2020
DOI: 10.1137/19m123765x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Connectivity Properties of the Set of Stabilizing Static Decentralized Controllers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, it is shown in [29] that a class of finite-horizon output-feedback linear quadratic control problems also satisfies the gradient dominance property. Some recent studies have examined the connectivity of stabilizing static output feedback policies [20,13,30]. It is shown in [20] that the set of stabilizing static output feedback policies can be highly disconnected, which poses a significant challenge for decentralized LQR problems.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, it is shown in [29] that a class of finite-horizon output-feedback linear quadratic control problems also satisfies the gradient dominance property. Some recent studies have examined the connectivity of stabilizing static output feedback policies [20,13,30]. It is shown in [20] that the set of stabilizing static output feedback policies can be highly disconnected, which poses a significant challenge for decentralized LQR problems.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This makes its optimization landscape richer and yet much more complicated than LQR. Indeed, the set of stabilizing static state feedback policies is connected, but the set of stabilizing static output feedback policies can be highly disconnected [20]. The connectivity of stabilizing dynamical output feedback policies, i.e., the feasible region of LQG control, remains unclear.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this case, a static outputfeedback (SOF) gain u t = Ky t with K ∈ R m×d is typically insufficient to obtain good control performance. In fact, the set of stabilizing SOF gains can be highly disconnected [20], and even finding a stabilizing SOF controller is generally a challenging task [22], [23]. Unlike SOF control, under Assumption 1, a stabilizing dynamic output controller always exists and can be found easily, thanks to the well-known separation principle [27].…”
Section: A Linear Quadratic Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unlike state-feedback LQR problems, it is shown that policy gradient methods are unlikely to find the globally optimal SOF controller. This is because the set of stabilizing SOF controllers is typically disconnected, and stationary points can be local minima, saddle points, or even local maxima [10], [20]. Moreover, even finding a stabilizing SOF controller is a challenging task [22], [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Noted that state feedback LQR can be regarded as a special case of SOF. Compared with state feedback LQR, the domain of the output control gain of SOF can be disconnected, while stationary points in each component can be local minima, saddle points, or even local maxima [12], [21]- [23]. Fatkhullin and Polyak (2020) focused on continuous-time SOF and analyzed the convergence rate to stationary points [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%