Viability criteria for differential inclusions

Article

Abstract

A method of verifying the viability criterion at a given point for a region with nonsmooth boundary, which is expressed by a quasidifferentiabl function, under a differential inclusion which is a convex hull of finitely many functions, is proposed. By this method, determining the viability is transformed into solving a number of systems of linear inequalities, or equivalently solving a number of linear programming problems. For the other differential inclusion, called the generalized convex process, it is shown that viability condition holds for a polytope if and only if it holds at all of its vertices. This result is an extension of corresponding one for a linear control system.

Key words

Complex system control differential inclusion nonsmooth analysis viability 

References

  1. [1]
    J. P. Aubin, J. Lygeros, M. Quincampoix, S. Sastry, and N. Seube, Impulse differential inclusions: A viability approach to hybrid systems, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2002, 47: 2–20.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    P. Cardaliaguet, M. Quincampoix, and P. Saint-Pierre, Pursuit pifferential game with state constraints, SIAM J. Control and Optimization, 2001, 39: 1615–1632.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Y. Gao, J. Lygeros, and M. Quincampoix, On the reachability problem of uncertain hybrid systems, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2007, 52: 1572–1586.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Y. Gao, J. Lygeros, M. Quincampoix, and N. Seube, On the control of uncertain impulsive system: Approximate stabilisation and controlled invariance, International Journal of Control, 2004, 77: 1393–1407.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Quincampoix and N. Seube, Stabilization of uncertain control systems through piecewise constant feedback, Journal of Mathematics Analysis and Applications, 1998, 218: 240–255.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    F. Blanchini, Set invariance in control, Automatica, 1999, 35: 1747–1767.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Y. Gao, Nonsmooth Optimization, Science Press, Beijing, 2008.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    B. E. A. Milani and C. E. T. Dorea, On invariant polyhedra of continuous-time linear systems subject to additive disturbances, Automatica, 1996, 32: 785–789.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. P. Aubin, Viability Theory, Birkhauser, Boston, 1991.MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    J. P. Aubin, Optima and Equilibria: An Introduction to Nonlinear Analysis, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993.MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    J. P. Aubin and H. Frankowska, Set-Valued Analysis, Birkhäuser, Boston, 1990.MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    F. H. Clarke, Y. S. Ledyaev, R. J. Stern, and P. R. Wolenski, Nonsmooth Analysis and Contro Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    V. F. Demyanov and A. M. Rubinov, Constructive Nonsmooth Analysis, Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main, 1995.MATHGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    V. F. Demyanov, S. Gamidov, and T. I. Sivelina, An algorithm for minimizing a certain class of quasi-differentiable functions, Math. Programming Study, 1986, 29: 74–84.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    S. G. Bartels, L. Kuntz, and S. Scholtes, Continuous selections of linear functions and nonsmooth critical point theory, Nonlinear Analysis, Theory, Methods & Applications, 1995, 24: 385–407.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    R. T. Rockafellar, Convex Analysis, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1970.MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Systems Science, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, CAS and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementUniversity of Shanghai for Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations