2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.automatica.2008.08.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Subspace identification of Bilinear and LPV systems for open- and closed-loop data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
175
0
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 218 publications
(176 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
175
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The dotted lines show the ν-gap for the nominal model (which is approximately 0.08 for all frozen θ), indicating that a significant improvement is achieved with a reasonably small number of samples. The second method examined is PBSIDopt, which is presented in an LPV version in [16]. In this approach, a subspace method is used to construct the state estimates, and consequently requires a lot of computational power.…”
Section: Simulation Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The dotted lines show the ν-gap for the nominal model (which is approximately 0.08 for all frozen θ), indicating that a significant improvement is achieved with a reasonably small number of samples. The second method examined is PBSIDopt, which is presented in an LPV version in [16]. In this approach, a subspace method is used to construct the state estimates, and consequently requires a lot of computational power.…”
Section: Simulation Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
“…[14] refines the instrumental variables method for Box-Jenkins-type models. [15], [16], [17] and [18] propose various subspace-based approaches to identification of LPV systems. Finally, [19] examines how to choose optimal orthonormal basis functions for LPV system identification.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a consequence, only preliminary closed-loop approaches has been proposed in the literature without being able to exploit the existing tools and knowledge available in the LTI case. In van Wingerden and Verhaegen (2009), an approximation based LPV extension of a predictor subspace approach (PSBID) has been proposed which is also applicable in a closed-loop setting, while in Boonto and Werner (2008) also an approximation based LPV extension of the CLOE algorithm (see Landau and Karimi (1997)) has been investigated w.r.t. LPV outputerror (OE) type of models.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, LPV models preserve the advantageous properties of LTI models, while being able to represent a large class of nonlinear systems [10]. LPV model-based control has been applied in many application areas (e.g., aerospace engineering, automotive applications, high-tech systems) as it benefits from the extension of successful LTI control design strategies, such as proportional-integral-derivative (PID) control [11], model predictive control (MPC) [12], optimal control [13], and robust control [14] (see [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]10] and the citations therein).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%