On the ill-conditioning of subspace identification with inputs

There is experimental evidence that the performance of standard subspace algorithms from the literature (e.g. the N4SID method) may be surprisingly poor in certain experimental conditions. This happens typically when the past signals (past inputs and outputs) and future input spaces are nearly parallel. In this paper we argue that the poor behavior may be attributed to a form of ill-conditioning of the underlying multiple regression problem, which may occur for nearly parallel regressors. An elementary error analysis of the subspace identification problem, shows that there are two main possible causes of ill-conditioning. The first has to do with near collinearity of the state and future input subspaces. The second has to do with the dynamical structure of the input signal and may roughly be attributed to ''lack of excitation''. Stochastic realization theory constitutes a natural setting for analyzing subspace identification methods. In this setting, we undertake a comparative study of three widely used subspace methods (N4SID, Robust N4SID and PO-MOESP). The last two methods are proven to be essentially equivalent and the relative accuracy, regarding the estimation of the (A,C) parameters, is shown to be the same.

[1]  Michel Gevers,et al.  On jointly stationary feedback-free stochastic processes , 1982 .

[2]  G. Stewart,et al.  Matrix Perturbation Theory , 1990 .

[3]  Giorgio Picci,et al.  Realization of stochastic systems with exogenous inputs and subspace identification methods , 1999, Autom..

[4]  Anders Lindquist,et al.  Canonical correlation analysis, approximate covariance extension, and identification of stationary time series , 1996, Autom..

[5]  Giorgio Picci,et al.  Oblique Splitting Subspaces and Stochastic Realization with Inputs , 1997 .

[6]  Michel Verhaegen,et al.  Identification of the deterministic part of MIMO state space models given in innovations form from input-output data , 1994, Autom..

[7]  Bo Wahlberg,et al.  On Consistency of Subspace Methods for System Identification , 1998, Autom..

[8]  M. M. Siddiqui Stationary Random Processes. Yu. A. Rozanov (translated from Russian by A. Feinstein). San Francisco: Holden-Day, 1967, 211 pp. $10.95. , 1968 .

[9]  B. Moor,et al.  Subspace identification for linear systems , 1996 .

[10]  Manfred Deistler,et al.  Statistical analysis of novel subspace identification methods , 1996, Signal Process..

[11]  Alessandro Chiuso,et al.  Error Analysis of Certain Subspace Methods , 2000 .

[12]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  Some facts about the choice of the weighting matrices in Larimore type of subspace algorithms , 2002, Autom..

[13]  G. Stewart Collinearity and Least Squares Regression , 1987 .

[14]  Giorgio Picci,et al.  Stochastic realization with exogenous inputs and 'subspace-methods' identification , 1996, Signal Process..

[15]  Gene H. Golub,et al.  Matrix computations , 1983 .

[16]  J. L. B. Cooper Toeplitz Forms and their Applications. By Ulf Grenander and Gabor Szegö. Pp. vii, 245, $6.00. 1958. California Monographs in Mathematical Science, 2, (University of California Press) , 1959 .

[17]  Alessandro Chiuso,et al.  Comparison of Two Subspace Identification Methods for Combined Deterministic-Stochastic System: Part 2 , 2000 .

[18]  E. J. Hannan,et al.  Unit canonical correlations between future and past , 1988 .

[19]  Dietmar Bauer,et al.  Comparing the CCA Subspace Method to Pseudo Maximum Likelihood Methods in the case of No Exogenous Inputs , 2005 .

[20]  P. Van Overschee,et al.  Subspace algorithms for the stochastic identification problem , 1991 .

[21]  U. Desai,et al.  A transformation approach to stochastic model reduction , 1984 .

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

[23]  Alessandro Chiuso,et al.  Numerical conditioning and asymptotic variance of subspace estimates , 2004, Autom..

[24]  A. Chiuso,et al.  The asymptotic variance of subspace estimates , 2004 .

[25]  David A. Belsley,et al.  Conditioning Diagnostics: Collinearity and Weak Data in Regression , 1991 .

[26]  B. Wahlberg,et al.  Counterexample to General Consistency of Subspace System Identification Methods , 1997 .

[27]  A. Chiuso,et al.  Subspace identification by orthogonal decomposition , 1999 .

[28]  M. Deistler,et al.  On the Impact of Weighting Matrices in Subspace Algorithms , 2000 .

[29]  U. Desai,et al.  A realization approach to stochastic model reduction , 1985 .

[30]  Bart De Moor,et al.  Subspace algorithms for the stochastic identification problem, , 1993, Autom..

[31]  Bart De Moor,et al.  N4SID: Subspace algorithms for the identification of combined deterministic-stochastic systems , 1994, Autom..

[32]  Dietmar Bauer,et al.  Analysis of the asymptotic properties of the MOESP type of subspace algorithms , 2000, Autom..

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

[34]  P. Caines,et al.  Estimation, Identification and Feedback , 1976 .