System Identification for Automotive Systems: Opportunities and Challenges

  • Daniel Alberer
  • Håkan Hjalmarsson
  • Luigi del Re
Part of the Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences book series (LNCIS, volume 418)

Abstract

Without control many essential targets of the automotive industry could not be achieved. As control relies directly or indirectly on models and model quality directly influences the control performance, especially in feedforward structures as widely used in the automotive world, good models are needed. Good first principle models would be the first choice, and their determination is frequently difficult or even impossible. Against this background methods and tools developed by the system identification community could be used to obtain fast and reliably models, but a large gap seems to exist: neither these methods are sufficiently well known in the automotive community, nor enough attention is paid by the system identification community to the needs of the automotive industry. This introduction summarizes the state of the art and highlights possible critical issues for a future cooperation as they arose from an ACCM Workshop on Identification for Automotive Systems recently held in Linz, Austria.

Keywords

Combustion Diesel Estima Hemel 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Fliess, M., Normand-Cyrot, D.: On the approximation of nonlinear systems by some simple state-space models. In: Bekey, G., Saridis, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth IFAC Symposium on Identification and System Parameter Estimation 1982. IFAC, vol. 1, pp. 511–514. Pergamon, Oxford (1983); Proceedings of the Sixth IFAC Symposium on Identification and System Parameter Estimation 1982, Washington, DC, USA, June 7-11 (1982)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gevers, M., Ljung, L.: Optimal experiment designs with respect to the intended model application. Automatica 22(5), 543–554 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goethals, I., Pelckmans, K., Suykens, J.A.K., Moor, B.D.: Identification of MIMO Hammerstein models using least squares support vector machines. Automatica 41(7), 1263–1272 (2005)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hirsch, M., Alberer, D., del Re, L.: Grey-box control oriented emissions models. In: Proc. 17th IFAC World Congress, Seoul, South Korea (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hjalmarsson, H.: System identification of complex and structured systems. European Journal of Control 15(4), 275–310 (2009); Plenaryaddress. European Control Conference MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hjalmarsson, H., Mårtensson, J.: Optimal input design for identification of non-linear systems: Learning from the linear case. In: American Control Conference, New York City, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jansson, H., Hjalmarsson, H.: Input design via LMIs admitting frequency - wise model specifications in confidence regions. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 50(10), 1534–1549 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Krener, A., Isidori, A., Respondek, W.: Partial and robust linearization by feedback. In: Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, New York, NY, USA, vol. 1, pp. 126–130 (1983); Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, San Antonio, TX, USA, December 14-16 (1983)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Larsson, C., Rojas, C., Hjalmarsson, H.: MPC oriented experiment design. In: 18th IFAC World Congress, Milano, Italy (to appear, 2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ljung, L.: System Identification: Theory for the User. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oppenauer, K.S., del Re, L.: Hybrid 2-zone Diesel combustion model for NO formation. In: SAE ICE 2009 – 9th International Conference on Engines and Vehicles, SAE 2009-24-0135. Capri, Italy (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parrilo, P., Ljung, L.: Initialization of physical parameter estimates. In: van der Hof, S.W.P., Wahlberg, B. (eds.) Proc. 13th IFAC Symposium on System Identification, pp. 1524–1529. Rotterdam, The Netherlands (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Röpke, K., von Essen, C.: DoE in engine development. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 24(6), 643–651Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schoukens, J., Widanage, W., Godfrey, K., Pintelon, R.: Initial estimates for the dynamics of a hammerstein system. Automatica 43(7), 1296–1301 (2007)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sjöberg, J., Ljung, Q.Z.L., Benveniste, A., Deylon, B., Glorennec, P.Y., Hjalmarsson, H., Juditsky, A.: Nonlinear black-box models in system identification: a unified overview. Automatica 31, 1691–1724 (1995)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Söderström, T., Stoica, P.: System Identification. Prentice-Hall International, Hemel Hempstead (1989)MATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stone, M.H.: The generalized weierstrass approximation theorem. Mathematics Magazine 4(21), 167–184; 21(5), 237–254 (1948)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Van Overschee, P., Moor, B.D.: Subspace Identification for Linear Systems: Theory-Implementation-Applications. Springer, New York (1996)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Verhaegen, M.: Identification of the deterministic part of mimo statespace models given in innovations form from input-output data the deterministic part of mimo state-space models given in innovations form from input-output data. Automatica 30(1), 61–74 (1994)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer London 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Alberer
    • Håkan Hjalmarsson
      • 1
    • Luigi del Re
      1. 1.ACCESS Linnaeus Center, School of Electrical EngineeringKTH – Royal, Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

      Personalised recommendations