LMI optimization approach to robust<i>H</i><sub>∞</sub>observer design and static output feedback stabilization for discrete‐time nonlinear uncertain systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A new approach for the design of robust H ∞ observers for a class of Lipschitz nonlinear systems with time‐varying uncertainties is proposed based on linear matrix inequalities (LMIs). The admissible Lipschitz constant of the system and the disturbance attenuation level are maximized simultaneously through convex multiobjective optimization. The resulting H ∞ observer guarantees asymptotic stability of the estimation error dynamics and is robust against nonlinear additive uncertainty and time‐varying parametric uncertainties. Explicit norm‐wise and element‐wise bounds on the tolerable nonlinear uncertainty are derived. Also, a new method for the robust output feedback stabilization with H ∞ performance for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems is proposed. Our solution is based on a noniterative LMI optimization and is less restrictive than the existing solutions. The bounds on the nonlinear uncertainty and multiobjective optimization obtained for the observer are also applicable to the proposed static output feedback stabilizing controller. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".