ROBUST IDENTIFICATION OF PROCESS MODELS FROM PLANT DATA

A precursor to any advanced control solution is the step of obtaining an accurate model of the process. Suitable models can be obtained from phenomenological reasoning, analysis of plant data or a combination of both. Here, we will focus on the problem of estimating (or calibrating) models from plant data. A key goal is to achieve robust identification. By robust we mean that small errors in the hypotheses should lead to small errors in the estimated models. We argue that, in some circumstances, it is essential that special precautions, including discarding some part of the data, be taken to ensure that robustness is preserved. We present several practical case studies to illustrate the results.

[1]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Identifiability of errors in variables dynamic systems , 2008, Autom..

[2]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Relative error issues in sampled data models , 2008 .

[3]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Identifiability of EIV Dynamic Systems with Non-Stationary Data , 2008 .

[4]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Application of Non-stationary EIV Methods to Transient Electromagnetic Mineral Exploration , 2008 .

[5]  Torsten Söderström,et al.  Errors-in-variables methods in system identification , 2018, Autom..

[6]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Errors-in-variables problems in transient electromagnetic mineral exploration , 2007, 2007 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[7]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Choosing Between Open- and Closed-Loop Experiments in Linear System Identification , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[8]  G.C. Goodwin,et al.  A Receding Horizon Algorithm to Generate Binary Signals with a Prescribed Autocovariance , 2007, 2007 American Control Conference.

[9]  Juan C. Agüero,et al.  On the Optimality of Binary-Open-Loop Experiments to Identify Hammerstein Systems , 2007, 2007 American Control Conference.

[10]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Optimal experiment design with diffuse prior information , 2007, 2007 European Control Conference (ECC).

[11]  G. Goodwin,et al.  Insights into the zero dynamics of sampled-data models for linear and nonlinear stochastic systems , 2007, 2007 European Control Conference (ECC).

[12]  G. Goodwin,et al.  Frequency domain identification of MIMO state space models using the EM algorithm , 2007, 2007 European Control Conference (ECC).

[13]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Robust optimal experiment design for system identification , 2007, Autom..

[14]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  On the Optimality of Open and Closed Loop Experiments in System Identification , 2006, Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[15]  G. Goodwin,et al.  SAMPLED-DATA MODELS FOR STOCHASTIC NONLINEAR SYSTEMS , 2006 .

[16]  J. Schoukens,et al.  ML IDENTIFICATION OF CLOSED-LOOP SYSTEMS IN A SPECIFIED FREQUENCY BAND , 2005 .

[17]  Yuichi Mori,et al.  Handbook of Computational Statistics , 2004 .

[18]  G.C. Goodwin,et al.  Virtual closed loop identification: a subspace approach , 2004, 2004 43rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37601).

[19]  B. Ripley,et al.  Robust Statistics , 2018, Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics.

[20]  Naim A. Kheir,et al.  Control system design , 2001, Autom..

[21]  M. Naumović.  Sampling in Digital Signal Processing and Control , 2001 .

[22]  D. Brillinger.  Time series - data analysis and theory , 1981, Classics in applied mathematics.

[23]  Robert L. Kosut,et al.  Iterative Adaptive Control: Windsurfing with Confidence , 2001 .

[24]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  Closed-loop identification revisited , 1999, Autom..

[25]  William Moran,et al.  Sampling zeros and the Euler-Frobenius polynomials , 1997, Proceedings of the 36th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[26]  L. Ljung,et al.  Frequency Domain Maximum Likelihood Identification , 1997 .

[27]  S. Morrell,et al.  Mineral comminution circuits: their operation and optimisation , 1996 .

[28]  Michael Jackson,et al.  Optimal Design of Experiments , 1994 .

[29]  Lennart Ljung.  Some results on identifying linear systems using frequency domain data , 1993, Proceedings of 32nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[30]  Naresh K. Sinha,et al.  Robust Identification of Continuous-Time Systems From Sampled Data , 1993 .

[31]  Brian D. O. Anderson,et al.  A new approach to adaptive robust control , 1993 .

[32]  Robert L. Kosut,et al.  Adaptive robust control: online learning , 1991, [1991] Proceedings of the 30th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[33]  Robert L. Kosut.  Adaptive Robust Control: On-Line Learning , 1991 .

[34]  Graham C. Goodwin,et al.  Digital control and estimation : a unified approach , 1990 .

[35]  D. I. Hoyer,et al.  The high-intensity nutating mill — A batch ball milling simulator , 1990 .

[36]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  System Identification: Theory for the User , 1987 .

[37]  P. Robinson.  On the errors-in-variables problem for time series , 1986 .

[38]  Werner A. Stahel,et al.  Robust Statistics: The Approach Based on Influence Functions , 1987 .

[39]  Karl Johan Åström,et al.  Zeros of sampled systems , 1980, 1980 19th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control including the Symposium on Adaptive Processes.

[40]  D.G. Dudley,et al.  Dynamic system identification experiment design and data analysis , 1979, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[41]  D. Brillinger.  Fourier analysis of stationary processes , 1974 .

[42]  P. Robinson,et al.  Stochastic difference equations with non-integral differences , 1974, Advances in Applied Probability.

[43]  R. Engle.  Band Spectrum Regression , 1974 .

[44]  E. Hannan,et al.  Lagged Regression with Unknown Lags , 1973 .

[45]  E. J. Hannan,et al.  Multiple time series , 1970 .

[46]  G. C. Tiao,et al.  A bayesian approach to some outlier problems. , 1968, Biometrika.

[47]  M. Siotani.  Some applications of Loewner's ordering on symmetric matrices , 1967 .

[48]  S. W..  On Some Key Issues in the Windsurfer Approach to Adaptive Robust Control , .