Optimal Integrated Control and Scheduling of Resource-Constrained Systems

  • Arben Çela
  • Mongi Ben Gaid
  • Xu-Guang Li
  • Silviu-Iulian Niculescu
Part of the Communications and Control Engineering book series (CCE)


In this chapter, we start by studying the problem of the optimal control, for a given fixed finite communication sequence. Then, we have formulated and solved the problem of the joint optimization of control and scheduling, for a given initial state. The numerical examples illustrating this method have pointed out that the obtained optimal schedule is extremely dependent on the chosen initial state x(0). These observations show that in the same way as the optimal control, the optimal scheduling depends on the current state of the system. However, from a computer science point of view, off-line scheduling has many advantages, essentially because it consumes a few computing resources and does not induce execution overheads. In order to obtain off-line schedules that are optimal from a certain point of view, it is necessary to use performance criteria depending on the intrinsic characteristics of the system, not on a particular initial state. This will be the objective of the next chapter. Nevertheless, this dependency between the optimal schedule and the plant state may be seen as promising way for improving the quality of control by means of plant state-based scheduling algorithms. The design of such algorithms will be studied in Chap.  6.


  1. 14.
    K.J. Åström, B. Wittenmark, Computer-Controlled Systems: Theory and Design (Prentice Hall, New York, 1997) Google Scholar
  2. 21.
    A. Bemporad, M. Morari, Control of systems integrating logic, dynamics, and constraints. Automatica 35(3), 407–427 (1999) MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 35.
    S. Bittanti, A.J. Laub, J.C. Willems (eds.), The Riccati Equation. The Periodic Riccati Equation (Springer, Berlin, 1991) MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 68.
    R.J. Dakin, A tree search algorithm for mixed integer programming problems. Comput. J. 8(3), 250–255 (1965) MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 85.
    R. Fletcher, S. Leyffer, Numerical experience with lower bounds for MIQP branch-and-bound. SIAM J. Optim. 8(2), 604–616 (1998) MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 86.
    O.E. Flippo, A.H.G. Rinnoy Kan, A note on benders decomposition in mixed-integer quadratic programming. Oper. Res. Lett. 9(2), 81–83 (1990) MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 145.
    A.H. Land, A.G. Doig, An automatic method for solving discrete programming problems. Econometrica 28(3), 497–520 (1960) MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 146.
    R. Lazimy, Improved algorithm for mixed-integer quadratic programs and a computational study. Math. Program. 32(1), 100–113 (1985) MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arben Çela
    • 1
  • Mongi Ben Gaid
    • 2
  • Xu-Guang Li
    • 3
  • Silviu-Iulian Niculescu
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and TelecommunicationUniversité Paris-Est, ESIEE ParisNoisy-le-GrandFrance
  2. 2.Electronic and Real-Time Systems DepartmentIFP New EnergyRueil-MalmaisonFrance
  3. 3.School of Information Science and EngineeringNortheastern UniversityShenyangPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.L2S—Laboratoire des signaux et systèmesSupélecGif-sur-YvetteFrance

Personalised recommendations