×

For model-based control design, closed-loop identification gives better performance. (English) Zbl 0874.93038

A comparison of open-loop versus closed-loop identification when the identified model is used for control design, and when the true system belongs to the model class, is made. As a quality criterion of the model, the variance of the error between the output of the ideal closed loop system (with the ideal controller that would be designed if the true plant were known) and that of the model-based closed loop system (with the controller computed from the identified model) is chosen. It was shown that if the controller is a smooth function of the input-output dynamics and the disturbance spectrum, the best controller performance is achieved for the model obtained from closed-loop identification. Moreover, for minimum variance and model reference control design criteria it was established that the best controller for identification is the ideal controller. This ascertainment resulted in a suboptimal mixed open-loop/closed-loop identification scheme where the model is partly identified from closed-loop data, provided that the number of measurements is large enough.

MSC:

93B30 System identification
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Gevers, M., Towards a joint design on identification and control?, (Trentelman, H. L.; Willems, J. C., Essays on control: Perspectives in the Theory and its Applications (1993), Birkhäuser: Birkhäuser Boston), 111-151 · Zbl 0840.93037
[2] Gevers, M.; Ljung, L., Optimal experiment designs with respect to the intended model application, Automatica, 22, 543-554 (1986)
[3] Henrici, P., Applied and Computational Complex Analysis (1974), Wiley-Interscience: Wiley-Interscience New York · Zbl 0313.30001
[4] Hjalmarsson, H.; Gunnarsson, S.; Gevers, M., Optimality and sub-optimality of iterative identification and control design schemes, (Proc. American Control Conf.. Proc. American Control Conf., Seattle, WA (1995)), 2559-2563
[5] Ljung, L., Asymptotic variance expressions for identified black-box transfer function models, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, AC-30, 834-844 (1985) · Zbl 0568.93065
[6] Ljung, L., System Identification: Theory for the User (1987), Prentice-Hall: Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ · Zbl 0615.93004
[7] Schrama, R., Accurate identification for control: the necessity of an iterative scheme, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, AC-37, 991-994 (1992) · Zbl 0767.93018
[8] Söderström, T.; Ljung, L.; Gustavsson, I., Identifiability conditions for linear multivariable systems operating under feedback, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, AC-21, 837-840 (1976) · Zbl 0344.93023
[9] Van den Hof, P. M.J.; Schrama, R. J.P., Identification and control—closed loop issues, (Proc. 10th IFAC Symp. on System Identification. Copenhagen, Vol. 2 (1994)), 2.001-2.014
[10] Van den Hof, P. M.J.; Schrama, R. J.P., Identification and control—closed loop issues, Automatica, 31, 1751-1770 (1995) · Zbl 0846.93020
[11] Vidyasagar, M., Control System Synthesis (1985), MIT Press: MIT Press Cambridge, MA · Zbl 0655.93001
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.