2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) 2016
DOI: 10.1109/cdc.2016.7798701
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stability analysis and robustness assessment of deterministic and stochastic nonlinear moving horizon estimators

Abstract: This paper proposes a discussion on the classification of the formulations of nonlinear Moving Horizon Estimators (MHE) of the literature into two categories: deterministic and stochastic. The stability of the dynamics of the estimation error is discussed for the MHEs in both frameworks. This paper also provides full explicit formulation of the stability conditions for the MHE in the deterministic framework, which were not given in the literature. Furthermore, robustness of MHE in both frameworks with respect … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 11 publications
(32 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…When the process dynamics are well known and the process noise is adequately chosen, the EKF and the UKF produce smaller estimation errors than the PF [23]. Furthermore, the PF is very sensitive to the value of the process noise and the estimation errors increase [23]. For estimation problems where the non-linearities are described by abrupt changes, the EKF performs poorly and the UKF and the PF perform better.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When the process dynamics are well known and the process noise is adequately chosen, the EKF and the UKF produce smaller estimation errors than the PF [23]. Furthermore, the PF is very sensitive to the value of the process noise and the estimation errors increase [23]. For estimation problems where the non-linearities are described by abrupt changes, the EKF performs poorly and the UKF and the PF perform better.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%