PLS-based model predictive control relevant identification: PLS-PH algorithm

Abstract Control-relevant identification produces a model by minimizing a cost function that is commensurate with the control cost function. This paper focuses on model predictive control (MPC); thus, a multi-step ahead prediction error cost function is minimized. Numerical optimization algorithms such as Levenberg-Marquardt can be used to minimize the non-linear identification cost function provided the identification data set is not ill-conditioned. A PLS-based line search numerical optimization approach denoted PLS-PH is proposed to tackle the minimization of the identification cost function in case the identification data set is ill-conditioned. PLS-PH fits a MIMO linear model to an identification data set that may be ill-conditioned. Two chemical processes are identified to compare predictive performance of models obtained using Least Squares, Levenberg-Marquardt, and PLS-PH. The two examples show that the models fitted with PLS-PH outperform the other models if the identification data set is ill-conditioned.

[1]  Age K. Smilde,et al.  A comparison of various methods for multivariate regression with highly collinear variables , 2007, Stat. Methods Appl..

[2]  Sirish L. Shah,et al.  Experiment design for MPC relevant identification , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 American Control Conference (IEEE Cat. No.CH37301).

[3]  Paola Gramatica,et al.  The Importance of Being Earnest: Validation is the Absolute Essential for Successful Application and Interpretation of QSPR Models , 2003 .

[4]  Jay H. Lee,et al.  Model predictive control: past, present and future , 1999 .

[5]  R. K. Wood,et al.  Terminal composition control of a binary distillation column , 1973 .

[6]  Harald Martens,et al.  Reliable and relevant modelling of real world data: a personal account of the development of PLS Regression , 2001 .

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

[8]  Michel Gevers A decade of progress in iterative process control design: from theory to practice , 2002 .

[9]  Ilya V. Kolmanovsky,et al.  Predictive energy management of a power-split hybrid electric vehicle , 2009, 2009 American Control Conference.

[10]  Sirkka-Liisa Jämsä Jounela Future trends in process automation , 2007, Annu. Rev. Control..

[11]  S. Shah,et al.  Identification for long-range predictive control , 1991 .

[12]  Sirish L. Shah,et al.  MPC relevant identification––tuning the noise model , 2004 .

[13]  C. de Prada,et al.  NONLINEAR MPC VERSUS MPC USING ON-LINE LINEARISATION — A COMPARATIVE STUDY , 2002 .

[14]  Hyunbo Cho,et al.  Partial least square-based model predictive control for large-scale manufacturing processes , 2002 .

[15]  A. Höskuldsson PLS regression methods , 1988 .

[16]  Si-Zhao Joe Qin,et al.  An overview of subspace identification , 2006, Comput. Chem. Eng..

[17]  Marko Bacic,et al.  Model predictive control , 2003 .

[18]  R. Fletcher Practical Methods of Optimization , 1988 .

[19]  M.H. Nehrir,et al.  Dynamic models and model validation for PEM fuel cells using electrical circuits , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion.

[20]  S. Shah,et al.  A control-relevant identification strategy for GPC , 1992 .

[21]  Yucai Zhu,et al.  Case studies on closed-loop identification for MPC , 2002 .

[22]  Stephen J. Wright,et al.  Numerical Optimization , 2018, Fundamental Statistical Inference.

[23]  S. Joe Qin,et al.  A survey of industrial model predictive control technology , 2003 .

[24]  Philip Thwaites PROCESS CONTROL IN METALLURGICAL PLANTS – FROM AN XSTRATA PERSPECTIVE* , 2007 .

[25]  Sirish L. Shah,et al.  Bias distribution in MPC relevant identification , 2002 .

[26]  J. A. Rossiter,et al.  Modelling and implicit modelling for predictive control , 2001 .