scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Bernhard Maschke

Bio: Bernhard Maschke is an academic researcher from Claude Bernard University Lyon 1. The author has contributed to research in topics: Hamiltonian system & Hamiltonian (control theory). The author has an hindex of 38, co-authored 231 publications receiving 9623 citations. Previous affiliations of Bernhard Maschke include University of Twente & Conservatoire national des arts et métiers.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A new PBC theory is developed which extends to a broader class of systems the aforementioned energy-balancing stabilization mechanism and the structure invariance and considers instead port-controlled Hamiltonian models, which result from the network modelling of energy-conserving lumped-parameter physical systems with independent storage elements, and strictly contain the class of EL models.

1,444 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors show that standard PBC is stymied by the presence of unbounded energy dissipation, hence it is applicable only to systems that are stabilizable with passive controllers.
Abstract: Energy is one of the fundamental concepts in science and engineering practice, where it is common to view dynamical systems as energy-transformation devices. This perspective is particularly useful in studying complex nonlinear systems by decomposing them into simpler subsystems that, upon interconnection, add up their energies to determine the full system's behavior. The action of a controller may also be understood in energy terms as another dynamical system. The control problem can then be recast as finding a dynamical system and an interconnection pattern such that the overall energy function takes the desired form. This energy-shaping approach is the essence of passivity-based control (PBC), a controller design technique that is very well known in mechanical systems. Our objectives in the article are threefold. First, to call attention to the fact that PBC does not rely on some particular structural properties of mechanical systems, but hinges on the more fundamental (and universal) property of energy balancing. Second, to identify the physical obstacles that hamper the use of standard PBC in applications other than mechanical systems. In particular, we show that standard PBC is stymied by the presence of unbounded energy dissipation, hence it is applicable only to systems that are stabilizable with passive controllers. Third, to revisit a PBC theory that has been developed to overcome the dissipation obstacle as well as to make the incorporation of process prior knowledge more systematic. These two important features allow us to design energy-based controllers for a wide range of physical systems.

865 citations

Book
15 Aug 2000
TL;DR: Dissipative Systems Analysis and Control (second edition) as mentioned in this paper presents a fully revised and expanded treatment of dissipative systems theory, constituting a self-contained, advanced introduction for graduate students, researchers and practising engineers.
Abstract: Dissipative Systems Analysis and Control (second edition) presents a fully revised and expanded treatment of dissipative systems theory, constituting a self-contained, advanced introduction for graduate students, researchers and practising engineers. It examines linear and nonlinear systems with examples of both in each chapter; some infinite-dimensional examples are also included. Throughout, emphasis is placed on the use of the dissipative properties of a system for the design of stable feedback control laws. The theory is substantiated by experimental results and by reference to its application in illustrative physical cases (Lagrangian and Hamiltonian systems and passivity-based and adaptive controllers are covered thoroughly). The second edition is substantially reorganized both to accommodate new material and to enhance its pedagogical properties. Some of the changes introduced are: * Complete proofs of the main theorems and lemmas. * The Kalman-Yakubovich-Popov Lemma for non-minimal realizations, singular systems, and discrete-time systems (linear and nonlinear). * Passivity of nonsmooth systems (differential inclusions, variational inequalities, Lagrangian systems with complementarity conditions). * Sections on optimal control and H-infinity theory. * An enlarged bibliography with more than 550 references, and an augmented index with more than 500 entries. * An improved appendix with introductions to viscosity solutions, Riccati equations and some useful matrix algebra.

609 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a Hamiltonian formulation of classes of distributed-parameter systems is presented, which incorporates the energy flow through the boundary of the spatial domain of the system, and which allows to represent the system as a boundary control Hamiltonian system.

469 citations


Cited by
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1996
TL;DR: A review of the collected works of John Tate can be found in this paper, where the authors present two volumes of the Abel Prize for number theory, Parts I, II, edited by Barry Mazur and Jean-Pierre Serre.
Abstract: This is a review of Collected Works of John Tate. Parts I, II, edited by Barry Mazur and Jean-Pierre Serre. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 2016. For several decades it has been clear to the friends and colleagues of John Tate that a “Collected Works” was merited. The award of the Abel Prize to Tate in 2010 added impetus, and finally, in Tate’s ninety-second year we have these two magnificent volumes, edited by Barry Mazur and Jean-Pierre Serre. Beyond Tate’s published articles, they include five unpublished articles and a selection of his letters, most accompanied by Tate’s comments, and a collection of photographs of Tate. For an overview of Tate’s work, the editors refer the reader to [4]. Before discussing the volumes, I describe some of Tate’s work. 1. Hecke L-series and Tate’s thesis Like many budding number theorists, Tate’s favorite theorem when young was Gauss’s law of quadratic reciprocity. When he arrived at Princeton as a graduate student in 1946, he was fortunate to find there the person, Emil Artin, who had discovered the most general reciprocity law, so solving Hilbert’s ninth problem. By 1920, the German school of algebraic number theorists (Hilbert, Weber, . . .) together with its brilliant student Takagi had succeeded in classifying the abelian extensions of a number field K: to each group I of ideal classes in K, there is attached an extension L of K (the class field of I); the group I determines the arithmetic of the extension L/K, and the Galois group of L/K is isomorphic to I. Artin’s contribution was to prove (in 1927) that there is a natural isomorphism from I to the Galois group of L/K. When the base field contains an appropriate root of 1, Artin’s isomorphism gives a reciprocity law, and all possible reciprocity laws arise this way. In the 1930s, Chevalley reworked abelian class field theory. In particular, he replaced “ideals” with his “idèles” which greatly clarified the relation between the local and global aspects of the theory. For his thesis, Artin suggested that Tate do the same for Hecke L-series. When Hecke proved that the abelian L-functions of number fields (generalizations of Dirichlet’s L-functions) have an analytic continuation throughout the plane with a functional equation of the expected type, he saw that his methods applied even to a new kind of L-function, now named after him. Once Tate had developed his harmonic analysis of local fields and of the idèle group, he was able prove analytic continuation and functional equations for all the relevant L-series without Hecke’s complicated theta-formulas. Received by the editors September 5, 2016. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 01A75, 11-06, 14-06. c ©2017 American Mathematical Society

2,014 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper presents control designs for single-input single-output (SISO) nonlinear systems in strict feedback form with an output constraint, and explores the use of an Asymmetric Barrier Lyapunov Function as a generalized approach that relaxes the requirements on the initial conditions.

1,999 citations

01 Nov 1981
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors studied the effect of local derivatives on the detection of intensity edges in images, where the local difference of intensities is computed for each pixel in the image.
Abstract: Most of the signal processing that we will study in this course involves local operations on a signal, namely transforming the signal by applying linear combinations of values in the neighborhood of each sample point. You are familiar with such operations from Calculus, namely, taking derivatives and you are also familiar with this from optics namely blurring a signal. We will be looking at sampled signals only. Let's start with a few basic examples. Local difference Suppose we have a 1D image and we take the local difference of intensities, DI(x) = 1 2 (I(x + 1) − I(x − 1)) which give a discrete approximation to a partial derivative. (We compute this for each x in the image.) What is the effect of such a transformation? One key idea is that such a derivative would be useful for marking positions where the intensity changes. Such a change is called an edge. It is important to detect edges in images because they often mark locations at which object properties change. These can include changes in illumination along a surface due to a shadow boundary, or a material (pigment) change, or a change in depth as when one object ends and another begins. The computational problem of finding intensity edges in images is called edge detection. We could look for positions at which DI(x) has a large negative or positive value. Large positive values indicate an edge that goes from low to high intensity, and large negative values indicate an edge that goes from high to low intensity. Example Suppose the image consists of a single (slightly sloped) edge:

1,829 citations