Erratum to: Multidim Syst Sign Process DOI 10.1007/s11045-015-0321-z

During the production process, typesetting errors were introduced. Please find the corrections below:

Equation number (3.9) refers to the entire group of equations expressing \(\hbox {L}_0,\,\hbox {L}_1,\,\hbox {L}_2,\,\hbox {L}_3\), and \(\hbox {L}_4\), and thus should have been aligned with the line above.

In Fig. 5 all T’s are meant to be bold faced, i.e., \(\hbox {T}_1,\, \hbox {T}_2 ,\, \hbox {T}_3\), and \(\hbox {T}_4\) must be as \(\mathbf{T}_\mathbf{1},\, \mathbf{T}_\mathbf{2},\, \mathbf{T}_\mathbf{3}\), and \(\mathbf{T}_\mathbf{4}\) respectively.

In Fig. 7 all T’s are meant to be bold faced, i.e., \(\hbox {T}_1,\, \hbox {T}_2\), and \(\hbox {T}_3\), must be as \(\mathbf{T}_\mathbf{1},\, \mathbf{T}_\mathbf{2}\), and \(\mathbf{T}_\mathbf{3}\) respectively.

The line after (7.12) should read:

and consequently with \(a_0 ={\gamma } _1 a_1 +\cdots +{\gamma } _{n-1} a_{n-1}\),

All equations in the Appendix have been numbered as (7.*). This makes it appear as though the Appendix is Section 7 of the paper. We meant the equations in the Appendix to have the format (A.*) instead. Thus, all equations in the paper of the type (7.*) should be replaced by corresponding equation numbers in the format (A.*).

Further comments provided by the authors:

For the paragraph before equation (3.26):

For the MD Kirchhoff circuit in Fig. 2 to be MD passive the MD inductances must have nonnegative values. These requirements enforce conditions on the parameters \(\upalpha \) and \(v_3\) that we have chosen according to \(L_0 \ge 4/3\) and \(L_{\upkappa } \ge 1\) for \({\upkappa } =1\) to 3. Since the two series inductances in Fig. 2, \(1,\hbox {D}_3\) and \(\hbox {L}_3 -1,\hbox {D}_3\), can be combined into one inductance \(\hbox {L}_3, \hbox {D}_3\), strictly speaking the requirements for MD passivity, and thus the global stability of the circuit is \(L_0 \ge 4/3,\, L_{\upkappa } \ge 1\) for \({\upkappa } =1\) to 2 and \(L_3 \ge 0\). However, the requirements \(L_0 \ge 4/3,\, L_{\upkappa } \ge 1\) for \({\upkappa }=1\) to 3, as adopted, can be conveniently satisfied, and they suffice for our purpose.

For the paragraph before equation (4.21):

Likewise, in Fig. 4 the two series inductances \(1,\hbox {D}_3\) and \(\hat{{\hbox {L}}}_3 -1,\hbox {D}_3\) can be combined into one inductance \(\hat{{\hbox {L}}}_3, \hbox {D}_3\). Once again, strictly speaking the requirements for the circuit in Fig. 4 to be MD passive are that \(\hat{{L}}_{\upkappa } \ge 1\) for \({\upkappa }=1\) to 2, \(\hat{{L}}_3 \ge 0\) and \(\hat{{L}}_{{\upkappa } 0} \ge 4/3\) for \({\upkappa }=1\) to 3. However, the requirements \(\hat{{L}}_{\upkappa } \ge 1\) for \({\upkappa }=1\) to 3, and \(\hat{{L}}_{{\upkappa } 0} \ge 4/3\) for \({\upkappa }=1\) to 3 are sufficient for our purposes and have been used for a more streamlined treatment.