Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 374

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Finite-time stability and settling-time estimation of nonlinear impulsive systems

Li, Xiaodi, Ho, Daniel W.C., Cao, Jinde·2019·Automatica

Abstract

This paper studies the problem of finite-time stability (FTS) for nonlinear impulsive systems. Based on impulsive control theory, several Lyapunov-based FTS theorems involving stabilizing impulses and destabilizing impulses are established, respectively. Our proposed results provide sufficient conditions for estimating the settling-time with respect to suitable classes of impulse time sequences. It is shown that the settling-time of nonlinear impulsive systems depends not only on the initial state but also on the impulse effect. As compared with the case without using stabilizing impulses, a smaller bound of setting-time can be derived when a FTS system is subject to stabilizing impulses. Conversely, a larger bound of settling-time can be derived when the FTS system is subject to destabilizing impulses, as compared with the case without using destabilizing impulses. As a special case, we extend the ideas to nonlinear impulsive delay systems and derive some delay-independent FTS results. Examples and their simulations are given to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed results.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.automatica.2018.10.024

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Li, X., Ho, D. W. C., & Cao, J.
Venue
Automatica
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
99
Pages
361-368
ISSN
0005-1098 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2900500391
Cited by
374
References
0
FWCI
20.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.