Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the Two Methods of Identification under Unknown-but-Bounded Disturbances

  • Adaptive and Robust Systems
  • Published:
Automation and Remote Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Considered are stable linear SISO plants subjected to unknown-but-bounded disturbances. For such plants, the potentials of the two methods of active identification are Compared—the instrumental variable method and the finite-frequency identification method. The relation between these methods is established in the situation where the measurable input is represented by a test signal in the form of the sum of harmonics, whose number is equal to the state space dimension of the plant. The advantages of the finite-frequency method are twofold: it reduces both the sensitivity of the estimates of the plant coefficients to the errors in experimental data and the effect of the dependence between the measurable input and exogenous disturbance on the accuracy of identification. These extra capabilities are provided by the self-tuning of the frequencies of the test signal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Fomin, V.N., Fradkov, A.L., and Yakubovich, V.A., Adaptivnoe upravlenie dinamicheskimi ob"ektami (Adaptive Control of Dynamic Plants), Moscow: Nauka, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ljung, L., System Identification. Theory for the User, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1987. Translated under the title Identifikatsiya sistem. Teoriya dlya pol'zovatelya, Moscow: Nauka, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Granichin, O.N. and Polyak, B.T., Randomizirovannye algoritmy otsenivaniya i optimizatsii pri pochti proizvol'nykh pomekhakh (Randomized Algorithms of Estimation and Optimization under Almost Arbitrary Noise), Moscow: Nauka, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bunich, A.L. and Bakhtadze, N.N., Sintez i primenenie diskretnykh sistem upravleniya s identifikatorom (Design and Applications of Discrete Time Control Systems with Identifier), Moscow: Nauka, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Aleksandrov, A.G., The Finite-Frequency Method of Identification, Proc. 10th IFAC Sympos. Syst. Identification, 1994, vol. 2, pp. 523–527.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wong, K.Y. and Polak, E., Identification of Linear Discrete Time Systems Using Instrumental Variable Method, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 1967, vol. 12, pp. 707–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Aleksandrov, A.G., The Frequency Parameter Method, Avtom. Telemekh., 1989, no. 12, pp. 3–15.

  8. Aleksandrov, A.G., Finite-Frequency Identification: Self-tuning of a Test Signal, in Robust Control and Frequency Identification, Elektrostal': EPI MISiS, 2004, pp. 67–97.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Aleksandrov, A.G., Frequency Adaptive Control for a Stable Plant Subjected to Unknown-but-bounded Disturbances, Avtom. Telemekh., 2000, no. 4, pp. 106–116.

  10. Aleksandrov, A.G., Finite-Frequency Identification: Frequency Bounds for Test Signals, Avtom. Telemekh., 2001, no. 11, pp. 3–14.

  11. Rabkin, G.L., Mitrofanov, B.A., and Shterenberg, Yu.O., On the Determination of Numerical Values of the Coefficients of Transfer Functions of Linearized Blocks and Systems from Experimental Frequency Response, Avtom. Telemekh., 1955, vol. 16, no.5, pp. 488–494.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kardashov, A.A. and Karnyushin, L.V., Determination of the System Parameters from Experimental (Given) Frequency Response, Avtom. Telemekh., 1958, vol. 19, no.4, pp. 334–345.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pintelon, R., Guillaume P., Rolain Y., et al., Parametric Identification of Transfer Functions in the Frequency Domain. A Survey, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 1994, vol. 39, no.11, pp. 2245–2260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Aleksandrov, A.G., Frequency Regulators, Avtom. Telemekh., 1991, no. 1, pp. 22–33.

  15. Graebe, S.F., Robust and Adaptive Control of an Unknown Plant: A Benchmark of New Format, Proc. 12th World Congress of IFAC, Sydney, 1993, vol. III, pp. 165–170.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Aleksandrov, A.G. and Orlov, Yu.F., ADAPLAB-M: The Routine for Identification with Self-tuning of a Test Signal, Proc. IV Int. Conf. “System Identification and Control Problems” (SICPRO'2005), Moscow: Inst. Probl. Upravlen., 2005, CD ISBN 5-201-14975-8.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dyakonov, V.P. and Kruglov, V., MATLAB. Analiz, identifikatsiya i modelirovanie sistem (MATLAB. Analysis, Identification and System Modelling), St. Petersburg: Piter, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

    A. G. Aleksandrov

  2. Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

    Yu. F. Orlov

Authors
  1. A. G. Aleksandrov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yu. F. Orlov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

__________

Translated from Avtomatika i Telemekhanika, No. 10, 2005, pp. 128–147.

Original Russian Text Copyright © 2005 by Aleksandrov, Orlov.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aleksandrov, A.G., Orlov, Y.F. Comparison of the Two Methods of Identification under Unknown-but-Bounded Disturbances. Autom Remote Control 66, 1647–1665 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10513-005-0198-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10513-005-0198-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation