On the micciancio-voulgaris algorithm to solve the long-horizon direct MPC optimization problem

It is widely accepted that model predictive control (MPC) with long prediction horizons yields, in general, a better performance than with short horizons. In the context of power electronic systems, the main advantages include improved closed-loop stability and lower current distortion per switching frequency. A shortcoming of MPC with long prediction horizons is the computational burden associated with solving the optimization problem in real time, which limits the minimum possible sampling interval. The solution to the MPC optimization problem is a polyhedral partition of the state-space. Pre-processing of the state-space and storing representative information thereof offline assists in reducing the online computational burden. The problem structure is a special case in the form of a truncated lattice. Exploiting this characteristic enables representation of the partitioned space to be is stored as a minimal set of Voronoi relevant vectors describing the basic Voronoi cell of a lattice. We evaluate the algorithm proposed by Micciancio and Voulgaris known as the MV-algorithm to solve the closest vector problem with pre-processing (CVPP). The performance of the algorithm is evaluated in a simulated three-level neutral point clamped (NPC) voltage source inverter with an RL load.

[1]  Daniele Micciancio,et al.  A Deterministic Single Exponential Time Algorithm for Most Lattice Problems Based on Voronoi Cell Computations , 2013, SIAM J. Comput..

[2]  Daniele Micciancio,et al.  The hardness of the closest vector problem with preprocessing , 2001, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[3]  Georges Voronoi Nouvelles applications des paramètres continus à la théorie des formes quadratiques. Deuxième mémoire. Recherches sur les parallélloèdres primitifs. , 1908 .

[4]  T. Geyer,et al.  Computationally efficient sphere decoding for long-horizon direct model predictive control , 2016, 2016 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE).

[5]  Tobias Geyer,et al.  ITERATIVE SLICING AS SOLUTION TO THE MODEL PREDIC- TIVE CONTROL PROBLEM OF A THREE-LEVEL INVERTER , 2017 .

[6]  Daniel E. Quevedo,et al.  Performance of Multistep Finite Control Set Model Predictive Control for Power Electronics , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics.

[7]  Ravi Kannan,et al.  Minkowski's Convex Body Theorem and Integer Programming , 1987, Math. Oper. Res..

[8]  Meir Feder,et al.  Finding the Closest Lattice Point by Iterative Slicing , 2007, ISIT.

[9]  Daniel E. Quevedo,et al.  Fast multistep finite control set model predictive control for transient operation of power converters , 2016, IECON 2016 - 42nd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society.

[10]  Alexander Vardy,et al.  Closest point search in lattices , 2002, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[11]  G. Goodwin,et al.  Finite constraint set receding horizon quadratic control , 2004 .

[12]  Daniel E. Quevedo,et al.  Predictive control in power electronics and drives: Basic concepts, theory, and methods , 2014 .

[13]  Daniel Dadush,et al.  Short Paths on the Voronoi Graph and Closest Vector Problem with Preprocessing , 2014, SODA.

[14]  Michael E. Pohst,et al.  On the computation of lattice vectors of minimal length, successive minima and reduced bases with applications , 1981, SIGS.