Probabilistic and Set-based Model Invalidation and Estimation Using LMIs

Probabilistic and set-based methods are two approaches for model invalidation, parameter and state estimation. Both classes of methods use different types of data, \ie deterministic or probabilistic data, which allow different statements and applications. Ideally, however, all available data should be used in estimation and model invalidation methods. This paper presents an estimation and model invalidation framework combining set-based and probabilistically uncertain data for polynomial continuous-time systems. In particular, uncertain data on the moments and the support is used without the need to make explicit assumptions on the type of probability densities. The paper derives pointwise-in-time outer approximations of the moments of the probability densities associated with the states and parameters of the system. These approximations can be interpreted as guaranteed confidence intervals for the moment estimates. Furthermore, guaranteed bounds on the probability masses on subsets are derived and allow an estimation of the unknown probability densities. To calculate the estimates, the dynamics of the probability densities of the state trajectories are found by occupation measures of the nonlinear dynamics. This allows the construction of an infinite-dimensional linear program which incorporates the set- and moment-based data. This linear program is relaxed by a hierarchy of LMI problems providing, as shown elsewhere, an almost uniformly convergent sequence of outer approximations of the estimated sets. The approach is demonstrated with numerical examples.

[1]  Stephen Prajna Barrier certificates for nonlinear model validation , 2006, Autom..

[2]  Didier Henrion,et al.  Convex Computation of the Region of Attraction of Polynomial Control Systems , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[3]  J. Doyle,et al.  Robust and optimal control , 1995, Proceedings of 35th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[4]  Pablo A. Parrilo,et al.  Selecting a monomial basis for sums of squares programming over a quotient ring , 2012, 2012 IEEE 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[5]  Daniele Marchisio,et al.  Quadrature Method of Moments for Poly-Disperse Flows , 2007 .

[6]  Biao Huang,et al.  System Identification , 2000, Control Theory for Physicists.

[7]  Neil J. Gordon,et al.  A tutorial on particle filters for online nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian tracking , 2002, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[8]  Abhishek Halder,et al.  Model validation: A probabilistic formulation , 2011, IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference.

[9]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Applications of semidefinite programming , 1999 .

[10]  Mi-Ching Tsai,et al.  Robust and Optimal Control , 2014 .

[11]  Richard D. Braatz,et al.  First-principles and direct design approaches for the control of pharmaceutical crystallization , 2005 .

[12]  Constantine Caramanis,et al.  Bounds on linear PDEs via semidefinite optimization , 2006, Math. Program..

[13]  Dario Piga,et al.  Set-Membership Error-in-Variables Identification Through Convex Relaxation Techniques , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[14]  Emmanuel Trélat,et al.  Nonlinear Optimal Control via Occupation Measures and LMI-Relaxations , 2007, SIAM J. Control. Optim..

[15]  Michael A. Henson,et al.  Model predictive control of continuous yeast bioreactors using cell population balance models , 2000 .

[16]  Petre Stoica,et al.  Decentralized Control , 2018, The Control Systems Handbook.

[17]  P. Seiler,et al.  Simplification Methods for Sum-of-Squares Programs , 2013, 1303.0714.

[18]  Yinyu Ye,et al.  Distributionally Robust Optimization Under Moment Uncertainty with Application to Data-Driven Problems , 2010, Oper. Res..

[19]  Mark M. Tobenkin,et al.  Invariant Funnels around Trajectories using Sum-of-Squares Programming , 2010, 1010.3013.

[20]  D. Bertsimas,et al.  Moment Problems and Semidefinite Optimization , 2000 .

[21]  Melvyn Sim,et al.  Constructing Risk Measures from Uncertainty Sets , 2009, Oper. Res..

[22]  Roberto Tempo,et al.  A probabilistic approach to optimal estimation part I: Problem formulation and methodology , 2012, 2012 IEEE 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[23]  Philipp Rumschinski,et al.  Fault Diagnosis for Polynomial Hybrid Systems , 2011 .

[24]  Roberto Tempo,et al.  A probabilistic approach to optimal estimation - Part II: algorithms and applications , 2012, 2012 IEEE 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[25]  Kwang-Ki K. Kim,et al.  Wiener's Polynomial Chaos for the Analysis and Control of Nonlinear Dynamical Systems with Probabilistic Uncertainties [Historical Perspectives] , 2013, IEEE Control Systems.

[26]  John Doyle,et al.  Model validation: a connection between robust control and identification , 1992 .

[27]  Antonio Vicino,et al.  Optimal estimation theory for dynamic systems with set membership uncertainty: An overview , 1991, Autom..

[28]  Stefan Streif,et al.  Estimation of consistent parameter sets for continuous-time nonlinear systems using occupation measures and LMI relaxations , 2013, 52nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[29]  R. Fox,et al.  Multiphase reacting flows: modelling and simulation , 2007 .

[30]  Roger Ghanem,et al.  A probabilistic construction of model validation , 2008 .

[31]  João Pedro Hespanha,et al.  Approximate Moment Dynamics for Chemically Reacting Systems , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[32]  Richard D. Braatz,et al.  Optimal Experimental Design for Probabilistic Model Discrimination Using Polynomial Chaos , 2014 .

[33]  Abhishek Halder,et al.  Further results on probabilistic model validation in Wasserstein metric , 2012, 2012 IEEE 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).