Identification of Parameterized Gray-Box State-Space Systems: From a Black-Box Linear Time-Invariant Representation to a Structured One

While determining the order as well as the matrices of a black-box linear state-space model is now an easy problem to solve, it is well-known that the estimated (fully parameterized) state-space matrices are unique modulo a non-singular similarity transformation matrix. This could have serious consequences if the system being identified is a real physical system. Indeed, if the true model contains physical parameters, then the identified system could no longer have the physical parameters in a form that can be extracted easily. By assuming that the system has been identified consistently in a fully parameterized form, the question addressed in this paper then is how to recover the physical parameters from this initially estimated black-box form. Two solutions to solve such a parameterization problem are more precisely introduced. First, a solution based on a null-space-based reformulation of a set of equations arising from the aforementioned similarity transformation problem is considered. Second, an algorithm dedicated to nonsmooth optimization is presented to transform the initial fully parameterized model into the structured state-space parameterization of the system to be identified. A specific constraint on the similarity transformation between both system representations is added to avoid singularity. By assuming that the physical state-space form is identifiable and the initial fully parameterized model is consistent, it is proved that the global solutions of these two optimization problems are unique. The proposed algorithms are presented, along with an example of a physical system.

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

[2]  Christoph Helmberg,et al.  A spectral bundle method with bounds , 2002, Math. Program..

[3]  Pierre Apkarian,et al.  A Trust Region Spectral Bundle Method for Nonconvex Eigenvalue Optimization , 2008, SIAM J. Optim..

[4]  L.R.J. Haverkamp,et al.  State space identification - Theory and practice , 2001 .

[5]  Marco Lovera,et al.  Continuous-time subspace identification in closed-loop , 2010 .

[6]  Kathrin Klamroth,et al.  Biconvex sets and optimization with biconvex functions: a survey and extensions , 2007, Math. Methods Oper. Res..

[7]  Aude Rondepierre,et al.  A Proximity Control Algorithm to Minimize Nonsmooth and Nonconvex Functions , 2008 .

[8]  V. Verdult,et al.  Filtering and System Identification: A Least Squares Approach , 2007 .

[9]  Naresh K. Sinha,et al.  Modern Control Systems , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[10]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  Handling Certain Structure Information in Subspace Identification , 2009 .

[11]  Charles R. Johnson,et al.  Matrix analysis , 1985, Statistical Inference for Engineers and Data Scientists.

[12]  T. McKelvey Identification of State-Space Models from Time and Frequency Data , 1995 .

[13]  Pablo A. Parrilo,et al.  Initialization of Physical Parameter Estimates , 2003 .

[14]  Brett Ninness,et al.  On Gradient-Based Search for Multivariable System Estimates , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[15]  Eric Walter,et al.  Identification of Parametric Models: from Experimental Data , 1997 .

[16]  Alex Simpkins,et al.  System Identification: Theory for the User, 2nd Edition (Ljung, L.; 1999) [On the Shelf] , 2012, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

[17]  F. Clarke Optimization And Nonsmooth Analysis , 1983 .

[18]  Guillaume Mercère,et al.  Regression techniques for subspace-based black-box state-space system identification: an overview , 2013, ArXiv.

[19]  José A. Ramos,et al.  Exponential data fitting applied to infiltration, hydrograph separation, and variogram fitting , 2006 .

[20]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  Estimate Physical Parameters by Black Box Modeling , 2003 .

[21]  S. Liberty,et al.  Linear Systems , 2010, Scientific Parallel Computing.

[22]  Paulo J. Lopes dos Santos,et al.  Parameter estimation of discrete and continuous-time physical models: A similarity transformation approach , 2010, 49th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[23]  D. Noll A PROXIMITY CONTROL ALGORITHM TO MINIMIZE NONSMOOTH AND NONCONVEX SEMI-INFINITE MAXIMUM EIGENVALUE FUNCTIONS , 2007 .

[24]  Adrian Lewis,et al.  The mathematics of eigenvalue optimization , 2003, Math. Program..

[25]  Michel Verhaegen,et al.  Filtering and System Identification: Frontmatter , 2007 .

[26]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  Perspectives on system identification , 2010, Annu. Rev. Control..

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

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

[29]  J. Willems,et al.  Parametrizations of linear dynamical systems: Canonical forms and identifiability , 1974 .

[30]  K. Schittkowski,et al.  NONLINEAR PROGRAMMING , 2022 .

[31]  Guillaume Mercère,et al.  Identifying second-order models of mechanical structures in physical coordinates: An orthogonal complement approach , 2013, 2013 European Control Conference (ECC).

[32]  Christian Lyzell,et al.  Initialization Methods for System Identification , 2009 .

[33]  M. Overton NONSMOOTH OPTIMIZATION VIA BFGS , 2008 .

[34]  D K Smith,et al.  Numerical Optimization , 2001, J. Oper. Res. Soc..