You are on page 1of 5

3676

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 61, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2016

Large-Scale Dissipative and Passive Control Systems


and the Role of Star and Cyclic Symmetries
Vahideh Ghanbari, Po Wu, and Panos J. Antsaklis

AbstractIn this technical note, symmetries in large-scale dissipative and passive control systems are considered. In the framework of dissipativity and passivity theory, stability conditions
for large-scale systems are derived by categorizing agents into
symmetry groups and applying local control laws under limited
interconnections with neighbors. Building upon previous studies
on stability of (Q, S, R)-dissipative large-scale systems, we show
that for cyclic and star-shaped symmetric systems there exists an
upper bound on the number of subsystems that can be added to
preserve stability of dissipative systems. In cyclic and star-shaped
symmetric systems, the subsystems can be heterogeneous as long
as they satisfy the same dissipative inequalities. Approximate
symmetry with respect to interconnections is also considered and
the robustness of the results is demonstrated.
Index TermsDissipativity, large-scale systems, passivity, stability of nonlinear systems, symmetry.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Symmetry is a basic feature of shapes and graphs and can be found
in many real-world networks, such as the Internet and power grids, as
a result of tree-like or cyclic growth process. Since symmetry is related
to the concept of a high degree of repetitions or regularities, common in
nature, the study of symmetry has been undertaken in many scientific
areas, such as mathematics (Lie groups), quantum mechanics, and
crystallography in Chemistry.
The concept of symmetry has been studied in the classical theory
of dynamical systems. For example, to simplify the analysis and
synthesis of large-scale dynamical systems, it is of interest to consider
smaller symmetric subsystems with simplified dynamics, which may
potentially simplify the analysis in control, planning or estimation [1],
[2]. When dealing with multi-agent systems with various information
constraints and communication protocols, under certain conditions
such systems can be expressed as or decomposed into interconnections
of lower dimensional systems, which may lead to better understanding
of system properties such as stability and controllability [3], [4].
Early research on symmetry in dynamical systems can be found
in [5][7]. Symmetry in the context of distributed systems containing
multiple instances of identical subsystems are studied in [8] and [9],
where the controllability of the entire class of systems was determined
by reducing the model and examining a lower order equivalent class.

Manuscript received April 20, 2015; revised January 30, 2016; accepted
February 3, 2016. Date of publication February 11, 2016; date of current
version October 25, 2016. This work was supported by the National Science
Foundation under Grants CNS-1035655 and CNS-1446288. Recommended by
Associate Editor C. De Persis.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556 USA (e-mail: vghanbar@nd.edu; pwu1@
nd.edu; pantsakl@nd.edu).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TAC.2016.2528824

Different forms of symmetry, such as star-shaped or cyclic symmetry,


result in distinct stability conditions for interconnected systems. We
will also show this in the present technical note using dissipativity
theory.
The notion of dissipativity is a generalization of Lyapunov stability
theory where an energy like quantity associated with a system is
defined to be non-increasing over time [10]. A dissipative system
can store or dissipate generalized energy supplied to the system
without generating surplus energy. The energy is characterized by a
storage function, which is a generalization of a Lyapunov function.
For dissipative systems, the energy can increase, as long as the rate of
increase is bounded by a supply rate, which can be a function of input,
output, state, and time. Electrical circuits and other physical systems
are common examples [10]. Nevertheless, the notion of a generalized
energy storage function, supply rate, and dissipativity can be applied to
general nonlinear systems. Passivity is a special case of dissipativity,
where the supply rate has a special form. When two passive systems
are interconnected in parallel or in feedback configuration, the overall
system remains passive. Thus, passivity may be preserved when largescale systems are put together from components of passive subsystems, which makes the passivity an appealing property in large-scale
systems.
Dissipativity and passivity in systems, together with decomposition
into lower order subsystems have been previously used in the study
of large-scale systems. Lyapunov stability has been studied using
vector Lyapunov functions, and input-output stability results have
been presented for dissipative subsystems [4]. In addition, [11] studied
interconnections of dissipative subsystems as well as special types of
dissipative systems such as finite gain systems, and passive systems.
Ref. [12] generalizes previous results to weighted Lyapunov functions
and gives spectral characterization of the interconnection matrix. The
stability conditions in interconnected passive systems, and the close
relationships between output feedback passivity and L2 stability have
been studied in [13] and [14]. Recently, the use of diagonal stability
in study of passive network systems have been investigated [15].
Moreover, a passivity-based controller for asymptotic stabilization of
interconnected port-Hamiltonian systems has been designed [16]. In
addition, the study of consensus algorithms for multi-agent network
systems based on the graph Laplacian of the networks is represented
in [17].
In the present technical note, first (Q, S, R)-dissipativity of largescale systems are studied as an extension of the results in [11].
Next, stability conditions for large-scale systems consisting dissipative
subsystems are derived by categorizing agents into symmetry groups
and applying local control laws under limited interconnections with
neighbors. Conditions are derived for the maximum number of subsystems that can be added while preserving stability and these results
may be used in the synthesis of large-scale systems with symmetric
interconnections. This technical note mainly focuses on two kinds of
symmetry: star-shaped symmetry and cyclic symmetry. The present
work extends the previous study [18] to additional symmetry cases and
presents new results in the case of (Q, S, R)-dissipativity, passivity,
and approximate symmetries.

0018-9286 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 61, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2016

3677

Fig. 1. Interconnected multi-agent system. Hi1 , . . . , HiN are constant interconnection matrices and Hi is constant local feedback matrix.
Fig. 2. Star-shaped symmetry.

The technical note is organized as follows: In Section II, we introduce a background on dissipativity, passivity and symmetry in dynamical systems. Section III describes stability conditions for dissipative
and passive systems with star-shaped symmetry interconnections.
Section IV discusses stability conditions for dissipative systems with
cyclic symmetry, and finally, the concluding remarks are presented.

ui , yi are input/output with the same dimension (m = p). Let the


linear feedback interconnections be described by
ui = uei

N


Hij yj ,

i = 1, . . . , N

(6)

j=1

II. BACKGROUND AND P RELIMINARIES


Consider a nonlinear system
x(t)

= f (x(t)) + g (x(t)) u(t), y(t) = h (x(t))

(1)

where x(t) X Rn , y(t) Y Rp , u(t) U Rm , and m n.


f (.) Rn , g(.) Rnm and h(.) Rp are continuous functions
where f (0) = 0, h(0) = 0 and f (.) is a locally Lipschitz function. Let
U be an inner product space whose elements are functions f : R R.
Also let 
Um be the space of m-tuples over U, with inner product
y, u = m
i=1 yi , ui .
Definition 1: [10] A dynamical system with supply rate (u, y) is
dissipative if there exists a positive definite storage function V (x) such
that for all t1 < t2

where ui is the input to the subsystem i, yi is its output, uei is an external input, and Hij are constant matrices. The system inputs and outT
T T
] .
puts are stacked as u = [uT1 , uT2 , . . . , uTN ] , y = [y1T , y2T , . . . , yN
Defining a constant interconnection matrix, H = [Hij ], the linear
interconnected system can be represented by
u = ue Hy.

Lemma 1: [11] Let the ith subsystem have finite gain input-output
stable with gain i , for i = 1, . . . , N , and suppose that each subsystem
has only one input and one output. Define = diag{1 , . . . , N } and
A = H, where H can be obtained from (7). Then, if there exists a
diagonal positive definite matrix D such that
D AT DA > 0

t2
(u, y)dt V (x(t2 )) V (x(t1 )) .

(2)

t1

Definition 2: [11] A system is (Q, S, R)-dissipative if the system is


dissipative with respect to the supply rate
 
 T 
Q
S y
y
(3)
(u, y) =
R u
ST
u
where Q Rpp , S Rpm , and R Rmm .
Passivity is a special case of (Q, S, R)-dissipativity, i.e., Q = 0,
S = (1/2)I, and R = 0, where I is the identity matrix.
Let Q = I, S = 0 and R = k2 I, for some fixed positive real
number k. In this case it can be shown that the (3) implies
y T k u T

(4)

where T is the truncated norm, defined via x 2T = x, xT . If (4)


is satisfied, we say that the system is finite gain input-output stable, or
L2 -stable with an upper gain bound of k.
Consider N dissipative subsystems and each subsystem in Fig. 1
has the dynamics
x i = fi (xi ) + gi (xi )ui , yi = hi (xi )

(5)

that satisfies the dissipativity inequality with storage function Vi (x)


and supply rate i (ui , yi ) = yiT Qyi + 2yiT Sui + uTi Rui , where

(7)

(8)

the interconnected system is BIBO stable.


A sufficient condition for the existence of a matrix D, which
satisfies (8) is that the matrix
= [
A
aij ]

(9)

has positive leading principal minors [19], where a


ii = 1 |aii |,
is positive definite in
a
ij = |aij |, i
= j with A = [aij ]. Note that A
this case.
Lemma 2: [12] If there exists a diagonal matrix D > 0 such that the
matrix
= H T DRH + DSH + H T S T D DQ
Q

(10)

> 0, then the network of N interconnected


is positive definite, i.e., Q
(Qi , Si , Ri )-dissipative agents (5), (6) is asymptotically stable.
Note that the existence of a diagonal matrix D > 0 is required in
Lemmas 1 and 2, which links our approach to the diagonal stability
analysis [15].
In this technical note, we consider two types of symmetries, namely
star-shaped symmetry and cyclic symmetry. In a star-shaped symmetry, subsystems do not have interconnections with each other but the
base system has interconnections with all the subsystems. In cyclic
symmetry, subsystems have interconnections with their neighbors and
the base system (see Figs. 2 and 3).

3678

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 61, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2016

Similarly, if the system is extended with N symmetric subsystems,


=
H
and
we have A

A
12
...
...
12

A
0
...
0

21
.
..
..

.
.
A= .
0
.

..

..
..
.
.
.
0

0
...
0
A
21

Fig. 3. Cyclic symmetry.

III. D ISSIPATIVE AND PASSIVE S TAR -S HAPED


S YMMETRIC S YSTEMS
A. Dissipative System With Star-Shaped Symmetric
Dissipative Subsystems
In this section, we use the results from Lemma 1 and consider all
the subsystems as single-input single-output (SISO), i.e. m = p = 1.
Consider the nonlinear system (1) with the linear feedback interconnections (7). The base system (y0 , u0 ) is the starting system, which we
expand about by adding subsystems; (yi , ui ) i = 1, . . . , N denote the
additional subsystems to the base system. For star-shaped symmetry,
we have the matrix of interconnections, H, in the form of

h0
h21

..
H =
.
.
..

h12
h0

h21

0
..
.
0

...
0
..
.

...
...
..

.
0

...

h12
0

..
.

(11)

h0

where block entries of H are feedback scalar gains since we consider each subsystem to be single-input single-output. Thus, the linear feedback interconnections are described by u0 = ue0 h0 y0

N
i=1 h12 yi , ui = uei h21 y0 h0 yi , i = 1, . . . , N .
Theorem 1: Consider a finite gain system extended by N starshaped finite gain symmetric subsystems with symmetric interconnections matrix H. If
N<

(A)
1 21 )
(12 A

(12)

is defined in (9) and and are its minimum and maximum


where A
eigenvalues respectively, then the interconnected system is BIBO
stable.
Proof: When the interconnected system is extended with one

ii = 1 |
ij ], where
a
aii |,
subsystem, we have the new matrix A
= [
a
ij = |
a

aij |, i
= j.
aij are the entries of the matrix

0



A = H = diag
0

0
1

 

h0
h21

h12
.
h0

A
12
, where 12 =
21
A
already has positive leading princi0 h12 and 21 = 1 h21 . Since A

12 A1 21 > 0
pal minors, A is an M -matrix [19] if and only if A
(Schurs theorem, [20, p. 7]). Then, based on Lemma 1, the extended
system is BIBO stable.



The new matrix A
can be written as A
=

N 12 A1 21 > 0, i.e. there is an


is an M -matrix if and only if A

upper-bound on such symmetric extension given by (12).
Remark 1: The existence of such upper bound implies that in order
to preserve stability, positive feedback for networked control systems
should be restricted. Since we assume feedback from symmetric
subsystems, their feedback gains should be identical, either all negative
feedback or positive feedback. For the former case, the system will
remain stable even after adding arbitrary number of subsystems. The
result for negative feedback is a well known result [10]. For the positive
feedback case, studied here, there exist an upper bound on the gain if
stability is to be guaranteed, or an upper bound on the number of subsystems that can be added. Theorem 1 states that even with very small
gain (Lemma 1), stability may be lost for large numbers of subsystems.
For more general case, with appropriate change of notation to
Kronecker algebra, we can get the results for multi-input multi-output
(MIMO) systems [12]. We consider (q, s, r)-dissipative subsystems
connected to the base system in star-shaped symmetry.
Consider MIMO subsystems with dynamics shown in (5) and linear
interconnected system (7). All the (q, s, r)-dissipative subsystems
are connected to the base system in star-shaped symmetry and it is
assumed that all subsystems satisfy the dissipative inequalities with
the same (q, s, r). The constant interconnection matrix is

H12
...
...
H12
H0
H21
H1
0
...
0

..
..
..

.
0
.
(13)
H = .

.
.
.
..
..

..
0
0
...
0
H1
H21
and therefore, the linear
feedback interconnections can be described by
u0 = ue0 H0 y0 N
i=1 H12 yi , ui = uei H21 y0 H1 yi , i =
1, . . . , N where H12 and H21 , are constant matrices containing feedback gains between the base system and subsystems. Also, H0 and H1
are constant local feedback matrices of base system and subsystems
respectively. We now have the following result:
Theorem 2: Consider a (Q, S, R)- dissipative base system extended
by N star-shaped symmetric (q, s, r)-dissipative subsystems as in
S,
R)-dissipative

with
Fig. 2. System s is (Q,
= Q 2SH + H T RH
Q
1
S = S {RH + H T R}
2
= R.
R

(14)

Proof: The base system is (Q, S, R)-dissipative with supply


rate (u, y) = y T Qy + 2y T Su + uT Ru. Thus, there exists a storage
function V > 0 such that V (u, y). Also, the subsystems are
added to the base system with the linear feedback interconnections
u = ue Hy, where ue is the external input (Fig. 1) and matrix
H contains gains of subsystems connected to the base system in a
star-shaped symmetric configuration. Then we have V y T Qy +
2y T S[ue Hy] + [ue Hy]T R[ue Hy] and after a few lines
of algebraic calculations, we get V y T [Q 2SH + H T RH]y +
y T [2S H T R RH]ue + uTe Rue . Thus, the enlarged system is
S,
R)-dissipative

S,
and R
given by (14).

(Q,
with Q,

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 61, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2016

Corollary 1: Consider a (Q, S, R)-dissipative base system extended


by N star-shaped symmetric (q, s, r)-dissipative subsystems (Fig. 2).
System s is asymptotically stable if



(Q)
q
N < min
,
(15)
T
(H21
rH21 + (
q H)1 T ) H
where
= H T RH0 + SH0 + H T S T Q > 0
Q
0
0
q = H1T rH1 + sH1 + H1T sT q > 0
T T
T
= SH12 + H21
s H0T RH12 H21
rH1
T
H = H12 RH12 .
Proof: In Theorem 2, we have shown that the enlarged system is
S,
R) dissipative. For simplicity, we consider D = I in Lemma 2
(Q,
such that (10) holds. Based on the linear interconnections, we have
matrix of feedback interconnections, H, for star-shaped symmetry and
for asymptotic stability, we require
= SH + H T S T H T RH Q > 0.
Q
This implies

T
rH21
Q N H21
T

T
=
Q

..

...

(16)

C. Approximate Star-Shaped Symmetry in Interconnected Passive


and Dissipative Systems
Exact symmetry in control systems may not apply in some cases,
for instance the models of distributed systems may be different but
bounded by some induced matrix norm, interconnections may have
different weights, there may be time-variant delays, packet drops,
etc. Disturbances in system dynamics and interconnection structure
can represent another type of approximate symmetry. The study of
approximate symmetry can provide more robust results for dynamical
systems. There are also a few results of approximate symmetry and
approximate model reduction of dynamic systems [21].
When introducing approximate symmetry into dissipative systems,
the linear
feedback interconnections can be described by u0 = ue0
H 0 y0 N
j=1 Hij yi , ui = uei Hji y0 Hi yi , i = 1, . . . , N . Therefore, star-shaped subsystems have different constant matrices, although
the structure of the network remains star-shaped symmetric.
Corollary 3: Consider a passive system extended by N star-shaped
approximately symmetric passive subsystems (Fig. 2). System s is
asymptotically stable if
N<

>0

3679

(Q)

 , i = 1, 2, . . . , N
max i qi1 iT

(19)

(17)

T
where
T T
T
s H0T RH12 H21
rH1
= SH12 + H21
T
= q IN H12
RH12 circ ([11 1]) .


A
B
> 0 if and only if
According to the Schurs theorem,
T
D
B
1 T
D > 0 and A BD B > 0. Thus, there is an upper-bound on

such symmetric extension which is given by (15).
Remark 2: The right-hand side of (15) consists of two parts, the first
part implies that the base system will become unstable if the sum of
a positive feedback gains from all subsystems exceed certain value,
while the second part implies that the subsystem will become unstable
if the positive feedback from the base system is too strong.
Notice that hitherto we have considered all subsystems being
(q, s, r)- dissipative. No restrictions were placed on the actual dynamics which may be different from each other. Thus, the above results
apply to heterogeneous systems as well, as long as they satisfy the
inequality (2).

B. Passive System With Star-Shaped Symmetric Passive Subsystems


Corollary 2: Consider a passive system extended by N star-shaped
symmetric passive subsystems (Fig. 2). System s is asymptotically
stable if

(Q)
(18)
N<
1
( q T )
= ((H0 + H T )/2) > 0, q = ((H1 + H T )/2) > 0, and
where Q
0
1
T
)/2. The proof is similar to the proof of Corollary 1
= (H12 + H21
and is thus omitted here.
Note that passive systems are special cases of dissipative systems
where Q = 0, S = (1/2)I, R = 0 for the base system and q = 0, s =
(1/2)I, r = 0 for subsystems. One can directly get this result from
(15) in Corollary 1.

= ((H0 + H T )/2) > 0, qi = ((Hi + H T )/2) > 0, and


where Q
0
i
T
)/2. The proof is similar to Corollary 1 and is
i = (H12 + H21
therefore omitted here.
Consider a dissipative system extended by N star-shaped approximately symmetric dissipative subsystems. System s is asymptoti > 0 in (10). The proof is similar to that of Corollary 1.
cally stable if Q
Example 1: Suppose we have N + 1 symmetric passive subsystems in Fig. 2, and the linear feedback interconnections are
described by u0 = ue0 y0 + 0.4y1 + 0.2y2 + + 0.2yN , u1 =
ue1 + 0.4y0 y1 , ui = uei + 0.2y0 yi , i = 2, . . . , N . In this example, we consider SISO subsystems with scalar feedback gains.
According to Corollary 3 (19), N < 6.25. Thus Nmax = 6, which is
relatively conservative as an upper bound of the number of subsystems
that can be added to the base system in symmetric interconnections
without losing stability.
IV. D ISSIPATIVE AND PASSIVE C YCLIC S YMMETRIC S YSTEMS
A. Dissipative System With Cyclic Symmetric Dissipative Subsystems
For cyclic symmetry, the matrix of linear interconnections, H is
represented by

H0
H12
...
H12

H21

(20)
H .

..

H
H21
= circ([v0 v1 vN1 ]) is a circulant matrix with first row
where H
= P T HP
and H
can be written as H
=
[v0 v1 vN1 ]. Here, H
N1
. P is a matrix in companion form with
v0 I + v1 P + vN1 P
the last row [1, 0, . . . , 0].
We now consider subsystems with dynamics (5) and linear interconnected system (7) with (q, s, r)-dissipative subsystems, connected via
a cyclic interconnection as shown in Fig. 3.
Corollary 4: Consider a (Q, S, R)- dissipative system extended
by N cyclic symmetric (q, s, r)- dissipative subsystems as in Fig. 3.
System c is asymptotically stable if



(Q)
q
N < min
(21)
, T
T
T
(H21
rH21 + N 1 N
) H12
RH12

3680

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 61, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2016

where

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
sH1 +
q IN
circ ([11 1])


+ s (H)
+ (H)
q

H)
q = r(H)(
T T
T

= SH12 + H21
s H0T RH12 H21
rH
N = [ ]
  
=

=
(H)

H1T rH1 +
T
H12
RH12

N
N1


N1


j=0

j=0

vj ji =

The authors thank Meng Xia for helpful conversations.

H1T s

vj e

2ij
N

R EFERENCES

Remark 3: Similar to (15), the right-hand side of (21) consists of two


parts, indicating that the positive feedback between the base system
and subsystems should not be too strong. However, unlike the starshaped structure, the ring-shaped structure does not necessarily need
the support of the base system, which means no constraints are put on

N as in (21) if there is no base system [12].


In this case, H0  H =
(s/r)| < (s2 /r 2 ) (q/r) where
circ(v), and we have |(H)

= N1 vj j N1 vj j N1 vj . Here, (H)
(H)
i
i
j=0
j=0
j=0
is bounded and the bound will not be affected by the number of
subsystems given a similar structure of the interconnection matrix, in
which zero entries are filled when adding new symmetric subsystems.
B. Passive System With Cyclic Symmetric Passive Subsystems
Corollary 5: Consider a passive system extended by N cyclic
symmetric passive subsystems (Fig. 3). System c is asymptotically
stable if
N<

(Q)
T
(N 1 N
)

(22)

where
=

T
H1 + H1T
H12 + H21
, =
, N = [ ].
  
2
2
N

This Corollary can be directly concluded from Corollary 4 by


putting Q = 0, S = (1/2)I, R = 0 for the base system and q = 0,
s = (1/2)I, r = 0 for subsystems.
V. C ONCLUSION
In this technical note, (Q, S, R)-dissipativity and stability conditions
for large-scale systems are derived by categorizing agents into symmetry groups and applying local control laws under limited interconnections with neighbors. Stability for dissipative and passive systems
is considered and conditions are derived for the maximum number of
subsystems that may be added while preserving stability. There may
exist an upper bound on the number of subsystems so to guarantee
stability, depending on the structure of symmetric interconnection.
Two kinds of symmetries are studied in this technical note: star-shaped
symmetry and cyclic symmetry. These results may be used in the
synthesis of large-scale systems with symmetric interconnections.

[1] J. Cortes, S. Martinez, J. P. Ostrowski, and H. Zhang, Simple mechanical control systems with constraints and symmetry, SIAM J. Control
Optimiz., vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 851874, 2002.
[2] Y. Wang and M. Morari, Structure of hierarchical linear systems with
cyclic symmetry, Syst. Control Lett., vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 241247, 2009.
[3] D. D. Siljak, Large-Scale Dynamic Systems: Stability and Structure.
New York, NY, USA: North-Holland, 1978, vol. 310.
[4] A. N. Michel, On the status of stability of interconnected systems, IEEE
Trans. Autom. Control, vol. AC-28, no. 6, pp. 639653, Jun. 1983.
[5] F. Fagnani and J. C. Willems, Representations of symmetric linear dynamical systems, SIAM J. Control Optimiz., vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 12671293,
1993.
[6] J. Grizzle and S. Marcus, The structure of nonlinear control systems
possessing symmetries, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. AC-30, no. 3,
pp. 248258, Mar. 1985.
[7] S. Y. Zhang, The structures of symmetry and similarity of complex
control systems, Control Theory Appl., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 231237, 1994.
[8] M. B. McMickell and B. Goodwine, Reduction and nonlinear controllability of symmetric distributed robotic systems with drift, in Proc. IEEE
Int. Conf. Robotics Autom., 2002, vol. 4, pp. 34543460.
[9] M. B. McMickell and B. Goodwine, Motion planning for nonlinear symmetric distributed robotic formations, Int. J. Robot. Res., vol. 26, no. 10,
pp. 10251041, 2007.
[10] J. C. Willems, Dissipative dynamical systems part i: General theory,
Arch. Ration. Mechan. Anal., vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 321351, 1972.
[11] P. Moylan and D. Hill, Stability criteria for large-scale systems, IEEE
Trans. Autom. Control, vol. AC-23, no. 2, pp. 143149, Feb. 1978.
[12] S. Hirche and S. Hara, Stabilizing interconnection characterization for
multi-agent systems with dissipative properties, in Proc. 17th IFAC
World Congr., 2008, pp. 15711577.
[13] M. Arcak and E. D. Sontag, A passivity-based stability criterion for
a class of interconnected systems and applications to biochemical reaction networks, in Proc. 46th IEEE Conf. Decision Control, 2007,
pp. 44774482.
[14] E. D. Sontag and M. Arcak, Passivity-based stability of interconnection
structures, Recent Advanc. Learn. Control, vol. 371, pp. 195204, 2008.
[15] M. Arcak, Diagonal stability on cactus graphs and application to network stability analysis, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 56, no. 12,
pp. 27662777, Dec. 2011.
[16] F. Castanos, R. Ortega, A. J. van der Schaft, and A. Astolfi, Asymptotic
stabilization via control by interconnection of port-hamiltonian systems,
Automatica, vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 16111618, 7 2009.
[17] R. Olfati-Saber, J. A. Fax, and R. M. Murray, Consensus and cooperation in networked multi-agent systems, Proc. IEEE, vol. 95, no. 1,
pp. 215233, 2007.
[18] P. Wu and P. J. Antsaklis, Symmetry in the design of large-scale complex
control systems: Some initial results using dissipativity and lyapunov stability, in Proc. 18th Mediterranean Conf. Control Autom. (MED), 2010,
pp. 197202.
[19] M. Araki, Application of m-matrices to the stability problems of
composite dynamical systems, J. Mathemat. Anal. Appl., vol. 52, no. 2,
pp. 309321, 1975.
[20] S. P. Boyd, L. El Ghaoui, E. Feron, and V. Balakrishnan, Linear Matrix
Inequalities in System and Control Theory. Philadelphia, PA, USA:
SIAM, 1994, vol. 15.
[21] P. Tabuada, A. D. Ames, A. Julius, and G. J. Pappas, Approximate
reduction of dynamic systems, Syst. Control Lett., vol. 57, no. 7,
pp. 538545, 7 2008.

You might also like