Cited by 398Stability and Control of Uncertain SystemsAdaptive Control of Nonlinear SystemsAdvanced Control Systems Design

A Small-Gain Approach to Robust Event-Triggered Control of Nonlinear Systems

Liu, Tengfei, Jiang, Zhong-Ping·2015·IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control

Abstract

This paper presents a new approach to event-triggered control for nonlinear uncertain systems by using the notion of input-to-state stability (ISS) and the nonlinear small-gain theorem. The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, it is proved that infinitely fast sampling can be avoided if the system is input-to-state stabilizable with the sampling error as the external input and the corresponding ISS gain is locally Lipschitz. No assumption on the existence of known ISS-Lyapunov functions is made in the discussions. Moreover, the forward completeness problem with event-triggered control is studied systematically by using ISS small-gain arguments. Second, the proposed approach gives rise to a new self-triggered sampling strategy for a class of nonlinear systems subject to external disturbances. If an upper bound of the external disturbance is known, then the closed-loop system can be designed to be robust to the external disturbance, and moreover, the system state globally asymptotically converges to the origin if the external disturbance decays to zero. Third, a new design method is developed for event-triggered control of nonlinear uncertain systems in the strict-feedback form. It is particularly shown that the ISS gain with the sampling error as the input can be designed to satisfy the proposed condition for event-triggered control and self-triggered control.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tac.2015.2396645

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 42 · Cited by 398

Authors
Liu, T., & Jiang, Z.-P.
Affiliations
  • State Key Laboratory of Synthetical Automation for Process Industries (CN)
  • New York University (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control
Published
2015-08
Volume
60
Issue
8
Pages
2072-2085
ISSN
  • 0018-9286 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-2523
OpenAlex
W2045511098
Cited by
398
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 4
FWCI
27.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • NSF (DMS-0906659, ECCS-1230040)
  • NSFC (61374042)
  • Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (N130108001, N140805001)
  • State Key Laboratory of Intelligent Control and Decision of Complex Systems
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Stability and Control of Uncertain Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Adaptive Control of Nonlinear Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Advanced Control Systems Design
Keywords
event-triggered control, small gain theorem, input-to-state stability, uncertain nonlinear systems, forward completeness, robustness to external disturbances, strict-feedback form, sampling error

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