text
stringlengths 0
89.3k
|
|---|
1 Ξm
|
N1 and the σiare obtained
|
from either ΦemorΣmusing 36a Additionally we
|
compute the tubes for iNas
|
Zprev
|
NM1M
|
m0λ
|
mZm
|
NVprev
|
NM1M
|
m0λ
|
mVm
|
N
|
Qdprev
|
N M1M
|
m0λ
|
mQdm
|
N
|
Apart from the tubes we also store the fused terminal
|
set scaling the shifted error system responses and the
|
shifted disturbance filter since they are needed to re
|
compute 48 in case λ
|
0 0 in the next solution of 46
|
Therefore we compute
|
αprevM1X
|
m0λ
|
mαm
|
ΦeprevM1X
|
m0λ
|
mΦem
|
shiftΦνprevM1X
|
m0λ
|
mΦνm
|
shift
|
ΣprevM1X
|
m0λ
|
mΣm
|
shiftΞprevM1X
|
m0λ
|
mΞm
|
shift
|
before collecting all computed sets and parameters in
|
memory entry
|
Mprev Zprev
|
iVprev
|
iQdprev
|
i αprev
|
ΦeprevΦνprevΣprevΞprev51
|
and updating the memory according to Algorithm 2
|
Remark 4 In practice shifting operations 4950
|
can be peformed by the secondary process after comput
|
ing new ΦeΦνΣΞ Due to the specific shifting op
|
eration these computations only need to be performed
|
Ntimes Therefore also the tightened sets in 48 eg
|
X F iΦem
|
shift can be computed by the secondary process
|
The primary process then just peforms the convex com
|
bination in 48 which only slightly increases the com
|
putational complexity of the primary process
|
13Algorithm 2 Update memory MPrimary Process
|
Input MprevMk1
|
Output Mk
|
1procedure updateMemory Mprev
|
2 runs every time the primary process terminates
|
3 MkMk1
|
4 M0kMprevwhere Mprevis given by 51
|
53 Theoretical Guarantees
|
In the following we provide theoretical guarantees for
|
the proposed asynchronous computation scheme applied
|
to 1 ie we prove recursive feasibility and ISS of pri
|
mary process 46 for any state of the memory includ
|
ing the case in which the memory is updated For the
|
proofs we make use of the following assumption
|
Assumption 2 At the start of the control task mem
|
oryMcontains at least one memory entry M0for which the
|
primary process is feasible ie 46is feasible for M0
|
Z0
|
iV0
|
iQd0
|
i α0Φe0Φν0Σ0Ξ0withλ0 1
|
Note that Assumption 2 is satisfied if for example the
|
secondary process is once run offline and the memory is
|
initialized with the computed memory entry Mnew
|
Proposition 5 Let Assumption 2 hold Then primary
|
process 46is recursively feasible for any state of mem
|
oryMkand any memory updates according to Algo
|
rithms 1 and 2
|
PROOF We prove the proposition using the standard
|
shifting argument 3 and relying on the proof of Theo
|
rem 3 We construct the candidate sequences specifically
|
for the case in which we only use memory slot M0that
|
contains the shifted previous tubes 51 This allows us
|
to show recursive feasibility for any state of the mem
|
ory including the case in which the memory is updated
|
since we can always fallback to the tubes in M0 Due to
|
Assumption 2 the primary process is then guaranteed
|
to be recursively feasible
|
Letz z
|
0 z
|
Nv v
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.