2021
DOI: 10.1109/tnse.2020.3042781
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impulsive Effects Based Distributed Synchronization of Heterogeneous Coupled Neural Networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Among these techniques, Lipchitz condition is relatively strict but a widely applied one, for example in listed papers. 12,18,26,27…”
Section: Preliminariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Among these techniques, Lipchitz condition is relatively strict but a widely applied one, for example in listed papers. 12,18,26,27…”
Section: Preliminariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The quasi‐synchronization of heterogenous fractional‐order dynamical networks was studied in Reference 25. Furthermore, it should be noted that impulsive effect is one of the most essential factors in impulsive control issues which directly affects the behavior of networks, see References 26 and 27 and references therein.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In [5], the authors investigated the exponential function projective synchronization of impulsive neural networks with mixed time-varying delays. [6] was devoted to investigating the exponential synchronization problem on a class of coupled heterogeneous neural networks. Considering the controller would suffer from impulsive effects and the disturbances, the distributed pinning control strategy was introduced.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, the impulsive instants and the impulsive intervals could be adjusted by introducing the definition of average impulsive interval. As mentioned before, it is usually assumed that (T − t/T a ) − N 0 ≤ N ζ (t, s) ≤ (T − t/T a ) + N 0 as described in [26], [31], [33], and [41]. But this assumption on N ζ (t, s) is removed in the proof procedure of Theorem 2, and therefore, a less conservative conclusion is obtained.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%