1390 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICSPART B: CYBERNETICS, VOL. 37, NO.

5, OCTOBER 2007
Generalized PID Observer Design for
Descriptor Linear Systems
Ai-Guo Wu, Guang-Ren Duan, and Yan-Ming Fu
AbstractA type of generalized proportional-integralderivative ob-
servers is proposed for descriptor linear systems. Based on a general
parametric solution to a type of generalized Sylvester matrix equations, a
parametric design approach for such observers is established. The pro-
posed approach provides parameterizations for all the observer gain
matrices, gives the parametric expression for the corresponding left
eigenvector matrix of the observer system matrix, realizes the elimination
of impulsive behaviors, and guarantees the regularity of the observer
system. The design method can offer all the degrees of design freedom,
which can be utilized to achieve various desired system specications and
performances. In addition, a numerical example is employed to show the
design procedure and illustrate the effect of the presented approach.
Index TermsDegrees of design freedom, descriptor linear systems,
generalized proportional-integralderivative (GPID) observers, para-
metric approach.
I. INTRODUCTION
Descriptor linear systems appear in many elds, such as power
systems, electrical networks, and social economic systems, and, there-
fore, have been intensively dealt with. A large number of fundamental
notations from state-space systems have been successfully extended
to descriptor systems, such as controllability, observability, and pole
assignment [1][4]. It is worth pointing out that, by introducing
some notations such as the output-nulling and composite subspaces,
a unied framework was established in the study in [5] for dealing
with descriptor linear systems in the geometry theory. Parallel to the
standard linear systems theory, the problem of designing observers for
descriptor linear systems has been being investigated by a number of
scholars. In [6], the design of full-order observers for descriptor linear
systems was considered. In [7], the design of reduced-order observers
for descriptor linear systems was developed. In [8], geometric design
techniques of observers for descriptor systems with unknown inputs
(UIs) were established. UI-conditioned invariant subspace, which is
related to the solution of a generalized Lyapunov equation, was rst
dened, then the design approach was given based on the Lyapunov
equation and a structural algorithm. It is shown in the study in [9] that,
under the condition of C-observability, the minimal-order state ob-
server of a descriptor linear system possesses the form of a Luenberger
observer. Moreover, a design method was given for this type of
observers using the concept of generalized inverses. Since then, many
researchers have been devoted to Luenberger-type observers problem
for descriptor linear systems [10], [11].
It is well known from control theory that integral terms are useful to
control UI systems or to achieve steady-state accuracy. The integral
terms have been introduced to the observers of conventional linear
systems, and hence, the proportional-integral (PI) observers were
established [12], [13]. The idea was later extended to the descriptor
linear systems. In [14], a Luenberger-type PI observer for descriptor
Manuscript received March 14, 2007; revised April 25, 2007. This work
was supported in part by the Chinese National Natural Science Foundation
under Grant 60374024 and in part by the Program for Changjiang Scholars
and Innovative Research Teams in University. This paper was recommended by
Associate Editor F. Lewis.
The authors are with the Center for Control Theory and Guidance Technol-
ogy, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China (e-mail: ag.wu@
163.com; g.r.duan@hit.edu.cn).
Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TSMCB.2007.901205
linear systems was designed for the aim of fault detection. Motivated
by the idea of the study in [15], the authors of [16] introduced an
integral term to a Luenberger-type observer for the descriptor linear
system with UI to estimate the state and the UI. It is also pointed
out in the study in [16] that a PI observer possesses the advantage
over a proportional observer that a posteriori robustness state and UI
estimations face to parameter variations, and UI-bounded nonlinearity
may be addressed by setting higher eigenvalues. In addition, the type
of generalized PI observer for descriptor systems was introduced in the
study in [17], and a parametric approach for this type of observers was
established.
Very recently, there have been authors to propose the type of
proportional-derivative observers by introducing derivative terms
[18][19]. Based on the ideas in the study in [17] and [19], in
this correspondence, we propose a new class of observers, general-
ized proportional-integralderivative (GPID) observers for descriptor
linear systems by introducing a derivative term to the generalized
PI observers. First, the separation property of the proposed GPID
observers is veried. Then, based on a complete parametric solution
to the generalized Sylvester matrix equation investigated in the study
in [20], a parametric design approach for the GPID observers is
established. The proposed method guarantees the regularity of the
observer system and realizes the elimination of impulsive responses.
In terms of three parameter sets which represent the degrees of design
freedom, i.e., the set of the nite eigenvalues of the observer system
{s
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p}, two groups of parameter vector {g
i
, i =
1, 2, . . . , n +p} and {v
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p}, parameterizations for
all the gain matrices of the observer system are established. The
existence conditions for the proposed type of GPID observers are
given by some constraints on these design parameters. Moreover, the
parametric expression of the left eigenvector matrix of the observer
system is also given. The proposed approach offers all the degrees
of design freedom, which can be utilized to achieve various system
performances.
II. GPID OBSERVERS AND SEPARATION PROPERTY
Consider the following time-invariant descriptor linear system
_
E x = Ax +Bu
y
p
= C
p
x
y
d
= C
d
x
(1)
where x R
n
, u R
r
, y
p
R
m
, and y
d
R
l
are, respectively, the
descriptor state vector, the input vector, the output vector, and the
derivative output vector. E, A R
nn
, B R
nr
, C
p
R
mn
,
and C
d
R
ln
are the known real matrices.
For system(1), we introduce a GPIDobserver in the following form:
_
E

x = A x+Bu+L
p
(y
p
C
p
x)+L
d
(y
d
C
d

x)+F
= K(y
p
C
p
x) +H
(2)
where x R
n
is the estimated state vector, R
p
is a vector
representing the integral of the weighted output estimation error, and
L
p
R
nm
, L
d
R
nl
, F R
np
, K R
pm
, and H R
pp
are the observer gains.
Denition 1: The system (2) is called a GPID observer for the
system(1), if, for any admissible initial conditions x(0), x(0) and (0)
and any input u(t), the following relations hold:
lim
t
(x(t) x(t)) = 0 lim
t
(t) = 0.
1083-4419/$25.00 2007 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICSPART B: CYBERNETICS, VOL. 37, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2007 1391
Let e(t) = x(t) x(t), then combining (1) and (2) gives the fol-
lowing observer system:
E
o
_
e

_
= A
o
_
e

_
(3)
with
E
o
=
_
E +L
d
C
d
0
0 I
p
_
A
o
=
_
AL
p
C
p
F
KC
p
H
_
. (4)
The GPID-observer-based state feedback
_
E

x = A x+Bu+L
p
(y
p
C
p
x)+L
d
(y
d
C
d

x)+F
= K(y
p
C
p
x) +H
u = K
p
x +v
(5)
with v R
r
being an external input, is applied to the system (1), the
closed-loop system is obtained as
_
E
c
x
c
= A
c
x
c
+B
c
v
y = C
c
x
c
(6)
with
x
c
=
_
x
x

_
E
c
=
_
E 0 0
L
d
C
d
E +L
d
C
d
0
0 0 I
_
A
c
=
_
A BK
p
0
L
p
C
p
AL
p
C
p
+BK
p
F
KC
p
KC
p
H
_
B
c
=
_
B
B
0
_
and
C
c
= [C
p
0 0].
Theorem 1: Given system (1), the closed-loop transfer function
under the GPID-observer-based state feedback (5) is equal to the one
under state-feedback control law
u = K
p
x +v. (7)
Proof: The closed-loop system of (1) under control law (7) is
_
E x = (A+BK
p
)x +Bv
y
p
= C
p
x
whose transfer function is easily found to be
C
p
[sE (A+BK
p
)]
1
B. (8)
Let
Q =
_
I
n
0 0
I
n
I
n
0
0 0 I
p
_
P =
_
I
n
0 0
I
n
I
n
0
0 0 I
p
_
(9)
it follows that
QE
c
P =
_
E 0
0 E
o
_
QA
c
P =
_
A+BK
p
[BK
p
0]
0 A
o
_
(10)
and
QB
c
=
_
B
0
0
_
C
c
P = [ C
p
0 0 ].
Therefore, the closed-loop system (6) is restricted system equivalent
to the following system:
_
_
E 0
0 E
o
_
,
_
A+BK
p
[BK
p
0]
0 A
o
_
,
_
B
0
0
_
, [C
p
0 0]
_
(11)
under transformation (P, Q) with P and Qdened by (9). By straight-
forward computations, it is easily found that the transfer function of
the system (11) is equal to the expression in (8), which is the transfer
function under the state feedback (7). In view of the fact that two
restricted equivalent systems have the same transfer functions, the
conclusion is true.
Based on the above proof procedure, it is easily seen that the
proposed GPID observer satises the separation principle.
Theorem2: Given the system(1), the eigenvalues of the closed-loop
system under the GPID-observer-based state feedback (5) is the union
of those of the GPID-observer system and the closed-loop system
under the state feedback.
Proof: It follows from (10) that the closed-loop system matrix
pair (E
c
, A
c
) is restricted system equivalent to the following matrix
pair under transformation (P, Q) with P and Q dened as (9):
__
E 0
0 E
o
_
,
_
A+BK
p
[BK
p
0]
0 A
o
__
.
Therefore, there holds (E
c
, A
c
) = (E
o
, A
o
) (E, A+BK
p
).
Thus, the conclusion is proved.
From the above two theorems, the proposed GPID observer satises
the essential features of observers and hence is qualied as an observer.
III. GPID OBSERVER DESIGN
In this section, our attention is focused on the design of the proposed
GPID observer for the descriptor linear system (1). It is well known
that a descriptor systemwith impulsive modes is very sensitive to slight
input change. Therefore, in order to guarantee the estimation accuracy,
we require that the observer system is impulse-free. For convenience,
we require that the resultant observer system can be converted into
a conventional linear system. In fact, the proposed approach can be
extended to the case that the resultant observer system is not impulse-
free. Let
C =
_
C
p
C
d
_
. (12)
The system (1) is required to satisfy the following assumptions.
1392 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICSPART B: CYBERNETICS, VOL. 37, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2007
Assumption A1: The matrix C is of full-row rank.
Assumption A2: The matrix triple (E, A, C) is R-observable, i.e.,
rank
_
sE A
C
_
= n, for any s C.
Assumption A3:
rank
_
E
C
d
_
= n.
It follows from descriptor linear systems theory that the system (2)
is a GPID observer for the system (1), if and only if the matrix pair
(E
o
, A
o
) is Hurwitz stable, i.e., it possesses all the nite eigenvalues
with negative real parts. Since nondefective matrix pairs have lower
eigenvalue sensitivities than defective ones, we require that the Jordan
form of the matrix pair (E
o
, A
o
) is diagonal. Furthermore, we demand
that the matrix pair (E
o
, A
o
) has (n +p) nite eigenvalues, which
ensures that the observer system (2) is regular, then elimination of
all possible impulsive modes of the observer system is realized in
the observer system (3). With the above reasoning, our problem of
designing GPID observers for descriptor linear system (1) can be
formulated as follows.
Problem GPIDO: Given matrices E, A R
nn
, B R
nr
,
C
p
R
mn
, and C
d
R
ln
satisfying Assumptions A1, A2, and
A3, nd parameterization for the observer gain matrices L
p
, L
d
, F, K,
and H, such that the matrix pair (E
o
, A
o
) in (4) satises the following
conditions: 1) It is Hurwitz stable and nondefective and 2) it is regular
and possesses (n +p) nite eigenvalues.
In the next subsections, we give the solution to Problem GPIDO.
A. Some Basic Relations
According to the second condition of Problem GPIDO, the matrix
pair (E
o
, A
o
) has a diagonal Jordan form
= diag(s
1
, s
2
, . . . , s
n+p
). (13)
Obviously, s
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p are the nite eigenvalues of the
matrix pair (E
o
, A
o
). The eigenvalues s
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p are not
necessarily distinct. To ensure that the matrix pair (E
o
, A
o
) is Hurwitz
stable and real, the following constraint is required.
Constraint C1: {s
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p} is self-conjugate and
Re s
i
< 0, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p.
Denote the left eigenvector associated with the nite eigenvalue s
i
of (E
o
, A
o
) by u
i
C
n+p
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p and construct the left
eigenvector matrix by
U = [ u
1
u
2
. . . u
n+p
] .
Partition the eigenvector matrix into
U =
_
T
V
_
T C
n(n+p)
V C
p(n+p)
(14)
then it follows from the denition that
rank
_
T
V
_
= n +p, (15)
and
[ T
T
V
T
]
_
AL
p
C
p
F
KC
p
H
_
= [ T
T
V
T
]
_
E +L
d
C
d
0
0 I
p
_
.
(16)
This relation can be equivalently decomposed into
T
T
(AL
p
C
p
) V
T
KC
p
= T
T
(E +L
d
C
d
) (17)
and
T
T
F +V
T
H = V
T
. (18)
Let
Z
T
=
_
T
T
L
p
+V
T
K T
T
L
d

. (19)
In view of (12) and (19), then (17) can be equivalently written as
T
T
A+Z
T
C = T
T
E. (20)
B. Solution to the Matrices T and Z
Taking transpose of (20) gives
A
T
T +C
T
Z = E
T
T
which is the generalized Sylvester matrix equation investigated in the
study in [20]. According to the result in the study in [20], the following
lemma is obtained.
Lemma 1: Given E, A R
nn
, C
p
R
mn
, and C
d
R
ml
satisfying Assumptions A1 and A2, all the matrices T and Z satisfying
(20) can be given by the parametric expressions
T = [N(s
1
)g
1
N(s
2
)g
2
. . . N(s
n+p
)g
n+p
] (21)
Z = [D(s
1
)g
1
D(s
2
)g
2
. . . D(s
n+p
)g
n+p
] (22)
where g
i
C
m+l
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p are a group of arbitrary
parameter vectors, and N(s) R
n(m+l)
[s] and D(s)
R
(m+l)(m+l)
[s] are a pair of right coprime polynomial matrices
satisfying the following right coprime factorization:
(sE
T
A
T
)
1
C
T
= N(s)D
1
(s). (23)
C. Solution to the Gain Matrices L
p
, L
d
, K, F, and H
Partition the matrix Z in (19) into
Z =
_
Z
p
Z
d
_
Z
p
C
m(n+p)
Z
d
C
l(n+p)
. (24)
Then it follows from (19) that
T
T
L
p
+V
T
K = Z
T
p
(25)
and
T
T
L
d
= Z
T
d
. (26)
Furthermore, partition the polynomial matrix D(s), satisfying
(23) into
D(s) =
_
D
p
(s)
D
d
(s)
_
D(s) R
m(m+l)
[s] D(s) R
l(m+l)
[s].
(27)
It is readily obtained from (22) and (24) that
Z
p
= [D
p
(s
1
)g
1
D
p
(s
2
)g
2
. . . D
p
(s
n+p
)g
n+p
] (28)
Z
d
= [D
d
(s
1
)g
1
D
d
(s
2
)g
2
. . . D
d
(s
n+p
)g
n+p
] . (29)
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICSPART B: CYBERNETICS, VOL. 37, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2007 1393
In addition, it is easily known that (25) is equivalent to
[T
T
V
T
]
_
L
p
K
_
= Z
T
p
.
Combining this with the relation (18) gives the following matrix
expression:
[ T
T
V
T
]
_
F L
p
H K
_
= [ V
T
Z
T
p
] . (30)
In the above form, the matrix V is taken as a free parameter matrix.
Following the form of the eigenvector matrix U, we denote the matrix
V by
V = [v
2
v
2
. . . v
n+p
]. (31)
To ensure that the matrices F, H, L
p
, and K are real, the following
constraint is met.
Constraint C2: g
i
= g
l
and v
i
= v
l
if s
i
= s
l
.
It follows from (14), (21), and (31) that the general parametric form
for the left eigenvector matrix of the observer system is obtained as
U =
_
N(s
1
)g
1
N(s
2
)g
2
. . . N(s
n+p
)g
n+p
v
1
v
2
. . . v
n+p
_
. (32)
Thus, (15) is converted into the constraint on the design parameters s
i
,
v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p.
Constraint C3: det U(s
i
, v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p) = 0.
With this condition, it follows from (30) that the gain matrices F,
H, L
p
, and K can be derived as
_
F L
p
H K
_
= [T
T
V
T
]
1
[V
T
Z
T
p
]. (33)
The gain matrix L
d
will be derived from (26). It follows from the
linear algebraic theory that (26) has a solution with respect to L
d
if
and only if the following rank condition is met:
rank T
T
= rank
_
T
T
Z
T
d

. (34)
In view of (13), (21), and (29), the condition (34) can be converted
into the following constraint on the design parameters s
i
, g
i
, i =
1, 2, . . . , n +p:
Constraint C4:
rank [ s
1
N(s
1
)g
1
s
2
N(s
2
)g
2
. . . s
n+p
N(s
n+p
)g
n+p
]
=rank
_
s
1
N(s
1
)g
1
s
2
N(s
2
)g
2
. . . s
n+p
N(s
n+p
)g
n+p
D
d
(s
1
)g
1
D
d
(s
2
)g
2
. . . D
d
(s
n+p
)g
n+p
_
= n.
Since matrix T has full row rank, under the condition of Constraint
C1, the gain matrix L
d
is derived from (26) as
L
d
= (TT
T
)
1
T
1
Z
T
d
. (35)
Regarding the regularity of the observer system (3), the following
lemma is given.
Lemma 2: Given the matrices E, A R
nn
, B R
nr
, C
p

R
mn
, and C
d
R
ln
, suppose that the observer system (3) pos-
sesses (n +p) nite eigenvalues, then the matrix pair (E
o
, A
o
) is
regular if and only if
det(E +L
d
C
d
) = 0. (36)
Proof: It follows from (16) that
U
T
A
o
= U
T
E
o
.
Due to the above relation and (4), it is easily obtain that
U
T
(sE
o
A
o
) =
_
sU
T
E
o
U
T
E
o
_
= (sI )U
T
E
o
.
Thus, we have
det U
T
det(sE
o
A
o
)
= det(sI ) det U
T
det
_
E +L
d
C
d
I
p
_
. (37)
Since det U
T
is nonzero in view of Constraint C3, from (37), the
following relation is obtained:
det(sE
o
A
o
) = det(sI ) det
_
E +L
d
C
d
I
p
_
.
From this relation, it is easily known that det(sE
o
A
o
) is not
identically zero if and only if (36) is satised, since det(sI ) is
not identically zero.
In view of (26), we have
[ T
T
V
T
]
_
E+L
d
C
d
I
p
_
=[ T
T
EZ
T
2
C
d
V
T
] . (38)
Since [T
T
V
T
] is nonsingular, from the above, it is obvious that
condition (36) is equivalent to
det
_
T
T
E Z
T
2
C
d
V
T

= 0.
In view of (18), (21), and (29), the regularity condition (36) is
converted into the following constraint on the design parameters s
i
,
v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p.
Constraint C5:
det
_

_
g
T
1
_
s
1
N
T
(s
1
)E D
T
d
C
d

s
1
v
T
1
g
T
2
_
s
2
N
T
(s
2
)E D
T
d
C
d

s
2
v
T
2
. . . . . .
g
T
n+p
_
s
n+p
N
T
(s
n+p
)ED
T
d
C
d

s
n+p
g
T
n+p
_

_
=0. (39)
D. Algorithm and Some Remarks
Summarizing the results in the above subsections, we have the
following theorem on the solution to Problem GPIDO.
Theorem: Given the system (1) satisfying the Assumptions A1,
A2, and A3, Problem GPIDO has a solution if and only if there
exist parameters s
i
, v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p satisfying Constraints
C1C5. If such parameters exist, then the observer gain matrices F,
K, H, L
p
, and L
d
are given by (33) and (35) through (21) and (22).
Based on the above theorem, we give the following algorithm to
solve Problem GPIDO.
Algorithm GPIDO
Step 1) Solve a pair of right coprime polynomial matrices N(s)
and D(s) satisfying the right coprime factorization (23),
and partition the matrix D(s) into D
p
(s) and D
d
(s) ac-
cording to (27).
1394 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICSPART B: CYBERNETICS, VOL. 37, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2007
Step 2) Express Constraints C1C5 into forms represented by the
parameters s
i
, v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p.
Step 3) Find a group of parameters s
i
, v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p
satisfying Constraints C1C5. If such parameters do not
exist, this approach is invalid.
Step 4) Based on the parameters s
i
, v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p
obtained in Step 3), calculate the matrices T, Z
p
, and Z
d
according to (21), (28), and (29).
Step 5) Calculate the observer gain matrices F, H, K, L
p
, and L
d
according to (33) and (35) based on the matrices T, Z
p
, and
Z
d
given in Step 4).
Concerning the proposed parametric approach for solving Problem
GPIDO, we provide the following remarks.
Remark 1: A method to solve the coprime factorization (23) has
been given in [20].
Remark 2: If the eigenvalues of the observer system are previously
prescribed, it is not necessary to nd the coprime polynomial matrices
N(s) and D(s). Similar to the idea in the study in [21], applying
singular value decomposition to matrix [C
T
A
T
s
i
E
T
], we obtain
the following relation:

i
_
C
T
A
T
s
i
E
T

i
= [
i
0], i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p
where
i
and
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p are unitary matrices of proper
dimensions. Partition the matrix
i
into the following form:

i
=
_
D(s
i
)
N(s
i
)
_
N(s
i
)C
n(m+l)
D(s
i
)C
(m+l)(m+l)
.
Then, in terms of the matrices N(s
i
) and D(s
i
) dened above,
a solution for the matrices T and Z can be given by (21) and
(22). Since singular value decompositions are applied, such an ap-
proach to solve the matrices T and Z possesses good numerical
stability.
Remark 3: It has been shown that under the condition of
Assumption A3, there always exists a real matrix L
d
satisfying (36).
Moreover, all the matrices L
d
satisfying (36) form a Zarisky open set.
Thus Constraint C4 can be neglected if only one special solution is of
interest.
Remark 4: The presented approach can provide all degrees of
the design freedom which is represented by the free parameters s
i
,
v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , n +p. They can be utilized to achieve various
desired system specications and performances such as disturbance
decoupling and loop transfer recovery/linear quadratic regulation .
IV. NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
Consider a system in the form of (1) with the following parameters:
E =
_

_
1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0 1
1 0 0 0 0
_

_
A =
_

_
0 0 1 0 0
1 0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
1 0 0 0 1
_

_
C
p
=
_
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
_
C
d
=
_
0 0 0 1 0
1 0 0 0 0
_
. (40)
For this system, n = 5 and m = l = 2. It is easy to verify that the
Assumptions A1, A2, and A3 are met. In the following, we will design
a GPID observer with p = 1 in the form of (2) for this example system
using Algorithm GPIDO.
Step 1) Solving the right coprime factorization (20), gives the
following right coprime polynomial matrices:
N(s) =
_

_
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0
1 0 0 0
s 0 0 0
_

_
D(s) =
_

_
0 1 0 s
0 s 1 0
1 0 0 0
s
2
0 s 1
_

_
. (41)
Step 2) For simplicity, we restrict the eigenvalues s
i
, i =
1, 2, . . . , 6 of the observer system to be negative real. Thus
Constraint C1 is automatically satised. In this case, the
parameter vectors v
i
, g
i
, i = 1, 2, . . . , 6 are restricted to be
real. Constraint C2 is therefore met. Denote
g
i
= [g
i1
g
i2
g
i3
g
i4
]
T
, i = 1, 2, . . . , 6.
Then, from (32), Constraint C3 is derived as
det
_

_
g
13
g
23
g
33
g
43
g
53
g
63
g
14
g
24
g
34
g
44
g
54
g
64
g
12
g
22
g
32
g
42
g
52
g
62
g
11
g
21
g
31
g
41
g
51
g
61
s
1
g
11
s
2
g
21
s
3
g
31
s
4
g
41
s
5
g
51
s
6
g
61
v
1
v
2
v
3
v
4
v
5
v
6
_

_
= 0. (42)
From (27) and (39), Constraints C4 and C5 are, respec-
tively, derived as
rank
_

_
s
1
g
13
s
2
g
23
. . . s
6
g
63
s
1
g
14
s
2
g
24
. . . s
6
g
64
s
1
g
12
s
2
g
22
. . . s
6
g
62
s
1
g
11
s
2
g
21
. . . s
6
g
61
s
2
1
g
11
s
2
2
g
21
. . . s
2
6
g
61
_

_
= rank
_

_
s
1
g
13
s
2
g
23
. . . s
6
g
63
s
1
g
14
s
2
g
24
. . . s
6
g
64
s
1
g
12
s
2
g
22
. . . s
6
g
62
s
1
g
11
s
2
g
21
. . . s
6
g
61
s
2
1
g
11
s
2
2
g
21
. . . s
2
6
g
61
g
11
g
21
. . . g
61
d
1
d
2
. . . d
6
_

_
= 5 (43)
with d
i
= s
2
i
g
i1
+s
i
g
i3
g
i4
and
det
_

_
g
14
+s
1
g
11
g
24
+s
2
g
21
. . . g
54
+s
5
g
51
s
1
g
14
s
2
g
24
. . . s
5
g
54
s
1
g
12
s
2
g
22
. . . s
5
g
52
g
11
g
21
. . . g
51
s
1
g
11
s
2
g
21
. . . s
5
g
51
s
1
v
1
s
2
v
2
. . . s
6
v
6
_

_
= 0.
(44)
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICSPART B: CYBERNETICS, VOL. 37, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2007 1395
Step 3) Specically, we choose the parameters satisfying (42) and
(44) as
s
i
= i, i = 1, 2, . . . , 6
[ v
1
v
2
. . . v
6
] = [ 1 1 2 1 0 1 ]
and
[ g
1
g
2
. . . g
6
] =
_

_
1 1 1 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 1 1 0 0
_

_
.
Step 4) Based on the parameters obtained in Step 3), we obtain
T =
_

_
1 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 1 1 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1
1 1 1 0 0 0
1 2 3 0 0 0
_

_
Z
p
=
_
1 0 3 3 1 1
0 1 0 4 4 5
_
Z
d
=
_
1 1 1 0 0 0
2 6 10 1 5 6
_
.
Step 5) According to (26) and (33), a group of observer gain
matrices are obtained as
L
p
=
_

_
1 8
5 9
2 4
1 2
1 3
_

_
F =
_

_
21
23
21
7
12
_

_
L
d
=
_

1
3

11
12

1
3

1
6

1
3
1
12

7
6

1
12

1
6

13
12
_

_
K =[ 0 1 ] H = 6.
V. CONCLUSION
In this correspondence, a type of GPID observers for descriptor
linear systems is proposed. A simple parametric approach to the design
of this kind of observers has been proposed. It is revealed that the
degrees of design freedom involved are composed of the following:
1) eigenvalues of the observer system matrix and 2) two groups of free
parameter vectors.
Parametric expression for the observer gains, as well as the left
eigenvectors of the observer system matrix, are also established in
terms of these design parameters. The proposed approach can realize
the elimination of impulse for the observer system.
REFERENCES
[1] J. D. Cobb, Controllability, observability and duality in singular sys-
tems, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. AC-29, no. 12, pp. 10761082,
Dec. 1984.
[2] F. L. Lewis and K. Ozcaldiran, Geometric structure and feed-
back in singular systems, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 34, no. 4,
pp. 450455, Apr. 1989.
[3] A. Banaszuk, M. Kociecki, G. Beauchamp, and F. L. Lewis, Observ-
ability with unknown input and dual properties for singular systems,
in Mathematical and Intelligent Models in System Simulation, R. Hanus,
P. Kool, and S. Tzafestas, Eds., 1991, pp. 125129.
[4] K. zcaldiran, D. W. Fountain, and F. L. Lewis, Some generalized
notions of observability, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 37, no. 6,
pp. 856860, Jun. 1992.
[5] F. L. Lewis, A tutorial on the geometric analysis of linear time-invariant
implicit systems, Automatica, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 119137, Jan. 1992.
[6] L. Dai, Observers for discrete singular system, IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 187191, Feb. 1988.
[7] M. El-Tohami, V. Lovass-Nagy, and R. Mukundan, On the design of
the observers for generalized state space systems using singular value
decomposition, Int. J. Control, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 673683, Mar. 1983.
[8] F. L. Lewis, Geometric design techniques for observers in singular sys-
tems, Automatica, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 411415, Mar. 1990.
[9] B. Shafai and R. L. Carroll, Design of a minimal-order observer
for singular systems, Int. J. Control, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 10751081,
1987.
[10] M. Hou and P. C. Mller, Design of a class of Luenberger observers for
descriptor linear systems, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 40, no. 1,
pp. 133136, Jan. 1995.
[11] W. Wang and Y. Zou, Analysis of impulsive modes and Luenberger
observers for descriptor systems, Syst. Control Lett., vol. 44, no. 5,
pp. 347353, Dec. 2001.
[12] B. Shafai and R. L. Carroll, Design of proportional integral observer
for linear time-varying multivariable systems, in Proc. 24th IEEE Conf.
Decision and Control, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 1985, pp. 597599.
[13] S. Beale and B. Shafai, Robust control system design with a proportional
integral observer, Int. J. Control, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 97111, 1989.
[14] H. S. Kim, T. K. Yeu, and S. Kawaji, Fault detection in linear descriptor
systems via unknown input PI observer, Trans. Control, Autom. Syst.
Eng., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 7782, 2001.
[15] D. Sffker, T. Yu, and P. C. Mller, State estimation of dynamical sys-
tems with nonlinearities by using proportional-integral observer, Int. J.
Syst. Sci., vol. 26, no. 9, pp. 15711582, Sep. 1995.
[16] D. Koening and S. Mammar, Design of proportional-integral observer for
unknown input descriptor systems, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 47,
no. 12, pp. 20572062, Dec. 2002.
[17] A. G. Wu and G. R. Duan, Design of generalized PI observers in
descriptor linear systems, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, vol. 53, no. 12,
pp. 28282837, Dec. 2006.
[18] Z. Gao, PD observer parameterization design for descriptor systems,
J. Franklin Inst., vol. 342, no. 5, pp. 551564, 2005.
[19] A. G. Wu and G. R. Duan, Design of PD observers in descriptor lin-
ear systems, Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 9398,
Feb. 2007.
[20] G. R. Duan, Solution to matrix equation AV +BW = EVF and eigen-
structure assignment for descriptor systems, Automatic, vol. 28, no. 3,
pp. 639643, Mar. 1992.
[21] G. R. Duan, Parametric eigenstructure assignment via state feedback: A
simple numerically reliable approach, in Proc. 4th World Congr. Intell.
Control and Autom., Shanghai, China, 2002, pp. 165173.