Consensus over networks with dynamic channels

Delayed-Compensation Algorithm for Second-Order Leader-Following Consensus Seeking under Communication Delay

“…For the interconnection topology that has the leader as a globally reachable node, the condition (14) in Theorem 2 always gives a criterion to calculate the delay bound for the multi-agent systems (6), but does not have special requirements on topology structure, coupling weights and control parameters.…”

“…Obviously, the positive integer m in the compensations has different impacts on the conditions (9) and (14) respectively. The condition (9) is independent of m, while the largest delay value in (14) decreases when m increases.…”

“…If (9) does not hold, then, we use the delay-dependent condition (14) to obtain an upper bound of the delay value.…”

“…To our great delight, the first-order and second-order agents with stationary consensus algorithms in the asynchronously-coupled form can be robust to arbitrary communication delays by choosing proper control parameters [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]. However, under dynamical consensus algorithm composed of the position and velocity consensus coordination parts, asynchronously-coupled form just drives the second-order agents to achieve a stationary consensus, and the consensus convergence is strictly dependent on the communication delay [23,24].…”

Robustness of noisy consensus dynamics with directed communication

“…Robustness to failure can be measured by the node and edge connectivities of the communication graph, while robustness to uncertainty and noise can be related to the H ∞ norm, H 2 norm, or L 2 gain of the consensus system. H ∞ robustness has been investigated in [13]- [15] in relation to uncertainty in the communication graph and to non-ideal communication channels. L 2 robustness has been considered in [12], [16] in relation to bounded (in the L 2 sense) inputs or errors.…”