Neuro-Adaptive Design - II:: A Robustifying Tool For Any Design

Lecture – 37
Neuro-Adaptive Design – II:

A Robustifying Tool for Any Design
Dr. Radhakant Padhi

Asst. Professor
Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
Indian Institute of Science - Bangalore
Motivation
z Perfect system modeling is difficult
z Sources of imperfection
• Unmodelled dynamics (missing algebraic terms in the model)
• Inaccurate knowledge of system parameters
• Change of system parameters/dynamics during
operation
z “Black box” adaptive approaches exist. But,
making use of existing design is better!
(faster adaptation, chance of instability before adaptation is minimal)
z The adaptive design should preferably be
compatible with “any nominal control” design
ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 2
Dr. Radhakant Padhi, AE Dept., IISc-Bangalore
Reference
Radhakant Padhi, Nishant

Unnikrishnan and S. N. Balakrishnan,
“Model Following Neuro-Adaptive
Control Design for Non-square, Non-
affine Nonlinear Systems”, IET Control
Theory and Applications, Vol. 1 (6),
Nov 2007, pp.1650-1661.

Modeling Inaccuracy:
A Simple Example
x = 2sin ( x ) + 0.1sin ( x )
Known part of Unknown part

actual system of actual
(nominal system) system
= 2sin ( x ) + Δc sin ( x )
Weight Basis Function

Objective:
To increase the robustness of a “nominal

controller” with respect to parameter and/or
modeling inaccuracies, which lead to
imperfections in the system model.

Problem Description and
Strategy
z Desired Dynamics: X d = f ( X d ,U d )
z Actual Plant: X = f ( X ,U ) + d ( X )
(unknown)
z Goal: X → X d , as t → ∞
z Approximate System: X a = f ( X ,U ) + dˆ ( X ) + K a ( X − X a )
( Ka > 0)
z Strategy: X → X a → X d , as t → ∞ NN Approx.

Steps for assuring X a → X d
z Select a gain matrix K > 0 such that

Ed + K Ed = 0, Ed ( Xa − Xd )
z This leads to
{ f ( X ,U ) + dˆ ( X ) + K ( X − X )} − f ( X ,U ) + K ( X − X ) = 0
a a d d a d
f ( X ,U ) = { f ( X ,U ) − dˆ ( X ) − K ( X − X ) − K ( X − X )}
d d a a a d
i.e. f ( X ,U ) = h ( X , X a , X d ,U d )
z Solve for the control U

Control Solution:
(No. of controls = No. of states)
z Affine Systems: f ( X ) + ⎣⎡ g ( X ) ⎦⎤ U = h ( X , X d , X a ,U d )
U = [ g( X )]
−1
{ h( X , X , X ,U ) − f ( X ) }
d a d
z Non-affine Systems: f ( X ,U ) = h ( X , X d , X a ,U d )
Use Numerical Method ⎧U d : k = 1 ⎫
(U ) guess k =⎨
=
⎬
(e.g. N-R Technique) ⎩ k −1
U : k 2,3,...⎭

Control Solution:
(No. of controls < No. of states)
z Modify X a dynamics:
X a = f ( X ,U ) + ⎡ dˆ ( X ) − Ψ ( X )U s ⎤ + Ψ ( X )U s + K a ( X − X a )
⎣ ⎦
= f ( X ,U ) + dˆ ( X ) + Ψ ( X )U + K ( X − X )
a s a a
z Solve for the control from:

{ f ( X ,U ) + dˆ ( X ) + Ψ ( X )U + K ( X − X )} − f ( X ,U ) + K ( X − X ) = 0
a s a a d d a d
f ( X ,U ) + Ψ ( X )U = { f ( X ,U ) − dˆ ( X ) − K ( X − X ) − K ( X − X )}
s d d a a a a d
= h ( X , X a , X d ,U d )

Solution for affine systems:
(No. of controls < No. of states)
{ f ( X ) + g ( X )U } + Ψ ( X )U s = h ( X , X a , X d ,U d )
⎡U ⎤
f ( X ) + ⎣⎡ g ( X ) Ψ ( X ) ⎦⎤ ⎢ ⎥ = h ( X , X a , X d ,U d )
⎣U s ⎦
G ( X ) V = − f ( X ) + h ( X , X a , X d ,U d )
{− f ( X ) + h( X , X , X ,U )}
−1
V = ⎣⎡G( X ) ⎦⎤ a d d
Extract U from V
For simplicity, we will not consider this special case in our further discussion.

Steps for assuring X → Xa
z Error: Ea ( X − X a ) , eai (x − x )
i ai
z Error Dynamics: Ideal neural network

xi = fi ( X , U ) + di ( X ) d i ( X ) = WiT ϕi ( X ) + ε i
xai = fi ( X , U ) + dî ( X ) + kai eai Actual neural network
eai = xi − xai dˆ ( X ) = Wˆ T ϕ ( X )
i i i
= ⎡⎣ di ( X ) − dî ( X ) ⎤⎦ − kai eai
= {Wi T Φ i ( X ) + ε i } − Wî T Φ i ( X ) − kai eai

eai = Wi T Φ i ( X ) + ε i − kai eai (W i Wi − Wî )
Stable Function Learning
Lyapunov Function Candidate
Li =
1
2
(pi ea2i +) 1
2γ i
(
Wi T Wi ) ( pi , γ i > 0 )
Derivative of Lyapunov Function

1
Li = pi eai eai + Wi T Wi
γi
(
= pi eai Wi T Φ i ( X ) + ε i − kai eai − ) 1
γi
Wi T Wî (∵W
i Wi − Wî )
⎛ 1 ⎞
= Wi T ⎜ pi eai Φ i ( X ) − Wî ⎟ + pi eai ε i − kai pi ea2i
⎝ γi ⎠
0
Stable Function Learning
Weight update rule (Neural network training)
Wî = γ i pi eai Φ i ( X )
Derivative of Lyapunov Function
Li = pi eai ε i − kai pi ea2i
Li < 0 if (
eai > ε i / kai )
The system is “Practically Stable”

Neuro-adaptive Design:
Implementation of Controller
Weight update rule:
Wî = γ i pi eai Φ i , Wî ( 0 ) = 0

where, γ i : Learing rate
eai = xi − xai
Φ i : Basis function
Estimation of unknown function:
dˆ ( X ) = Wˆ T Φ i

Neuro-adaptive Design:
Implementation of Controller
z Desired Dynamics: X d = f ( X d ,U d )
(unknown)
z Actual Plant: X = f ( X ,U ) + d ( X )
In reality, X(t) should be available from sensors and filters!
z Approximate System: NN Approximation
X a = f ( X ,U ) + dˆ ( X ) + K a ( X − X a ) , K a > 0 ( pdf )
z Initial Condition: X d ( 0 ) = X a ( 0 ) = X ( 0 ) : known

Example – 1
A Motivating Scalar Problem
Dr. Radhakant Padhi

Asst. Professor
Example – 1:
A scalar problem
z System dynamics xd = ( xd + xd 2 ) + (1 + xd 2 ) ud
(nominal system)
z System dynamics x = ( x + x 2 ) + (1 + x 2 ) u + d ( x )
(actual system) d ( x ) = sin (π x / 2 )
z Problem objectives: ( unknown for control design )
* Nominal control design: xd → 0

* Adaptive control design: x → xd
Note: The objective x → xd should be achieved much faster than xd → 0

Example – 1:
A scalar problem
z Nominal control ( xd − 0 ) + (1/ τ d ) ( xd − 0 ) = 0 (τ d = 1)
(dynamic inversion)
z Nominal control ud = − (1 + xd )
2 −1
( d d + xd )
x + x 2
1 ⎢ ⎡ ( xd + xd
2
) + ( 1 + x d
2
) ud − k ( xa − xd )⎤⎥
z Adaptive control u=
1 + x 2 ⎢ − ( x + x 2 ) − dˆ ( x ) − ka ( x − xa ) ⎥
⎣ ⎦
z Design parameters
k = 2.5 ka = 1 p =1 γ = 30
3 T
Φ ( x ) = ⎡( x / x0 ) ( x / x0 ) ( x / x0 ) ⎤
2
⎣ ⎦

Example – 1:
A scalar problem
State Trajectory Control Trajectory

Example – 1:
A scalar problem
Approximation of the unknown function

Example – 2
Double Inverted Pendulum:
A Benchmark Problem
Dr. Radhakant Padhi

Asst. Professor
Example – 2:
Double inverted pendulum

Example – 2:
x11 = x12
z Nominal Plant:
⎛ u1max ⎞ ⎛ kr 2 ⎞
⎟ sin ( x2 )
kr
x = α1 sin( x ) +
2
1
1
1 (l − b) + ⎜ ⎟ tanh ( u1 ) + ⎜
1
2 J1 ⎝ J1 ⎠ ⎝ 4 J1 ⎠
x12 = x22
⎛u ⎞ ⎛ kr 2 ⎞
⎟ sin ( x1 )
kr
x = α 2 sin( x ) +
2
2
1
2 ( l − b ) + ⎜ 2max ⎟ tanh ( u2 ) + ⎜
1
2J2 ⎝ J2 ⎠ ⎝ 4J2 ⎠
z Actual Plant: x11 = x12

u1max tanh ( u1 ) kr 2
x = (α1 + Δα1 )sin( x ) +
2
1
kr
1
1
2 J1
( )
l − b +
J1
+
4 J1
sin ( 2 ) m1
x1
+ K e a1 x11
x12 = x22
u2max tanh ( u2 ) kr 2
sin ( x11 ) + K m 2 e a2 x2
kr
x = (α 2 + Δα 2 )sin( x ) + (l − b) + +
1
2 1
2 2
2J2 J2 4J2

Example – 2:
⎛ mi gr kr 2 ⎞
αi ⎜ − ⎟
⎝ i J 4 J i ⎠
kr
βi (l − b)
2Ji
uimax
ξi
Ji
kr 2
σi
4Ji

Example – 2:
z Parameters in unknown function
Δα1 , Δα 2 : 20% off a1 = a2 = 0.01 K m = K m = 0.1
1 2
z Control design parameters

K = 0.2 I 4 , K a = I 4
⎡ −10 10 0
T
0 ⎤
ψ (X ) = ⎢ ⎥
⎣ 10 −10 10 −10 ⎦
p2 = p4 = 1 Φ 2 ( X ) = ⎡⎣1 x1 /1! x117 /17! 1 x2 /1! x17 ⎤
2 /17!⎦
T
γ 2 = γ 4 = 20 Φ 4 ( X ) = ⎡⎣1 x3 /1!
T
x317 /17! 1 x4 /1! x17 ⎤
4 /17!⎦

Example – 2:
Position of Mass – 1 Velocity of Mass – 1

Example – 2:
Position of Mass – 2 Velocity of Mass – 2

Example – 2:
Torque for Mass – 1 Torque for Mass – 2

Example – 2:
Capturing d 2 ( X ) Capturing d 4 ( X )

Neuro-Adaptive Design for Output Robustness
Dr. Radhakant Padhi

Asst. Professor
N-A for Robustness of
Output Dynamics
Desired output dynamics:
Actual output dynamics:

Y = fYd ( X ) + GYd ( X )U + d ( X )
Objective: Y → Yd as soon as possible

N-A for Robustness of
Output Dynamics
Dynamics of auxiliary output:
Ya = fYd ( X ) + GYd ( X )U + dˆ ( X ) + K a (Y − Ya )
Strategy: NN Approx.
Approximate state
Ya
Y Yd
Actual state Desired state
Steps for assuring Ya → Yd
z Enforce the error dynamics
Ed + KEd = 0 Ed (Ya − Yd )
z After carrying out the necessary algebra
f ( X , U ) = h( X , X a , X d , U d )
z In case of control affine system
f ( X ) + [ g ( X )]U = h( X , X d , X a , U d )
z The control is given by
U = [ g ( X )]−1{h( X , X d , X a , U d ) − f ( X )}
Steps for assuring Y → Ya
z The error in the output is defined as
Ea (Y − Ya ) ea ( y i − y ai )
i
z Ideal neural network is given by:

d i ( X ) = Wi T ϕi ( X ) + ε i
where Wi is the weight matrix and ϕi ( X ) is

the radial basis function
Function Learning:
Define error eai Δ ( yi − yai )
From universal function
Output dynamics approximation property
y i = fYi ( X ) + gYi ( X )U + di ( X ) d i ( X ) = WiT ϕi ( X ) + ε i
yai = fYi ( X ) + gYi ( X )U + dî ( X ) + kai eai dî ( X ) = WîT ϕi ( X )
Error dynamics
eai = d i ( X ) − dî ( X ) − kai eai
= Wi T Φ i ( X ) + ε i − kai eai

Lyapunov Stability Analysis
Lyapunov Function Candidate:
Derivative of Lyapunov Function:

Li = eai pi eai + Wi T γ iWi
= eai pi ⎡⎣Wi T Φ i ( X ) + ε i − kai eai ⎤⎦ − Wi T γ iWî
= Wi T ⎡eai pi Φ i ( X ) − γ i−1Wî ⎤ + eai pi ε i − kai ea2 pi

⎢⎣ ⎥⎦ i
0
Weight Update Rule:

Lyapunov Stability Analysis
This condition leads to Li = ea piε i − k a ea pi
2
i i i
whenever eai > ε i / kai
Using the Lyapunov stability theory, we conclude

~
e
that the trajectory of a and i are pulled towards
W i
the origin.
Hence, the output dynamics is “Practically Stable”!

Neuro-Adaptive Design with Modified Weight
Update Rule (with σ modification)
Dr. Radhakant Padhi

Asst. Professor
Neuro-adaptive Design
with σ Modification
Weight update rule:
Wî = γ i eai Φ i − γ iσ iWî , Wî ( 0 ) = 0

where, γ i : Learing rate, σ i > 0 : Stabilizing factor
eai = xi − xai
Φ i : Basis function
Estimation of unknown function:
dˆ ( X ) = Wˆ T Φ i

Lyapunov function candidate:
1 2 1 T −1
vi = eai + Wi γ i Wi ( Note: pi = 1)
2 2
Then vi = eai eai + WiT γ i−1Wi
( )
= eai ε i − ea2i + σ iWiTWî (can be derived so, with kai = 1)
Consider the last term in vi
1
(
Wi Wi = × 2 WiTWî
T ˆ
2
)
1
2
T
( 1
)
= × 2Wi Wi − Wi = 2WiTWi − 2WiTWi
2
( )
However, 2WiTWi = WiTWi + WiTWi
( ) ( )
T
= Wi T
Wî + Wi + Wi − Wî Wi
= WiTWî + WiTWi + WiTWi − WîTWi

( i )
= Wˆ T W − W + W TW + W TW
i i i i i i
= −WîTWî + WiTWi + WiTWi
(
Hence, σ WiTWî = σ 1 −WîTWî + WiTWi + WiTWi − WiTWi − WiTWi
2
)
1
(
= −σ WîTWî − σ WiTWi + σ WiTWi
2
)
1
2 ( 2
≤ −σ Wi − σ Wî + σ Wi
2 2
)
Hence, the equation for vi becomes

1 2 1 2 1
vi ≤ eai ε i − e − σ i Wi − σ i Wi + σ i Wi
2
2 ˆ
ai
2 2 2
ea2i ε i 2 1 2 1 2 1
≤ + − eai − σ i Wi − σ i Wi + σ i Wi
2
2 ˆ
2 2 2 2 2
eai ⎛ ε i 2 1
2
1 2 1 2⎞
≤ − +⎜ + σ i Wi − σ i Wi − σ i Wî ⎟
2
2 ⎝ 2 2 2 2 ⎠

Defining βi
εi21
+ σ i Wi
2 2 ( 2
− Wi
2
− Wî
2
)
We have
2
e
vi < 0, whenever > βi
ai
2
i.e. vi < 0, whenever eai > 2βi

Summary:
Neuro-Adaptive Design
z N-A Design: A generic model-following
adaptive design for robustifying “any”
nominal controller
z It is valid for both non-square and non-
affine problems in general
z Extensions:
• Robustness of output dynamics only
• “Structured N-A design” for efficient learning
References
z Padhi, R., Unnikrishnan, N. and Balakrishnan, S. N., “Model
Following Neuro-Adaptive Control Design for Non-square,
Non-affine Nonlinear Systems”, IET Control Theory and
Applications, Vol. 1 (6), Nov 2007, pp.1650-1661.
z Padhi, R., Kothari, M., “An Optimal Dynamic Inversion
Based Neuro-adaptive Approach for Treatment of Chronic
Myelogenous Leukemia”, Computer Methods and
Programs in Biomedicine, Vol. 87, 2007, pp. 208-224.
z Rajasekaran, J., Chunodkar, A. and Padhi, R., “Structured
Model-following Neuro-adaptive Design for Attitude
Maneuver of Rigid Bodies”, Control Engineering Practice,
Vol. 17, 2009, pp.676-689.

Neuro-Adaptive Design - II:: A Robustifying Tool For Any Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Neuro-Adaptive Design - II:: A Robustifying Tool For Any Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture – 37

Neuro-Adaptive Design – II:

Dr. Radhakant Padhi

Radhakant Padhi, Nishant

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 3

Known part of Unknown part

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 4

To increase the robustness of a “nominal

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 5

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 6

z Select a gain matrix K > 0 such that

z Solve for the control U

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 7

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 8

z Solve for the control from:

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 9

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 10

z Error Dynamics: Ideal neural network

xai = fi ( X , U ) + dˆi ( X ) + kai eai Actual neural network

= ⎡⎣ di ( X ) − dˆi ( X ) ⎤⎦ − kai eai

= {Wi T Φ i ( X ) + ε i } − Wˆi T Φ i ( X ) − kai eai

Derivative of Lyapunov Function

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 13

Wˆi = γ i pi eai Φ i , Wˆi ( 0 ) = 0

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 14

z Approximate System: NN Approximation

z Initial Condition: X d ( 0 ) = X a ( 0 ) = X ( 0 ) : known

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 15

Dr. Radhakant Padhi

z Problem objectives: ( unknown for control design )

* Nominal control design: xd → 0

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 17

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 18

State Trajectory Control Trajectory

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 19

Approximation of the unknown function

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 20

Dr. Radhakant Padhi

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 22

z Actual Plant: x11 = x12

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 23

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 24

z Control design parameters

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 25

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 26

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 27

Torque for Mass – 1 Torque for Mass – 2

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 28

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 29

Dr. Radhakant Padhi

Desired output dynamics:

Actual output dynamics:

Objective: Y → Yd as soon as possible

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 31

z Ideal neural network is given by:

where Wi is the weight matrix and ϕi ( X ) is

y i = fYi ( X ) + gYi ( X )U + di ( X ) d i ( X ) = WiT ϕi ( X ) + ε i

yai = fYi ( X ) + gYi ( X )U + dî ( X ) + kai eai dî ( X ) = WîT ϕi ( X )

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 35

Derivative of Lyapunov Function:

= eai pi ⎡⎣Wi T Φ i ( X ) + ε i − kai eai ⎤⎦ − Wi T γ iWˆi

= Wi T ⎡eai pi Φ i ( X ) − γ i−1Wˆi ⎤ + eai pi ε i − kai ea2 pi

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN 36