16

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine

Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks
Zhao Tong
School of Automatization and Electronic Engineering, Qingdao University of Science and
Technology
China

1. Introduction
Adaptive control of highly uncertain nonlinear dynamic systems has been an important
research area in the past decades, and in the meantime neural networks control has found
extensive application for a wide variety of areas and has attracted the attention of many
control researches due to its strong approximation capability. Many significant results on
these topics have been published in the literatures (Lewis et al., 1996 ; Yu & Li 2002;
Yesidirek & Lewis 1995). It is proved to be successful that neural networks are used in
adaptive control. However, most of these works are applicable for a kind of affine systems
which can be linearly parameterized. Little has been found for the design of specific
controllers for the nonlinear systems, which are implicit functions with respect to control
input. We can find in literatures available there are mainly the results of Calise et al. (Calise
& Hovakimyan 2001) and Ge et al. (Ge et al. 1997). Calise et al. removed the affine in control
restriction by developing a dynamic inversion based control architecture with linearly
parameterized neural networks in the feedback path to compensate for the inversion error
introduced by an approximate inverse. However, the proposed scheme does not relate to the
properties of the functions, therefore, the special properties are not used in design. Ge, S.S.
et al., proposed the control schemes for a class of non-affine dynamic systems, using mean
value theorem, separate control signals from controlled plant functions, and apply neural
networks to approximate the control signal, therefore, obtain an adaptive control scheme.
Furthermore, when controlling large-scale and highly nonlinear systems, the presupposition
of centrality is violated due to either due to problems in data gathering when is spread out
or due to the lack of accurate mathematical models. To avoid the difficulties, the
decentralized control architecture has been tried in controller design. Decentralized control
systems often also arise from various complex situations where there exist physical
limitations on information exchange among several subsystems for which there is
insufficient capability to have a single central controller. Moreover, difficulty and
uncertainty in, measuring parameter values within a large-scale system may call for
adaptive techniques. Since these restrictions encompass a large group of applications, a
variety of decentralized adaptive techniques have been developed (Ioannou 1986).

www.intechopen.com

338

Adaptive Control

Earlier literature on the decentralized control methods were focused on control of largescale linear systems. The pioneer work by Siljak (Siljak 1991) presents stability theorems of
interconnected linear systems based on the structure information only. Many works
consider subsystems which are linear in a set of unknown parameters (Ioannou 1986 ; Fu
1992 ; Sheikholeslam & Desor 1993 ; Wen 1994 ; Tang et al. 2000), and these results were
focused on systems with first order interconnections. When the subsystems has nonlinear
dynamics or the interconnected is entered in a nonlinear fashion, the analysis and design
problem becomes even challenging.
The use of neural networks learning ability avoids complex mathematical analysis in
solving control problems when plant dynamics are complex and highly nonlinear, which is
a distinct advantage over traditional control methods. As an alternative, intensive research
has been carried out on neural networks control of unknown nonlinear systems. This
motivates some researches on combining neural networks with adaptive control techniques
to develop decentralized control approaches for uncertain nonlinear systems with
restrictions on interconnections. For example, in (Spooner & Passino 1999), two
decentralized adaptive control schemes for uncertain nonlinear systems with radial basis
neural networks are proposed, which a direct adaptive approach approximates unknown
control laws required to stabilize each subsystem, while an indirect approach is provided
which identifies the isolated subsystem dynamics to produce a stabilizing controller. For a
class of large scale affine nonlinear systems with strong interconnections, two neural
networks are used to approximate the unknown subsystems and strong interconnections,
respectively (Huang & Tan 2003), and Huang & Tan (Huang & Tan 2006) introduce a
decomposition structure to obtain the solution to the problem of decentralized adaptive
tracking control a class of affine nonlinear systems with strong interconnections. Apparently,
most of these results are likewise applicable for affine systems described as above. For the
decentralized control research of non-affine nonlinear systems, many results can be found
from available literatures. Nardi et al. (Nardi & Hovakimyan 2006) extend the results in
Calise et al. (Calise & Hovakimyan 2001) to non-affine nonlinear dynamical systems with
first order interconnections. Huang (Huang & Tan 2005) apply the results in (Ge & Huang
1999) to a class of non-affine nonlinear systems with strong interconnections.
Inspired by the above researches, in this chapter, we propose a novel adaptive control
scheme for non-affine nonlinear dynamic systems. Although the class of nonlinear plant is
the same as that of Ge et al. (Ge et al. 1997), utilizing their nice reversibility, and invoking
the concept of pseudo-control and inverse function theorem, we find the equitation of error
dynamics to design adaptation laws. Using the property of approximation of two-layer
neural networks (NN), the control algorithm is gained. Then, the controlled plants are
extended to large-scale decentralized nonlinear systems, which the subsystems are
composed of the class of non-affine nonlinear functions. Two schemes are proposed,
respectively. The first scheme designs a RBFN-based (radial basis function neural networks)
adaptive control scheme with the assumption which the interconnections between
subsystems in entire system are bounded linearly by the norms of the tracking filtered error.
In the scheme, unlike most of other approaches in available literatures, the weight of BBFN
and center and width of Gaussian function are tuned adaptively. In another scheme, the
interconnection is assumed as stronger nonlinear function. Moreover, in the former, in every
subsystem, a RBFN is adopted which is used to approximate unknown function, and in the
latter, in every subsystem, two RBFNs are respectively utilized to approximate unknown

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

339

function and uncertain strong interconnection function. For those complicated large-scale
decentralized dynamic systems, in order to decrease discontinuous factors and make
systems run smooth, unlike most of control schemes, the hyperbolic tangent functions are
quoted in the design of robust control terms, instead of sign function. Otherwise, the citation
of the smooth function is necessary to satisfy the condition of those theorems.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 gives the normal form of a class of
non-affine nonlinear systems. Section 3 proposes a novel adaptive control algorithm, which
is strictly derived from some mathematical and Lyapunov stability theories, and the
effectiveness of the scheme is validated through simulation. Extending the above-mentioned
result, Section 4 discusses two schemes of decentralized adaptive neural network control for
the class of large-scale nonlinear systems with linear function interconnections and
nonlinear function interconnections, respectively. Finally, the Section 5 is concluding
remarks.

2. Problem Statement
We consider a general analytic system

& = g(, u ), R n , u R

y R.
y = h(),

(1)

where g (, ) is a smooth vector fields and h() is a scalar function. In practice, many
physical systems such as chemical reactions, PH neutralization and distillation columns are
inherently nonlinear, whose input variables may enter in the systems nonlinearly as
described by the above general form (Ge et al. 1998). Then, the Lie derivative (Tsinias &
Kalouptsidis 1983) of h ( ) with respect to g (, u ) is a scalar function defined
by Lg h = [h() ] g (, u ) . Repeated Lie derivatives can be defined recursively

for i = 1, 2L . The system (1) is said to have relative degree

as Lig h = Lg ( Lig1h),

( 0 , u0 )

at

if

there

exists

that L h u = 0 , Lg h u 0, i = 1, L , 1 .
i
g

Let

smallest

positive

integer

such

R n and u R be compact subsets containing 0 and u0 , respectively. System

(1) is said to have a strong relative degree

degree

in a compact set D = u , if it has relative

at every point ( 0 , u0 ) D . Therefore, system (1) is feedback linearizable and the

mapping () = [1 (), 2 (),Ln ()] , with

j () = Lgj 1h, j = 1, 2,L

has a Jacobian

matrix which is nonsingular for all x () , system (1) can be transformed into a normal
form

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control

340

x&1 = x2
x& = x
3
2
M

x& = f ( x, u )
n
y = x1

where

(2)

T
f ( x, u ) = Lng h and x = 1 () with x = [ x1 , x2 ,L , xn ] . Define the domain of

normal system (2) as D ( x, u ) x ( ); u u .

3. Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via TwoLayer Neural Networks

Now we consider the n th order nonlinear systems of the described form as (2). For the
considered systems in the chapter, we may make the following assumptions.
Assumption 1.

f ( x, u ) / u 0 for all ( x, u ) R .

Assumption 2. f () : R n +1 R , is an unknown continuous function and f ( x, u ) a smooth

function with respect to control input u .
The control objective is: determine a control law, force the output, y , to follow a given
desired output,

xd

with an acceptable accuracy, while all signals involved must be

bounded.

Assumption 3. The desired signals xd (t ) = [ yd , yd(1) ,L , yd( n 1) ], and

bounded, with

X d X d , X d a known positive constant.

Define the tracking error vector as

and a filtered tracking error as

with

X d = [ xdT , yd( n ) ]T are

e = x xd ,

(3)

= [T 1]e ,

(4)

a gain parameter vector selected so that e(t ) 0 as 0. Differentiating (4), the

filtered tracking error can be written as

& = x&n xd( n ) + [0 T ]e.

Define a continuous function

www.intechopen.com

(5)

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

341

= k + xd( n ) [0 T ]e.
k is a positive
[ f ( x, u ) ] u 0 .

where

f ( x, u ) u 0 (Assumption 1), thus,

Considering the fact that

u = 0 ,

we invoke the implicit

f ( x, u ) = 0 ,

= f ( x, u ) holds.

constant. We know

neighborhood of ( x, u ) R , such that

(6)

function theorem (Lang 1983), there exists a continuous ideal control input

= f ( x, u ) may represent ideal control inverse.

Adding and subtracting to the right-hand side of x&n = f ( x, u )

i.e.

& = k + f ( x, u ) .

Considering the following state dependent transformation

of (2), one obtains

x&n = f ( x, u ) k + xd( n ) [0 T ]e ,

and yields

u in

(7)

= x&n , where

(8)
is commonly

referred to as the pseudo-control (Calise & Hovakimyan 2001). Apparently, the pseudocontrol is not a function of the control u but rather a state dependent operator.

u = 0 , from Assumption 1, f ( x, u ) u 0 thus [ f ( x, u )] u 0 .

( x, u ) R , there exists a
function such that f ( x, u ) = 0 holds, i.e. = f ( x, u ) . Therefore, we have

Then,

With the implicit function theorem, for every

= f ( x, u ) .

implicit

(9)

[ f ( x, u )] u 0
and f ( x, u ) is a smooth with respect to control input, u , then, f ( x, u ) defines a local

Furthermore, using inverse function theorem, with the fact that

u = f ( x, ) holds.

diffeomorphism (Slotine & Li 1991), such that, for a neighborhood of

smooth inverse function and

u,

there exists a

If the inverse is available, the control

problem is easy. But this inverse is not known, we can generally use some techniques, such
as neural networks, to approximate it. Hence, we can obtain an estimated function,

u = f 1 ( x, ) . This result in the following equation holding:

where

= f ( x, u ) ,

(10)

may be referred to as approximation pseudo-control input which represents

actual dynamic approximation inverse.

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control

342

control signal, , must be a smooth function. Therefore, in order to satisfy the condition,

Remark 1. According to the above-mentioned conditions, when one designs the pseudowe adopt hyperbolic tangent function, instead of sign function in design of input. This also
makes control signal tend smooth and system run easier. The hyperbolic tangent function
has a good property as follows (Polycarpou 1996) :

0 < tanh( ) ,

(11)

with = 0.2785 , any positive constant. Moreover, theoretically, is approximation

inverse, generally a nonlinear function, but it must be bounded and play a dynamic
approximation role and make system stable. Hence, it represents actual dynamic
approximation inverse.
Based on the above conditions, in order to control the system and make it be stable, we
design the approximation pseudo-control input as follows:

= f ( x, u ) + uad + vr ,

(12)

uad is output of a neural network controller, which adopts

network, vr is robustifying control term designed in stability analysis.
where

Adding and subtracting to the right-hand side of (8), with

= f ( x, u ) , we have

& = k + f ( x, u ) + f ( x, u ) uad vr
= k + % ( x, u, u ) + uad vr ,

where

a two-layer neural

(13)

% ( x, u, u ) = f ( x, u ) f ( x, u ) is error between nonlinear function and its ideal

control function, we can use the neural network to approximate it.

3.1 Neural network-based approximation
A two-layer NN consists of two layers of tunable weights, a hidden layer and an output
layer. Given a > 0 , there exists a set of bounded weights M and N such that the

% C () , with
nonlinear error
layer neural network, i.e.

with

% = M T ( N T xnn ) + ( xnn ) ,

xnn = [1, xdT , eT , ] input vector of NN.

www.intechopen.com

compact subset of R , can be approximated by a two-

(14)

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

Assumption 4. The approximation error

is bounded as follows:

N ,

where
Let

343

(15)

N > 0 is an unknown constant.

and

be the estimates respectively of

and N . Based on these estimates, let

uad be the output of the NN

uad = M T ( N T xnn ).

M% = M M and N% = N N ,
Z% = diag[ M% , N% ] , Z = diag[ M , N ] for

Define

(16)

where we use notations:

Z = diag[ M , N ] ,

convenience. Then, the following inequality

holds:

tr ( Z% T Z ) Z%
The Taylor series expansion of

( N T xnn )

Z%

for a given

2
F

(17)

xnn can be written as:

( N T xnn ) = ( N T xnn ) + ( N T xnn ) N% T xnn + O ( N% T xnn ) 2 ,

:= ( N T xnn ) and denoting

O( N% T xnn ) 2 the
T
T
the following, we use notations: := ( N xnn ) , % := ( N% xnn ) .
with

its Jacobian,

(18)

term of order two. In

With the procedure as Appendix A, the approximation error of function can be written as

M T ( N T xnn ) M T ( N T xnn ) = M% T ( N T xnn ) + M T N% T xnn + ,

and the disturbance term

can be bounded as

xnn M T

+ M N T xnn + M 1 ,

(19)

(20)

where the subscript F denotes Frobenius norm, and the subscript 1 the 1-norm.
Redefine this bound as

( M , N , xnn ) ,

www.intechopen.com

(21)

Adaptive Control

344

where

= max{ M , N

, M 1} and = xnn M T

+ N T xnn + 1 . Notice that

is an unknown coefficient, whereas is a known function.

F

3.2 Parameters update law and stability analysis

Substituting (14) and (16) into (13), we have

& = k + M T ( N T xnn ) M T ( N T xnn ) + vr + ( xnn ).

(22)

Using(19), the above equation can become

& = k + M% T ( N T xnn ) + M T N% T xnn + vr + + .

(23)

hold. If choose the approximation pseudo-control input as Eq.(12), use the following
Theorem 1. Consider the nonlinear system represented by Eq. (2) and let Assumption 1-4
adaptation laws and robust control law

&
M = F ( Nxnn ) k1M ,
&
N = R xnn M T k1 N ,

&
( + 1)
= ( + 1) tanh

( + 1)
vr = ( + 1) tanh

where F = F T > 0, R = RT > 0 are any constant matrices,

design parameters,

k1 > 0 and > 0 are

(24)

scalar

error of , then, guarantee that all signals

is the estimated value of the uncertain disturbance term

= max( , N ) , defining % =

with

in the system are uniformly bounded and that the tracking error converges to a
neighborhood of the origin.
Proof. Consider the following positive define Lyapunov function candidate as

1
1
1
1
L = 2 + tr ( M% T F 1M% ) + tr ( N% T R 1 N% ) + 1% 2
2
2
2
2

(25)

The time derivative of the above equation is given by

% %&
& + tr ( M% T F 1M%& ) + tr ( N% T R 1 N%& ) + 1
L& =

www.intechopen.com

(26)

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

345

Substituting (23) and the anterior two terms of (24) into (26), after some straightforward
manipulations, we obtain

L& = k 2 + [ M% T ( N T xnn ) + M T N% T xnn + ( ) vr + + ]

&
&
% &%
+ tr ( M% T F 1M% ) + tr ( N% T R 1 N% ) + 1
% %& + k tr ( Z% T Z ).
= k 2 + ( ) vr + ( + ) + 1
1
1 % &
2
k + ( ) vr + ( + 1) + % + k1 tr ( Z% T Z ).

(27)

With (4),(6),(12),(16) and the last two equations of (24), the approximation error between
actual approximation inverse and ideal control inverse is bounded by

c1 + c2 + c3 Z%

where

(28)

c1 , c2 , c3 are positive constants.

Using (11) and the last two terms of (24), we obtain

( + 1)
L& k 2 + ( ) ( + 1) tanh

( + 1)
+ ( + 1) % ( + 1) tanh
+ k1 tr ( Z% T Z )

T
2

%
k + ( ) + + + k tr ( Z% Z )

(29)

%
Applying (17),(28) , and

% %

, after completing square, we have the following

inequality
2
L& (k c2 ) + D1 + D2

where D1
Let D3
then

= c1 +

c
k1
1
( Z M + 3 ) 2 , D2 = 2 + .
4
4
k1

= D12 + 4 D2 (k c2 ) + D1 ,

L& 0 holds.

Now define

www.intechopen.com

thus, as long as

D3 [2(k c2 )] ,

(30)

and

k > c2 ,

Adaptive Control

346

= % % , Z = Z%

Z%

(k1Z M + c3 ) , =
k1

1
D3 .
2(k c2 )

(31)

Z M , k1 , k , D1 , D2 , D3 , c2 , c3 are positive constants, as long as k is chosen to be big

enough, such that k > c2 holds, we conclude that , Z and are compact sets.
& is negative outside these compacts set. According to a standard Lyapunov
Hence L
theorem, this demonstrates that % , Z% and are bounded and will converge
Since

to , Z and , respectively. Furthermore, this implies

is bounded and will converge

to a neighborhood of the origin and all signals in the system are uniformly bounded.
3.3 Simulation Study
In order to validate the performance of the proposed neural network-based adaptive control
scheme, we consider a nonlinear plant, which described by the differential equation

x&1 = x2

x&2 = 2 x1 0.02( + x12 ) x2 + u 3 + ( x12 + x22 ) (u ) + tanh(0.2u ) + d

= 0.4 , (u ) = (1 e u ) (1 + e u )
xd = 0.1 [sin(2t ) cos(t )] .

where

and

d = 0.2

(32)

. The desired trajectory

To show the effectiveness of the proposed method, two controllers are studied for
comparison. A fixed-gain PD control law is first used as Polycarpou, (Polycarpou 1996).
Then, the adaptive controller based on NN proposed is applied to the system.

= [1, xdT , eT , ] , and number of hidden layer nodes 25.

(0) = (0), N (0) = (0) . The initial condition of
network is M

Input vector of neural network is xnn

The initial weight of neural

x(0) = [0.1, 0.2]T . The other parameters are chosen as follows:

k1 = 0.01, = 0.1, = 0.01, = 10 , = 2, F = 8I M , R = 5I N , with I M , I N corresponding

controlled plant is

identity matrices.
Fig.1, 2, and 3 show the results of comparisons, the PD controller and the adaptive controller
based on NN proposed, of tracking errors, output tracking and control input, respectively.
These results indicate that the adaptive controller based on NN proposed presents better
control performance than that of the PD controller. Fig.4 depicts the results of output of NN,
norm values of

M , N and

M , N , respectively, to illustrate the boundedness of the estimates of

the control role of NN. From the results as figures, it can be seen that the

learning rate of neural network is rapid, and tracks objective in less than 2 seconds.
Moreover, as desired, all signals in system, including control signal, tend to be smooth.

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

0.05
0
-0.05

Trackingerror

-0.1
-0.15
-0.2
-0.25
-0.3
-0.35
-0.4
-0.45
0

10

15

20

time sec

Fig. 1. Tracking errors: PD(dot) and NN(solid).

0.6

O
utput tracking

0.4

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

10

15

20

time sec

Fig. 2. Output tracking: desired (dash), NN(solid) and PD(dot).

1.5

C
ontrolinput

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5
0

10

15

20

time sec

Fig. 3. Control input: PD (dash), NN(solid)

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
0

10

time sec

Fig. 4. M (dash), N (dot), output of NN(solid)

www.intechopen.com

15

20

347

Adaptive Control

348

4. Decentralized Adaptive Neural Network Control of a Class of Large-Scale

Nonlinear Systems with linear function interconnections
In the section, the above proposed scheme is extended to large-scale decentralized nonlinear
systems, which the subsystems are composed of the class of the above-mentioned non-affine
nonlinear functions. Two schemes are proposed, respectively. The first scheme designs a
RBFN-based adaptive control scheme with the assumption which the interconnections
between subsystems in entire system are bounded linearly by the norms of the tracking
filtered error. In another scheme, the interconnection is assumed as stronger nonlinear
function.
We consider the differential equations in the following form described, and assume the
large-scale system is composed of the nonlinear subsystems:

where

xi R li

x&i1 = xi 2

x&i 2 = xi 3

x& = f ( x , x ,L , x , u ) + g ( x , x ,L , x )
1
2
i
i1
i2
ili
i
i
n
ili
yi = xi1
i = 1, 2,L n,

is the state vector,

xi = [ xi1 , xi 2 ,L , xili ]T , ui R

yi R is the output of the i th subsystem.

fi ( xi , ui ) : R li +1 R

is an unknown continuous function and

(33)

is the input and

implicit and smooth

function with respect to control input ui .

fi ( xi , ui ) / ui 0 for all ( xi , ui ) i R .
gi ( x1 , x2 ,L , xn ) is the interconnection term. In according

Assumption 5.

to the distinctness of the

interconnection term, two schemes are respectively designed in the following.

4.1 RBFN-based decentralized adaptive control for the class of large-scale nonlinear
systems with linear function interconnections
Assumption 6. The interconnection effect is bounded by the following function:

gi ( x1 , x2 ,L , xn ) ij j
n

where

ij

j =1

are unknown coefficients, j is a filtered tracking error to be defined shortly .

www.intechopen.com

(34)

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

The control objective is: determine a control law, force the output,
desired output,

xdi

, to follow a given

, with an acceptable accuracy, while all signals involved must be

bounded.
Define the desired trajectory vector xdi
tracking error

yi

349

= [ ydi , y& di ,L , ydili 1 ]T and X di = ydi , y& di ,L , ydi(li ) ,

T

ei = xi xdi = [ei1 , ei 2 ,L , eili ]T

, thus, the filter tracking error can be

written as

i = [Ti 1]ei = ki ,1ei + ki ,2e&i + L + ki ,l 1ei(l 2) + ei(l 1) ,

i

where the coefficients are chosen such that the polynomial

+ s (li 1) is Hurwitz.

(35)

ki ,1 + ki ,2 s + L + ki ,li 1s (li 2)

Assumption 7. The desired signal xdi (t ) is bounded, so that

X di X di ,

X di is

where

known constant.
For an isolated subsystem, without interconnection function, by differentiating (35), the
filtered tracking error can be rewritten as

&i = x&il xdi( l ) + [0 iT ]ei = fi ( xi , ui ) + Ydi

i

(36)

with

Ydi = xdi(li ) + [0 iT ]ei .

Define a continuous function

where

ki

thus, [ f

i = ki i Ydi

(37)

f ( xi , ui ) ui 0 ,
that i u i = 0 , we invoke the

is a positive constant. With Assumption 5, we know

( xi , ui ) i ] u i 0 .

Considering the fact

neighborhood of ( xi , ui ) i R , such that

i = fi ( xi , ui )

i to

represents ideal control inverse.

Adding and subtracting

obtains

and yields

www.intechopen.com

ui

f ( xi , ui ) i = 0 , i.e. i = fi ( xi , ui ) holds.

implicit function theorem, there exists a continuous ideal control input

the right-hand side of

x&ili = f i ( xi , ui ) + g i

x&ili = f i ( xi , ui ) + g i i ki i Ydi ,

in a

of (33), one

(38)

Adaptive Control

350

&i = ki i + f i ( xi , ui ) + gi i

(39)

In the same the above-discussed manner as equations (9)-(10) , we can obtain the following
equation:

i = fi ( xi , ui ) .

(40)

design the approximation pseudo-control input i as follows:

Based on the above conditions, in order to control the system and make it be stable, we

i = ki i Ydi + uci + vri ,

where

uci

is output of a neural network controller, which adopts a RBFN,

Adding and subtracting i to the right-hand side of (39), with

robustifying control term designed in stability analysis.
we have

where

(41)

vri

is

i = ki i Ydi = fi ( xi , ui ) ,

&i = ki i + % i ( xi , ui , ui ) uci + i i vri + gi ,

(42)

% i ( xi , ui , ui ) = fi ( xi , ui ) f i ( xi , ui ) is error between nonlinear function and its

ideal control function, we can use the RBFN to approximate it.

4.1.1 Neural network-based approximation

n1i and m1i be node number of input layer and

Given a multi-input-single-output RBFN, let

hidden layer, respectively. The active function used in the RBFN is Gaussian

function, Sl ( x) = exp[ 0.5( zi lk ) / k2 ] , l = 1, , n1i , k = 1, , m1i where zi R n1i 1 is input

2

vector of the RBFN,

i R n1i m1i and i R m

1i 1

Based on the approximation property of RBFN,

are the center matrix and the width vector.

% i ( xi , ui , ui ) can be written as

% i ( xi , ui , ui ) = WiT Si ( zi , i , i ) + i ( zi ) ,

(43)

i ( zi ) is approximation error of RBFN, Wi R m 1 .

Assumption 8. The approximation error ( xnn ) is bounded by i Ni , with Ni > 0 is

where

1i

The input of RBFN is chosen as zi = [ xiT , i , i ]T . Moreover, output of RBFN is designed as

an unknown constant.

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

Define

Wi , i , i

uci = WiT Si ( zi , i , i ).

(44)

as estimates of ideal Wi , i , i , which are given by the RBFN tuning

algorithms.
Assumption 9. The ideal values of

where

351

WiM , iM , iM

Wi , i , i

Wi WiM ,

satisfy

are positive constants.

iM ,

and

i iM ,

(45)

denote Frobenius norm and 2-

norm, respectively. Define their estimation errors as

% i = i i , % i = i i .

W%i = Wi Wi ,
Using the notations: Z i

(46)

= diag[Wi , i , i ], Z%i = diag[W%i , % i , % i ], Zi = diag[Wi , i , i ] for

convenience.
The Taylor series expansion for a given

i and i is

Si ( zi , i , i ) = Si ( zi , i , i ) + S i % i + S i% i + O ( % i , % i ) 2

where S i

S k ( zi , i , i ) i ,

i = i , O( %i , % i )2

(47)

S i S k ( zi , i , i ) i evaluated at i = i ,

denotes the terms of order two. We use notations: Si

S%i := Si ( zi , % i , % i ) , Si := Si ( zi , i , i ) .

:= Si ( zi , i , i ),

Following the procedure in Appendix B, it can be shown that the following operation. The
function approximation error can be written as

WiT Si WiT Si = W%iT ( Si S i i S i i ) + WiT ( S i % i + S i% i ) + i (t ),

(48)

The disturbance term i (t ) is given by

i (t ) = WiT ( Si Si ) + WiT ( S i i + S i i ) WiT ( S i i + S i i )

Then, the upper bound of i (t ) can be written as

i (t ) Wi ( S i i

www.intechopen.com

+ S i i

) + Wi T S i

+ Wi T S i

i + 2 Wi 1 ii

(49)

(50)

Adaptive Control

352
where i = max( Wi , i

, i , 2 Wi 1 ) , i = S i i

with 1 1 norm. Notice that

F

+ S i i

+ WiT S i

+ WiT S i

+1 ,

i is an unknown coefficient, whereas i is a known

F

function.
4.1.2 Controller design and stability analysis
Substituting (43) and (44) into (42), we have

&i = ki i + WiT Si WiT Si + i i vri + gi + i ( zi ) ,

(51)

using (48), the above equation can become

&i = ki i + W%iT ( Si S i i S i i ) + WiT ( S i % i + S i% i )

+ i i vri + gi + i ( zi ) + i (t ).

(52)

hold. If choose the pseudo-control input i as Eq.(41), and use the following adaptation

Theorem 2. Consider the nonlinear subsystems represented by Eq. (33) and let assumptions
laws and robust control law

&
Wi = Fi ( Si S i i S i i ) i WiWi i ,

& i = Gi S iT Wi i Wi i i ,

& i = H i S iT Wi i Wi i i ,

i*i
&

i = i ii tanh(
) ii i ,
i

&
di = di ( i2 di di i ) ,

vri = i*i tanh( i i ) + di i

i

www.intechopen.com

(53)

(54)

(55)

(56)

(57)

(58)

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

where

*i = i + 1

matrices,

Fi = FiT > 0, Gi = GiT > 0, H i = H iT > 0

Wi , i , di , i , di and i are

positive design parameters,

value of the uncertain disturbance term i

%i

error,

di > 0 is

= max( i , Ni ) ,

353

are any constant

i is

defining

the estimated

%i = i i

with

used to estimate unknown positive number to shield interconnection

effect, di is its estimated value, with

d%i = di di

estimated error, then, guarantee that all

signals in the system are bounded and the tracking error

ei will converge to a neighborhood

of the origin.
Proof. Consider the following positive define Lyapunov function candidate as

1
1
Li = i2 + tr (W%iT Fi 1W%i ) + tr (%iT Gi 1%i ) + tr (%iT Hi 1%i ) + i1%i 2 + di1d%i2
2
2

(59)

The time derivative of the above equation is given by

&
% %& + 1d% d&%
L&i = i&i + tr (W%iT Fi 1W%i ) + tr(%iT Gi 1%&i ) + tr (%iT Hi 1%&i ) + i1
i i
di i i

(60)

Applying(52) to (60), we have

k + W%iT (Si S i i S ii ) + WiT (S i %i + S i%i )

L&i = i i i

+i i vri + gi + i + i

&
% %& + 1d% d%&
+ tr (W%iT Fi 1W%i ) + tr(%iT Gi 1%&i ) + tr (%iT Hi 1%&i ) + i1
i i
di i i

Substituting the adaptive laws (53), (54) and (55) into (61), and

(61)

( &% ) = ( & ) ,yields

% &% + 1d% d&%

L&i = i [ ki i + i i vri + gi + i + i ] + Wi i tr (Z%iT Zi ) + i1
i i
di i i
ki i2 + i ( i i ) vri i + i gi + i ( ii + Ni )
% %& + 1d% d&%
+ Wi i tr (Z%iT Zi ) + i1
i i
di i i
*
ki i2 + i ( i i ) vri i + i gi + i
i i
% &% + 1d% d&%
+ Wi i tr (Z%iT Zi ) + i1
i i
di i i

www.intechopen.com

(62)

Adaptive Control

354

L&i ki i2 + i ( i i ) + i g i + i i*i ii*i tanh( i i )

Inserting (56) and (58) into the above inequality, we obtain

%i i*i tanh( i i ) ii i di i2
i

2
d% ( d ) + tr ( Z% T Z )

*
= ki i2 + i ( i i ) + i i *i i*i tanh( i i ) + i i %ii
i

d 2 + g + d% d + tr ( Z% T Z )
i

di

i i

Wi

di

Wi

(63)

Using (11), (63) becomes

L&i ki i2 + i ( i i ) + i i i d i i2 + i gi
+ i i%ii + di d%i di + Wi tr ( Z%iT Zi )

(64)

By completing square, we have

g2
L&i k i i2 + i ( i i ) + i i i + i
4di

(65)

+ i i%ii + di d%i di + Wi tr ( Z% iT Z i )

With (41), (44), (53)-(58), approximation error between actual approximation inverse and
ideal control inverse is bounded by

i i c1i + c2i i + c3i Z%i

where

c1i , c2i , c3i are positive constants.

L&i ( ki c2 i ) i 2 + i c1i + c3i Z% i

(66)

)+
i i

g2
+ i + i i%ii + di d%i di + Wi tr ( Z% iT Z i )

4d i

Since

tr ( Z%iT Zi ) Z% i

www.intechopen.com

Zi

Z%i

2
F

(67)

2
2
&
, %ii %i i %i , d%i d%i d%i d i d%i hold, the

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

L&i ( ki c2i ) i 2 + i c1i + c3i Z%i

above inequality can be written as

) + + 4gd

355

i i

+ i i ( %i i %i ) + di ( d%i di d%i ) + Wi ( Z%i

Zi

Z%i )
F

(68)

By completing square for (68), we get

g2
L&i ( ki c2i ) i 2 + c5i i + i i i + i
4d i

= c1i + c4i ,with c4i =

where c5i

i +
2

di
4

di

(
+

Wi

Zi

+ c3i )

(69)

For the overall system, it can be derived that the bound as

n
n

g2
L& = L&i ( ki c2i ) i 2 + c5i i + i i i + i
4d i
i =1
i =1

gi ij j = T i
n

According

to

(34),

j =1

define

(70)

= [ 1 , 2 ,L n ]T

i = [ i1 , i 2 ,L in ]T , K = diag[k1 c21 , k2 c22 ,L , kn c2 n ] , C = [c51 , c52 ,L , c5n ]T

, D=

(
n

i =1

i i ) , the above inequality can be rewritten as

1
i iT + C T + D = T E + C T + D
L& T K
4d i

min ( E ) + C + D

(71)

where E

= K (4di ) 1 i iT , min ( E )

as long as

&
the minimum singular value of E . Then L

ki > c2i and sufficiently large di , E would be positive definite, and

www.intechopen.com

0,

Adaptive Control

356

+ Dmin ( E )

2
min

(E)

%i i , d%i d i , Z% i

Now, we define

di = d%i
Since

Zi

A} , i = %i

, i , di , Wi , c3i

2min ( E )

Wi
1

Wi

%i i ,

d%i d i , Zi = Z%i

Z%i

Wi
1

= A,

Zi

Wi

+ c3i )

Zi

L&

(72)

+ c3i )

are positive constants, we conclude that

and d are compact sets. Hence

F

, Z i

is negative outside these compacts set. According to a

Z%i , %i , d%i

are bounded and will

converge to , Z i , and d , respectively. Furthermore, this implies

standard Lyapunov theorem, this demonstrates that

i

(73)

and

ei

is bounded

and will converge to a neighborhood of the origin and all signals in the system are bounded.
4.1.3 Simulation Study
In order to validate the effectiveness of the proposed scheme, we implement an example,
and assume that the large-scale system is composed of the following two subsystems
defined by

Subsystem

Subsystem

x&11 = x12

2
2
1 : x&12 = x11 + 0.02( x11 ) x12 + u1

+ ( x112 + x122 ) (u1 ) + 0.2 + sin(0.2 x21 )

x&21 = x22

2
2
2 : x&22 = x21 + 0.1(1 + x22 )u2 + tanh(0.1u2 )

+ 0.15u23 + tanh(0.1x11 )

(74)

(75)

where = 0.4 , (u1 ) = (1 eu1 ) (1 + eu1 ) . The desired trajectory xd 11 = 0.1 [sin(2t ) cos(t )] ,

xd 21 = 0.1 cos(2t ) .

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

357

Input vectors of neural networks are zi = [ xiT , i , i ]T , i = 1, 2 , and number of hidden layer

nodes both 8. The initial weight of neural network is Wi (0) = (0) . The center values and the

5 , respectively. The initial

condition of controlled plant is x1 (0) = [0.1, 0.2] x2 (0) = [0, 0] . The other parameters are

widths of Gaussian function are initialized as zeroes, and

T

i = 5, ki = 5 Wi = 0.001, i = 1, di = 1, i = 0.01, di = 0.01 , i = 10 , Fi = 10 IWi ,

chosen as follows:

G = 2 I i , H = 2 I i , with IWi , I i , I i corresponding identity matrices.

Fig.5 shows the results of comparisons of tracking errors of two subsystems. Fig.6 gives
control input of two subsystems, Fig.7 and Fig.8 the comparison of tracking of two
subsystems, respectively. Fig.9 and Fig.10 illustrate outputs of two RBFNs and the change of
norms of W , , , respectively. From these results, it can be seen that the effectiveness of the

proposed scheme is validated, and tracking errors converge to a neighborhood of the zeroes
and all signals in system are bounded. Furthermore, the learning rate of neural network
controller is rapid, and can track the desired trajectory in about 1 second. From the results of
control inputs, after shortly shocking, they tend to be smoother, and this is because neural
networks are unknown for objective in initial stages.
0.4

e11,e21

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4

10
time sec

15

20

Fig. 5. Tracking error of two subsystems: 1(solid), 2(dot)

8
6

control input

4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
0

10
time sec

Fig. 6. Control input of two subsystems: 1(solid), 2(dot)

www.intechopen.com

15

20

Adaptive Control

358

0.6

x11,xd11

0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
0

10
time sec

Fig. 7. Comparison of the tracking of subsystem 1:

15

20

x11 (solid) and xd 11 (dot)

0.6

x21,xd21

0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
0

10
time sec

Fig. 8. Comparison of the tracking of subsystem 2:

15

20

x21 (solid) and xd 21 (dot)

15
10
5
0
-5
-10
0

10
time sec

Fig. 9. Subsystem 1: Output of RBFN (solid), norms of

dot)

www.intechopen.com

W (dash), (dot), (dash15

20

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

359

15

10

-5
0

10
time sec

15

20

W (dash), (dot), (dash-

Fig. 10. Subsystem 2: Output of RBFN (solid), norms of

dot)

4.2 RBFN-based decentralized adaptive control for the class of large-scale nonlinear
systems with nonlinear function interconnections
Assumption 10. The interconnection effect is bounded by the following function:

gi ( x1 , x2 ,L , xn ) j =1 ij (| j |) ,
n

where

ij (| j |)

are unknown smooth nonlinear function,

(76)

j are filtered tracking errors to

be defined shortly .
The control objective is: determine a control law, force the output,
desired output,

xdi

yi

, to follow a given

, with an acceptable accuracy, while all signals involved must be

X di = [ ydi , y& di ,L , ydi(li ) ]T and

Define the desired trajectory vector xdi = [ ydi , y& di ,L , ydili 1 ]T ,

bounded.

tracking error ei = xi xdi = [ei1 , ei 2 ,L , eil ]T , thus, the filter tracking error can be written as
i

i = [Ti 1]ei = ki ,1ei + ki ,2 e&i + L + ki ,l 1ei( l 2) + ei(l 1) ,

i

(77)

where the coefficients are chosen such that the polynomial ki ,1 + ki ,2 s + L + ki ,l 1s (li 2) + s ( li 1)
i
is Hurwitz.
Assumption 11. The desired signal

xdi (t )

is bounded, so that

X di X di , with X di a

known constant.
For an isolated subsystem, without interconnection function, by differentiating (77), the
filtered tracking error can be rewritten as

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control

360

&i = x&il ydi( l ) + [0 iT ]ei = fi ( xi , ui ) + Ydi

i

(78)

= ydi( li ) + [0 iT ]ei .

with Ydi

Define a continuous function

i = ki i + Ydi ,

(79)

ki is a positive constant. With Assumption 5, we know f ( xi , ui ) ui 0 ,

thus, [ f ( xi , ui ) i ] u i 0 . Considering the fact that i u i = 0 , with the implicit

where

f ( xi , ui ) i = 0

ui in

i = fi ( xi , ui ) holds.

Here, i = f i ( xi , ui ) represents an ideal control inverse. Adding and subtracting i to the

function theorem, there exists a continuous ideal control input
of

( xi , ui ) i R

right-hand side of

, such that

x&ili = f i ( xi , ui ) + g i

and yields

a neighborhood

, i.e.

of (33), one obtains

x&ili = fi ( xi , ui ) + gi + i Ydi ki i ,

(80)

&i = ki i + fi ( xi , ui ) + gi + i ,

(81)

Similar to the above-mentioned equation (40), i

= f i ( xi , ui )

holds.

design the approximation pseudo-control input i as follows:

Based on the above conditions, in order to control the system and make it be stable, we

i = ki i Ydi uci W giT S gi (| i |) i vri ,

where

uci

(82)

is output of a neural network controller, which adopts a RBFN,

robustifying control term designed in stability analysis,

Adding and subtracting i to the right-hand side of (81), with i

W S gi (| i |)
T
gi

vri

is

is used to

= ki i + Ydi = f i ( xi , ui ) ,

compensate the interconnection nonlinearity (we will define later).

we have

&i = ki i + % i ( xi , ui , ui ) uci W giT S gi (| i |) i + i i vri + gi ,

www.intechopen.com

(83)

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

where

% i ( xi , ui , ui ) = fi ( xi , ui ) f i ( xi , ui ) is

361

error between the nonlinear function

and its ideal control function, we can use the RBFN to approximate it.
4.2.1 Neural network-based approximation
Based on the approximation property of RBFN,

% i ( xi , ui , ui ) can be written as

% i ( xi , ui , ui ) = WiT Si ( zi ) + i ( zi ) ,
where

Wi

is the weight vector,

S i ( zi )

is Gaussian basis function,

(84)

i ( zi )

is the

R , q the number of input node.

Assumption 12. The approximation error i ( zi ) is bounded by | i | Ni , with Ni > 0 is

approximation error and the input vector zi

an unknown constant. The input of the RBFN is chosen as zi

= [ xiT , i , i ]T . Moreover,

output of the RBFN is designed as

uci = WiT Si ( zi ).
Define

Wi

(85)

as estimates of ideal Wi , which are given by the RBFN tuning algorithms.

Assumption 13. The ideal value of

Wi satisfies

|| Wi || WiM ,

where

WiM is positive known constant, with estimation errors as W%i = Wi Wi

(86)
.

4.2.2 Controller design and stability analysis

Substituting (84) and (85) into (83), we have

&i = ki i + W%iT Si + i i vri + gi W giT S gi (| i |) i + i ( zi )

(87)

hold. If choose the pseudo-control input i as Eq.(82), and use the following adaptation

Theorem 3. Consider the nonlinear subsystems represented by Eq. (33) and let assumptions
laws and robust control law

&
Wi = Fi [ Si i WiWi | i |] ,

www.intechopen.com

(88)

Adaptive Control

362

&
W gi = Gi [ S gi (| i |) i2 giW gi | i |] ,

(89)

i = i [ i (| i | +1) tanh( i i ) ii | i |] ,

(90)

&

vri = i (| i | +1) tanh( i i ) ,

(91)

= FiT > 0 , Gi = GiT > 0 are any constant matrices, i , Wi , gi , i and i are
positive design parameters, is the estimated value of the unknown approximation errors,
where Fi

which will be defined shortly, then, guarantee that all signals in the system are bounded and
the tracking error

ei will converge to a neighborhood of the origin.

Proof. Consider the following positive define Lyapunov function candidate as

2 Li = i2 + W%iT Fi 1W%i + W% giT Gi 1W% gi + i1%i 2

(92)

The time derivative of the above equation is given by

&
&
L&i = i&i + W%iT Fi 1W%i + W% giT Gi 1W% gi + i1%i%i

Applying (87) and(53) to (59) and ( &% )

(93)

= (& ) , we have

L&i = i [ki i + i i vri + gi W giT S gi (| i |) i + i ]

&
&
+ WiW%iT Wi | i | +W% giT Gi 1W% gi + i1%i%i

(94)

Using (76), (94) is rewritten as

n
L&i ki i2 + i ( i i ) vri i + i [ j =1 ij (| j |) W giT S gi (| i |) i ]

&
+ | i | Ni + % % + WiW%iT Wi i + W% giT Gi 1W%& gi
1
i i i

(95)

ij () is a smooth function, there exists a smooth function ij (| j |) , (1 i, j n)

such that ij (| j |) =| j | ij (| j |) hold. Thus, we have

Since

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

363

n
L&i ki i2 + i ( i i ) vri i + i2 [ j =1 ij (| j |) W giT S gi (| i |)]

&
&
+ | i | Ni + % % + WiW%iT Wi | i | +W% giT Gi 1W% gi

(96)

1
i i i

Since the function

di (| i |) can

d i (| i |) = i =1 ij (| i |) is smooth and i is on a compact set,

n

be approximated via a RBFN, i.e.,

bounded approximation error

gi , | gi | gNi

|| WgMi , WgMi > 0 a

boundedness || Wgi

W% gi = Wgi W gi . Then, (96) becomes

di (| i |) = WgiT S gi (| i |) + gi ,
W is estimate of ideal W ,
gi

gi

with
with

known constant, and the estimation errors as

L&i ki i2 + i ( i i ) vri i + i [ ij ( j ) W giT S gi ( i ) i ]

n

j =1

&
&
+ i Ni + i1%i%i + WiW%iT Wi i + W% giT Gi 1W% gi

ki i2 + i ( i i ) vri i + i2W% giT S gi (| i |) + gi i2 + | i | Ni

(97)

&
&
+ i1%i%i + WiW%iT Wi i + W% giT Gi 1W% gi

Substituting the adaptive law (89), we obtain

% %&
L&i ki i2 + i (i i ) vri i + gNi i2 + | i | Ni + i1
i i
+ WiW%iTWi | i | + giW%giTWgi | i |

Define i

(98)

= max( Ni , gNi ) , with i is its estimate, and %i = i i with %i error. (98) can

be rewritten as

L&i ki i2 + i ( i i ) vri i + i ( i2 + i )
&
+ i1%i%i + WiW%iTWi i + giW% giTW gi i

Applying the adaptive law (56) and robust control term (58), we have

www.intechopen.com

(99)

Adaptive Control

364

L&i ki i2 + i ( i i ) i i ( i + 1) tanh( i i ) + i i ( i + 1)

%i i ( i + 1) tanh( i i ) + WiW%iT Wi i + giW% giT W gi i + i%ii i

= ki i2 + i ( i i ) + i i ( i + 1) i i ( i + 1) tanh( i i )
+ WiW%iT Wi i + giW% giT W gi i + i%ii i

(100)

= ki i2 + i ( i i ) + i ( i + 1) i i tanh( i i )
+ W% T W + W% T W + %
Wi

gi

gi

gi

i i i

Using (11), we get

L&i ki i2 + i (i i ) + i (| i | +1)i
% | |
+ WiW%iTWi | i | + giW%giTWgi | i | + i
i i
i

(101)

| i i | c1i + c2i | i |

With (82), (85), and (88)-(91), the approximation error between the ideal control inverse and
the

actual

approximation

inverse

is

bounded

by

+c3i || W%i || + c4i || W% gi ||, with c1i , c2i , c3i , c4i positive constants. Moreover, we utility the

facts, a%

a || a% |||| a || || a% ||2

, (101) can be rewritten as

L&i ( ki c2i ) i 2 + i c1i + c3i W%i + c4i W% gi

Wi W%i ( Wi W%i )

+ i + gi W% gi ( Wgi W% gi

+ % ( % )
i
i i i

W% + ( W + c ) W%
3i
i
i
Wi i

2
2
( ki c2i ) i + c1i i + i i i + i + gi W% gi + ( Wgi + c4i ) W% gi

% 2 + %
i
i
i i
2

) + i i i

(102)

Completing square for (102), we have

L&i ( ki c2i ) i 2 + c8i | i | +i i i

www.intechopen.com

(103)

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

365

c5i = Wi || Wi || +c3i , c6i = gi || Wgi || +c4i , c7i = i 2 4i + c62i 4 gi + c52i 4 Wi

c8i = c1i + i i i + c7 i .

with

For the overall system, we have

n
n
L& = i =1 L&i i =1[ ( ki c2i ) i 2 + c8i | i | +i i i ]

(104)

= [| 1 |,L | n |]T , K = diag[k1 c21 ,L , kn c2 n ] , C = [c81 , c82 ,L , c8 n ]T ,

D = i =1 (i i i ) . (104) can be rewritten as

Now, define
n

L& T K + C T + D min ( K ) || ||2 + || C |||| || + D

(105)

By completing square, yields

C
C
+D
L& min ( K )
+
2min ( K ) 4min ( K )

Clearly,

(106)

L& 0 , as long as ki > c2i , and

A, %i i1 i , W%i c5i 1 Wi , W% gi c6i 1 Wgi

Wi

where

2
( K )] + C [2min ( K )] with min ( K ) the minimum
A = [ C + Dmin ( K )] [4min
2

singular value of K .
Now, we define

Wi , Wgi , i , i , Wi , Wgi , c5i , c6i

, i

W%i , W% gi , %i

W i

1
W%i c5i Wi
Wi , Wgi = W% gi

Wi = W%i

that

A} , i = %i %i i1 i ,

Since

(107)

gi

and

Wgi

are

W% gi c6i gi1 Wgi ,

positive

are compact sets. Hence

L&

constants,

we

(108)

conclude

is negative outside these

, i

W i

Wgi

compacts set. According to a standard Lyapunov theorem, this demonstrates that

and

respectively.

www.intechopen.com

are bounded and will converge to

and

Adaptive Control

366

Furthermore, this implies

ei

is bounded and will converge to a neighborhood of the origin

and all signals in the system are bounded.

4.2.3 Simulation Study
In order to validate the effectiveness of the proposed scheme, we implement an example,
and assume that the large-scale system is composed of the following two subsystems
defined by

Subsystem

Subsystem

x&11 = x12

2
2
2
2
1 : x&12 = x11 + 0.02( x11 ) x12 + u1 + ( x11 + x12 ) (u1 )

+ 0.1|| x2 || exp(0.5 || x2 ||)

x&21 = x22

2
2
3
2 : x&22 = x21 + 0.1(1 + x22 )u2 + tanh(0.1u2 ) + 0.15u2

+ 0.2 || x2 || exp(0.1|| x2 ||)

(109)

(110)

The
desired
trajectory
(u1 ) = (1 e u ) (1 + e u ) .
xd 11 = 0.1 [sin(2t ) cos(t )] , xd 21 = 0.1 sin(2t ) . For the RBFNs as (84), input vectors are

where

= 0.4

chosen as zi

= [ xiT , i , i ]T , i = 1, 2

and number of hidden layer nodes both 8, the initial

weights Wi (0) = (0) and the center values and the widths of Gaussian function zero, and 2,

[ 1 , 2 ]T

respectively. For the RBFNs, which used to compensate the interconnection nonlinearities,
both input vectors are

, number of hidden layer nodes is 8, the initial

weights W gi (0) = (0) , and the center values and the widths of Gaussian function zero,
and

5 , respectively. The initial condition of controlled plant is

x1 (0) = [0.2, 0.2]T ,

x2 (0) = [0.3,0.2]T . The other parameters are chosen as follows: i = 1, ki = 2 ,

Wi = 0.001, i = 0.1, i = 0.01, i = 10

Fi = 10 IWi , G = 2 I gi , with IWi , I gi

corresponding identity matrices. Fig.11 and 12 show the results of comparisons of tracking
errors and control input of two subsystems, Fig.13 and 14 the comparison of tracking of two
subsystems, respectively. Fig.15 and Fig.16 illustrate the norm of the four weights in two
subsystems, respectively. From these results, it can be seen that the effectiveness of the
proposed scheme is validated, and tracking errors converge to a neighborhood of the zeroes
and all signals in system are bounded. Furthermore, the learning rate of neural network
controller is rapid, and can track the desired trajectory in less than 3 seconds. From the
results of control inputs, after shortly shocking, they tend to be smoother, and this is
because neural networks are unknown for objective in initial stages. As desired, though the
system is complex, the whole running process is well.

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

3
u1
u2

2.5
2
1.5

u1,u2

1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
0

10

15

20

time sec

Fig. 12. Control input of subsystem1: u1 , and subsystem 2: u2

xd11
x11

0.8
0.6

x11,xd11

0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4

10

15

20

time sec
Fig. 13. Comparion of tracking of subsystem 1

0.5
xd21
x21

0.4
0.3

x21,xd21

0.2
0.1
0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
0

10

time sec

Fig. 14. Comparion of tracking of subsystem 2

www.intechopen.com

15

20

367

Adaptive Control

368

1.2
NN1
||Wg1||
||W1||

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
0

10

15

20

time sec

Fig. 15. The norms of weights and output of RBFNof subsystem1

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
||Wg2||
||W2||
NN2

-0.6
-0.8
0

10

15

20

time sec

Fig. 16. The norms of weights and output of RBFNof subsystem 2

5. Conclusion
In this chapter, first, a novel design ideal has been developed for a general class of nonlinear
systems, which the controlled plants are a class of non-affine nonlinear implicit function and
smooth with respect to control input. The control algorithm bases on some mathematical
theories and Lyapunov stability theory. In order to satisfy the smooth condition of these
theorems, hyperbolic tangent function is adopted, instead of sign function. This makes
control signal tend smoother and system running easier. Then, the proposed scheme is
extended to a class of large-scale interconnected nonlinear systems, which the subsystems
are composed of the above-mentioned class of non-affine nonlinear functions. For two
classes of interconnection function, two RBFN-based decentralized adaptive control schemes
are proposed, respectively. Using an on-line approximation approach, we have been able to
relax the linear in the parameter requirements of traditional nonlinear decentralized
adaptive control without considering the dynamic uncertainty as part of the
interconnections and disturbances. The theory and simulation results show that the neural
network plays an important role in systems. The overall adaptive schemes are proven to

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

369

guarantee uniform boundedness in the Lyapunov sense. The effectiveness of the proposed
control schemes are illustrated through simulations. As desired, all signals in systems,
including control signals, are tend to smooth.

6. Acknowledgments
This research is supported by the research fund granted by the Natural Science Foundation
of Shandong (Y2007G06) and the Doctoral Foundation of Qingdao University of Science and
Technology.

7. References
Lewis,F.L.; Yesildirek A. & Liu K.(1996). Multilayer neural-net robot controller with
guaranteed tracking performance. IEEE Trans.on Neural Networks, Vol. 7, No.2, Mar.
1996, pp.388-399, ISSN 1045-9227
Yu, W. & Li, X.(2002). Adaptive control with multiple neural networks. Proceeding of the
American Control Conference, pp. 1543-1549, ISBN 0-7803-7298-0, May 8-10,2002
Anchorage, AK
Yesidirek, A. and Lewis,F.L.(1995). Feedback linearization using neural networks.
Automatica, Vol.31, No.11, 1995, pp. 1659-1664, ISSN 0005-1098
Calise,A.J. & Hovakimyan, N. (2001). Adaptive output feedback control of nonlinear system
using neural networks. Automatica, Vol.37, 2001, pp.1201-1211, ISSN 0005-1098
Ge, S. S. ; Hang, C. C. & Zhang, T.(1997). Direct adaptive neural network control of
nonlinear systems. Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pp. 1568-1572,
ISBN 0-7803-3832-4, 1997, Albuqerque, New Mexico
Ioannou, P.A. (1986). Decentralized adaptive control of interconnected systems, IEEE Trans.
on Automatic Control, Vol. 31, Apr. 1986, pp. 291-298, ISSN 0018-9286
Siljak, D.D.(1991). Decentralized control of complex systems. Academic, 1991, ISBN-10:
0126434301, Boston
Fu, L.C. (1992). Robust adaptive decentralized control of robot manipulators. IEEE Trans. on
Automatic Control,Vol.37, 1992, pp.106110, ISSN 0018-9286
Sheikholeslam, S. & Desor, C.A. (1993). Indirect adaptive control of a class of interconnected
nonlinear dynamical systems. Int J Control, Vol. 57, No.3, 1993, pp.742765, ISSN
0020-7179
Wen, C. (1994). Decentralized adaptive regulation. IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, Vol.39,
pp.21632166, ISSN 0018-9286
Tang, Y. ; Tomizuka, M. & Guerrero, G. (2000). Decentralized robust control of mechanical
systems. IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, Vol.45, No.4, 2000, pp. 21632166, ISSN
0018-9286
Spooner, J.T. & Passino, K.M.(1999). Decentralized adaptive control of nonlinear systems
using radial basis neural networks, IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, Vol. 44, No.11,
1999, pp.2050-2057, ISSN 0005-1098
Huang, S.; Tan, K.K. & Lee, T.H. (2003). Decentralized control design for large-scale systems
with strong interconnections using neural networks, IEEE Trans. on Automatic
Control, Vol.48, No.5, 2003, pp. 805-810, ISSN 0018-9286

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control

370

Huang, S.N. & Tan, K.K. (2006). Nonlinear adaptive control of interconnected systems using
neural networks. IEEE Trans Neural Networks, Vol.17, No.1, 2006, pp.243246,
ISSN 1045-9227
Nardi, F. & Hovakimyan, N.(2006). Decentralized control of largescale systems using single
hidden layer neural networks. Proceedings of the American control conference,
pp.31233127, ISBN 0-7803-6495-3, June 2001,Arilington
Huang, S.N. & Tan, K.K. (2005). Decentralized control of a class of large-scale nonlinear
systems using neural networks. Automatica, Vol.41, 2005, pp.16451649, ISSN 00051098
Ge, S. S. ; Hang, C. C. & Zhang, T.(1998). Nonlinear adaptive control using neural networks
and its application to CSTR systems. Journal of Process Control, Vol.9, 1998, pp.313323, ISSN 0959-1524
Tsinias, J. & Kalouptsidis,N.(1983). Invertibility of nonlinear analytic single-input systems,
IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, Vol.28, No. 9, 1983, pp. 931 933, ISSN 0018-9286
Lang, S. (1983). Real Analysis, Reading, ISBN-10: 0201141795, MA: Addison-Wesley, Reading
Slotine, J.-J. E. & Li, W.P. (1991). Applied Nonlinear Control, Englewood Cliffs, ISBN-10:
0130408905, NJ: Prentice Hall
Polycarpou, M.M.(1996). Stable adaptive neural control scheme for nonlinear system, IEEE
Trans. on Automatic Control, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1996, pp.447-451, ISSN 0018-9286

Appendix A
As Eq.(19), the approximation error of function can be written as

M T M T = M T M T + M T M T = M T ( ) + M% T
Substituting (18) into the above equation, we have

M T ( ) + M% T
= M% T [ + N% T xnn + O( N% T xnn )2 ] + M T [ N% T xnn + O( N% T xnn )2 ]
= M% T + M% T N% T x + M T N% T x + M T O( N% T x )2

= M% T + M% T N T xnn M% T N T xnn + M T N% T xnn + M T O( N% T xnn )2

= M% T ( N T x ) + M T N% T x + M% T N T x + M T O( N% T x )2
nn

nn

nn

nn

Define that

= M% T NT xnn + M T O(N% T xnn )2

www.intechopen.com

nn

nn

nn

Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks

371

so that

M T M T = M% T ( N T xnn ) + M T N% T xnn +
Thus,

= M T M T M% T ( N T xnn ) M T N% T xnn

= M T M T + M% T N T xnn M T N% T xnn
= M T ( ) + M T N T x M T N T x M T N% T x

= M ( ) + M N xnn M N xnn
nn

nn

nn

Appendix B
Using (46) and (47), the function approximation error can be written as

WiT Si WiT Si = WiT Si WiT Si + WiT Si WiT Si = W%iT Si + WiT S%i

= W%iT [Si + S i %i + S i%i + O(%i ,%i )2 ] + WiT [Si + S i %i + S i%i + O(%i ,%i )2 Si ]

= W%iT Si + W%iT (S i %i + S i%i ) + W%iT O(%i ,%i )2 + WiT (S i %i + S i%i ) + WiT O(%i ,%i )2

= W%iT Si + W%iT [S i (i i ) + S i ( i i )] + WiT (S i %i + S i%i ) + WiT O(%i ,%i )2

= W%iT (Si S i i S ii ) + W%iT (S i i + S i i ) + WiT (S i %i + S i%i ) + WiT O(%i ,%i )2

= W%iT (Si S i i S ii ) + WiT (S i %i + S i%i ) + i (t ).
define as

i (t) = W%iT (S i i + S i i ) +WiT O(%i ,%i )2

Thus,

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control

372

i (t ) = W%iT Si + WiT S%i W%iT (Si S i i S ii ) WiT (S i %i + S i%i )

= W%iT S%i + WiT S%i + W%iT (S i i + S ii ) WiT (S i %i + S i%i )
= WiT S%i + W%iT (S i i + S ii ) WiT (S i %i + S i%i )
= WiT S%i + WiT (S i i + S ii ) WiT (S i i + S i i )

www.intechopen.com

Adaptive Control

Edited by Kwanho You

ISBN 978-953-7619-47-3
Hard cover, 372 pages
Publisher InTech

Published online 01, January, 2009

Published in print edition January, 2009

Adaptive control has been a remarkable field for industrial and academic research since 1950s. Since more
and more adaptive algorithms are applied in various control applications, it is becoming very important for
practical implementation. As it can be confirmed from the increasing number of conferences and journals on
adaptive control topics, it is certain that the adaptive control is a significant guidance for technology
development.The authors the chapters in this book are professionals in their areas and their recent research
results are presented in this book which will also provide new ideas for improved performance of various
control application problems.

How to reference

In order to correctly reference this scholarly work, feel free to copy and paste the following:
Zhao Tong (2009). Adaptive Control for a Class of Non-affine Nonlinear Systems via Neural Networks,
Adaptive Control, Kwanho You (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-7619-47-3, InTech, Available from:
http://www.intechopen.com/books/adaptive_control/adaptive_control_for_a_class_of_nonaffine_nonlinear_systems_via_neural_networks

InTech Europe

University Campus STeP Ri

Slavka Krautzeka 83/A
51000 Rijeka, Croatia
Phone: +385 (51) 770 447
Fax: +385 (51) 686 166
www.intechopen.com

InTech China

Unit 405, Office Block, Hotel Equatorial Shanghai

No.65, Yan An Road (West), Shanghai, 200040, China
Phone: +86-21-62489820
Fax: +86-21-62489821