and output states x. The resulting augmented dynamical system is
{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=z2z˙2=z3z˙3=u3
which can be re-grouped as the single-integrator system
{[x˙z˙1z˙2]x˙2=[fx(x)+gx(x)z2z20]f2(x2)+[001]g2(x2)z3 ( by Lyapunov function V2, subsystem stabilized by u2(x2) )z˙3=u3
By the definitions of x1, f1, and g1 from the previous step, this system is also represented by
{[x˙1z˙2]x˙2=[f1(x1)+g1(x1)z20]f2(x2)+[01]g2(x2)z3 ( by Lyapunov function V2, subsystem stabilized by u2(x2) )z˙3=u3
Further, using these definitions of x2, f2, and g2, this system can also be expressed as
{x˙2=f2(x2)+g2(x2)z3 ( by Lyapunov function V2, subsystem stabilized by u2(x2) )z˙3=u3
So the re-grouped system has the single-integrator structure of Equation (1), and so the single-integrator backstepping procedure can be applied again. That is, if we feed back states z1, z2, z3, and x to input u3 according to the control law
u3(x,z1,z2,z3)=V2x2g2(x2)k3(z3u2(x2))+u2x2(f2(x2)+g2(x2)z3)
with gain k3>0, then the states z1, z2, z3, and x will return to z1=0, z2=0, z3=0, and x=0 after a single perturbation. This subsystem is stabilized by feedback control law u3, and the corresponding Lyapunov function is
V3(x,z1,z2,z3)=V2(x2)+12(z3u2(x2))2
That is, under feedback control law u3, the Lyapunov function V3 decays to zero as the states return to the origin.
  • This process can continue for each integrator added to the system, and hence any system of the form
{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1 ( by Lyapunov function Vx, subsystem stabilized by ux(x) )z˙1=z2z˙2=z3z˙i=zi+1z˙k2=zk1z˙k1=zkz˙k=u
has the recursive structure
{{{{{{{{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1 ( by Lyapunov function Vx, subsystem stabilized by ux(x) )z˙1=z2z˙2=z3z˙i=zi+1z˙k2=zk1z˙k1=zkz˙k=u
and can be feedback stabilized by finding the feedback-stabilizing control and Lyapunov function for the single-integrator (x,z1) subsystem (i.e., with input z2 and output x) and iterating out from that inner subsystem until the ultimate feedback-stabilizing control u is known. At iteration i, the equivalent system is
{[x˙z˙1z˙2z˙i2z˙i1]x˙i1=[fi2(xi2)+gi2(xi1)zi20]fi1(xi1)+[01]gi1(xi1)zi ( by Lyap. func. Vi1, subsystem stabilized by ui1(xi1) )z˙i=ui
The corresponding feedback-stabilizing control law is
ui(x,z1,z2,,zixi)=Vi1xi1gi1(xi1)ki(ziui1(xi1))+ui1xi1(fi1(xi1)+gi1(xi1)zi)
with gain ki>0. The corresponding Lyapunov function is
Vi(xi)=Vi1(xi1)+12(ziui1(xi1))2
By this construction, the ultimate control u(x,z1,z2,,zk)=uk(xk) (i.e., ultimate control is found at final iteration i=k).

Hence, any system in this special many-integrator strict-feedback form can be feedback stabilized using a straightforward procedure that can even be automated (e.g., as part of an adaptive control algorithm).

Generic Backstepping

Systems in the special strict-feedback form have a recursive structure similar to the many-integrator system structure. Likewise, they are stabilized by stabilizing the smallest cascaded system and then backstepping to the next cascaded system and repeating the procedure. So it is critical to develop a single-step procedure; that procedure can be recursively applied to cover the many-step case. Fortunately, due to the requirements on the functions in the strict-feedback form, each single-step system can be rendered by feedback to a single-integrator system, and that single-integrator system can be stabilized using methods discussed above.

Single-step Procedure

Consider the simple strict-feedback system

{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=f1(x,z1)+g1(x,z1)u1 (6)

where

Rather than designing feedback-stabilizing control u1 directly, introduce a new control ua1 (to be designed later) and use control law

u1(x,z1)=1g1(x,z1)(ua1f1(x,z1))

which is possible because g10. So the system in Equation (6) is

{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=f1(x,z1)+g1(x,z1)1g1(x,z1)(ua1f1(x,z1))u1(x,z1)

which simplifies to

{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1z˙1=ua1

This new ua1-to-x system matches the single-integrator cascade system in Equation (1). Assuming that a feedback-stabilizing control law ux(x) and Lyapunov function Vx(x) for the upper subsystem is known, the feedback-stabilizing control law from Equation (3) is

ua1(x,z1)=Vxxgx(x)k1(z1ux(x))+uxx(fx(x)+gx(x)z1)

with gain k1>0. So the final feedback-stabilizing control law is

u1(x,z1)=1g1(x,z1)(Vxxgx(x)k1(z1ux(x))+uxx(fx(x)+gx(x)z1)ua1(x,z1)f1(x,z1)) (7)

with gain k1>0. The corresponding Lyapunov function from Equation (2) is

V1(x,z1)=Vx(x)+12(z1ux(x))2 (8)

Because this strict-feedback system has a feedback-stabilizing control and a corresponding Lyapunov function, it can be cascaded as part of a larger strict-feedback system, and this procedure can be repeated to find the surrounding feedback-stabilizing control.

Many-step Procedure

As in many-integrator backstepping, the single-step procedure can be completed iteratively to stabilize an entire strict-feedback system. In each step,

  1. The smallest "unstabilized" single-step strict-feedback system is isolated.
  2. Feedback is used to convert the system into a single-integrator system.
  3. The resulting single-integrator system is stabilized.
  4. The stabilized system is used as the upper system in the next step.

That is, any strict-feedback system

{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1 ( by Lyapunov function Vx, subsystem stabilized by ux(x) )z˙1=f1(x,z1)+g1(x,z1)z2z˙2=f2(x,z1,z2)+g2(x,z1,z2)z3z˙i=fi(x,z1,z2,,zi)+gi(x,z1,z2,,zi)zi+1z˙k2=fk2(x,z1,z2,zk2)+gk2(x,z1,z2,,zk2)zk1z˙k1=fk1(x,z1,z2,zk2,zk1)+gk1(x,z1,z2,,zk2,zk1)zkz˙k=fk(x,z1,z2,zk1,zk)+gk(x,z1,z2,,zk1,zk)u

has the recursive structure

{{{{{{{{x˙=fx(x)+gx(x)z1 ( by Lyapunov function Vx, subsystem stabilized by ux(x) )z˙1=f1(x,z1)+g1(x,z1)z2z˙2=f2(x,z1,z2)+g2(x,z1,z2)z3z˙i=fi(x,z1,z2,,zi)+gi(x,z1,z2,,zi)zi+1z˙k2=fk2(x,z1,z2,zk2)+gk2(x,z1,z2,,zk2)zk1z˙k1=fk1(x,z1,z2,zk2,zk1)+gk1(x,z1,z2,,zk2,zk1)zkz˙k=fk(x,z1,z2,zk1,zk)+gk(x,z1,z2,,zk1,zk)u

and can be feedback stabilized by finding the feedback-stabilizing control and Lyapunov function for the single-integrator (x,z1) subsystem (i.e., with input z2 and output x) and iterating out from that inner subsystem until the ultimate feedback-stabilizing control u is known. At iteration i, the equivalent system is

{[x˙z˙1z˙2z˙i2z˙i1]x˙i1=[fi2(xi2)+gi2(xi2)zi2fi1(xi)]fi1(xi1)+[0gi1(xi)]gi1(xi1)zi ( by Lyap. func. Vi1, subsystem stabilized by ui1(xi1) )z˙i=fi(xi)+gi(xi)ui

By Equation (7), the corresponding feedback-stabilizing control law is

ui(x,z1,z2,,zixi)=1gi(xi)(Vi1xi1gi1(xi1)ki(ziui1(xi1))+ui1xi1(fi1(xi1)+gi1(xi1)zi)Single-integrator stabilizing control uai(xi)fi(xi1))

with gain ki>0. By Equation (8), the corresponding Lyapunov function is

Vi(xi)=Vi1(xi1)+12(ziui1(xi1))2

By this construction, the ultimate control u(x,z1,z2,,zk)=uk(xk) (i.e., ultimate control is found at final iteration i=k). Hence, any strict-feedback system can be feedback stabilized using a straightforward procedure that can even be automated (e.g., as part of an adaptive control algorithm).

See also

References

43 year old Petroleum Engineer Harry from Deep River, usually spends time with hobbies and interests like renting movies, property developers in singapore new condominium and vehicle racing. Constantly enjoys going to destinations like Camino Real de Tierra Adentro.

  1. One of the biggest reasons investing in a Singapore new launch is an effective things is as a result of it is doable to be lent massive quantities of money at very low interest rates that you should utilize to purchase it. Then, if property values continue to go up, then you'll get a really high return on funding (ROI). Simply make sure you purchase one of the higher properties, reminiscent of the ones at Fernvale the Riverbank or any Singapore landed property Get Earnings by means of Renting

    In its statement, the singapore property listing - website link, government claimed that the majority citizens buying their first residence won't be hurt by the new measures. Some concessions can even be prolonged to chose teams of consumers, similar to married couples with a minimum of one Singaporean partner who are purchasing their second property so long as they intend to promote their first residential property. Lower the LTV limit on housing loans granted by monetary establishments regulated by MAS from 70% to 60% for property purchasers who are individuals with a number of outstanding housing loans on the time of the brand new housing purchase. Singapore Property Measures - 30 August 2010 The most popular seek for the number of bedrooms in Singapore is 4, followed by 2 and three. Lush Acres EC @ Sengkang

    Discover out more about real estate funding in the area, together with info on international funding incentives and property possession. Many Singaporeans have been investing in property across the causeway in recent years, attracted by comparatively low prices. However, those who need to exit their investments quickly are likely to face significant challenges when trying to sell their property – and could finally be stuck with a property they can't sell. Career improvement programmes, in-house valuation, auctions and administrative help, venture advertising and marketing, skilled talks and traisning are continuously planned for the sales associates to help them obtain better outcomes for his or her shoppers while at Knight Frank Singapore. No change Present Rules

    Extending the tax exemption would help. The exemption, which may be as a lot as $2 million per family, covers individuals who negotiate a principal reduction on their existing mortgage, sell their house short (i.e., for lower than the excellent loans), or take part in a foreclosure course of. An extension of theexemption would seem like a common-sense means to assist stabilize the housing market, but the political turmoil around the fiscal-cliff negotiations means widespread sense could not win out. Home Minority Chief Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) believes that the mortgage relief provision will be on the table during the grand-cut price talks, in response to communications director Nadeam Elshami. Buying or promoting of blue mild bulbs is unlawful.

    A vendor's stamp duty has been launched on industrial property for the primary time, at rates ranging from 5 per cent to 15 per cent. The Authorities might be trying to reassure the market that they aren't in opposition to foreigners and PRs investing in Singapore's property market. They imposed these measures because of extenuating components available in the market." The sale of new dual-key EC models will even be restricted to multi-generational households only. The models have two separate entrances, permitting grandparents, for example, to dwell separately. The vendor's stamp obligation takes effect right this moment and applies to industrial property and plots which might be offered inside three years of the date of buy. JLL named Best Performing Property Brand for second year running

    The data offered is for normal info purposes only and isn't supposed to be personalised investment or monetary advice. Motley Fool Singapore contributor Stanley Lim would not personal shares in any corporations talked about. Singapore private home costs increased by 1.eight% within the fourth quarter of 2012, up from 0.6% within the earlier quarter. Resale prices of government-built HDB residences which are usually bought by Singaporeans, elevated by 2.5%, quarter on quarter, the quickest acquire in five quarters. And industrial property, prices are actually double the levels of three years ago. No withholding tax in the event you sell your property. All your local information regarding vital HDB policies, condominium launches, land growth, commercial property and more

    There are various methods to go about discovering the precise property. Some local newspapers (together with the Straits Instances ) have categorised property sections and many local property brokers have websites. Now there are some specifics to consider when buying a 'new launch' rental. Intended use of the unit Every sale begins with 10 p.c low cost for finish of season sale; changes to 20 % discount storewide; follows by additional reduction of fiftyand ends with last discount of 70 % or extra. Typically there is even a warehouse sale or transferring out sale with huge mark-down of costs for stock clearance. Deborah Regulation from Expat Realtor shares her property market update, plus prime rental residences and houses at the moment available to lease Esparina EC @ Sengkang
  2. One of the biggest reasons investing in a Singapore new launch is an effective things is as a result of it is doable to be lent massive quantities of money at very low interest rates that you should utilize to purchase it. Then, if property values continue to go up, then you'll get a really high return on funding (ROI). Simply make sure you purchase one of the higher properties, reminiscent of the ones at Fernvale the Riverbank or any Singapore landed property Get Earnings by means of Renting

    In its statement, the singapore property listing - website link, government claimed that the majority citizens buying their first residence won't be hurt by the new measures. Some concessions can even be prolonged to chose teams of consumers, similar to married couples with a minimum of one Singaporean partner who are purchasing their second property so long as they intend to promote their first residential property. Lower the LTV limit on housing loans granted by monetary establishments regulated by MAS from 70% to 60% for property purchasers who are individuals with a number of outstanding housing loans on the time of the brand new housing purchase. Singapore Property Measures - 30 August 2010 The most popular seek for the number of bedrooms in Singapore is 4, followed by 2 and three. Lush Acres EC @ Sengkang

    Discover out more about real estate funding in the area, together with info on international funding incentives and property possession. Many Singaporeans have been investing in property across the causeway in recent years, attracted by comparatively low prices. However, those who need to exit their investments quickly are likely to face significant challenges when trying to sell their property – and could finally be stuck with a property they can't sell. Career improvement programmes, in-house valuation, auctions and administrative help, venture advertising and marketing, skilled talks and traisning are continuously planned for the sales associates to help them obtain better outcomes for his or her shoppers while at Knight Frank Singapore. No change Present Rules

    Extending the tax exemption would help. The exemption, which may be as a lot as $2 million per family, covers individuals who negotiate a principal reduction on their existing mortgage, sell their house short (i.e., for lower than the excellent loans), or take part in a foreclosure course of. An extension of theexemption would seem like a common-sense means to assist stabilize the housing market, but the political turmoil around the fiscal-cliff negotiations means widespread sense could not win out. Home Minority Chief Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) believes that the mortgage relief provision will be on the table during the grand-cut price talks, in response to communications director Nadeam Elshami. Buying or promoting of blue mild bulbs is unlawful.

    A vendor's stamp duty has been launched on industrial property for the primary time, at rates ranging from 5 per cent to 15 per cent. The Authorities might be trying to reassure the market that they aren't in opposition to foreigners and PRs investing in Singapore's property market. They imposed these measures because of extenuating components available in the market." The sale of new dual-key EC models will even be restricted to multi-generational households only. The models have two separate entrances, permitting grandparents, for example, to dwell separately. The vendor's stamp obligation takes effect right this moment and applies to industrial property and plots which might be offered inside three years of the date of buy. JLL named Best Performing Property Brand for second year running

    The data offered is for normal info purposes only and isn't supposed to be personalised investment or monetary advice. Motley Fool Singapore contributor Stanley Lim would not personal shares in any corporations talked about. Singapore private home costs increased by 1.eight% within the fourth quarter of 2012, up from 0.6% within the earlier quarter. Resale prices of government-built HDB residences which are usually bought by Singaporeans, elevated by 2.5%, quarter on quarter, the quickest acquire in five quarters. And industrial property, prices are actually double the levels of three years ago. No withholding tax in the event you sell your property. All your local information regarding vital HDB policies, condominium launches, land growth, commercial property and more

    There are various methods to go about discovering the precise property. Some local newspapers (together with the Straits Instances ) have categorised property sections and many local property brokers have websites. Now there are some specifics to consider when buying a 'new launch' rental. Intended use of the unit Every sale begins with 10 p.c low cost for finish of season sale; changes to 20 % discount storewide; follows by additional reduction of fiftyand ends with last discount of 70 % or extra. Typically there is even a warehouse sale or transferring out sale with huge mark-down of costs for stock clearance. Deborah Regulation from Expat Realtor shares her property market update, plus prime rental residences and houses at the moment available to lease Esparina EC @ Sengkang
  3. 3.0 3.1 20 year-old Real Estate Agent Rusty from Saint-Paul, has hobbies and interests which includes monopoly, property developers in singapore and poker. Will soon undertake a contiki trip that may include going to the Lower Valley of the Omo.

    My blog: http://www.primaboinca.com/view_profile.php?userid=5889534