4.6 Article

Bipartite consensus on networks of agents with antagonistic interactions and measurement noises

期刊

IET CONTROL THEORY AND APPLICATIONS
卷 10, 期 17, 页码 2306-2313

出版社

INST ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY-IET
DOI: 10.1049/iet-cta.2016.0128

关键词

multi-agent systems; measurement errors; graph theory; time-varying systems; stochastic processes; Lyapunov methods; algebra; bipartite consensus; agent networks; measurement noises; antagonistic interactions; undirected signed graphs; detrimental effects; time-varying consensus gain; time-varying stochastic-type protocol; stochastic Lyapunov analysis; algebraic graph theory; mean-square bipartite consensus protocol; necessary conditions; initial conditions

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61104136, 61304048, 61273123]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2010FQ002]
  3. Scientific Research Foundation of Qufu Normal University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study considers the effects of measurement noises on bipartite consensus over undirected signed graphs. Each agent has to design a protocol based on imprecise information caused by noises. To reduce the detrimental effects of measurement noises, a time-varying consensus gain a(t) is introduced and then a time-varying stochastic-type protocol is presented to solve the bipartite consensus problem for the first time. By means of stochastic Lyapunov analysis and algebraic graph theory, the protocol is proved to be a mean-square bipartite consensus protocol. Particularly, in the noise-free case, not only sufficient, but also necessary conditions for ensuring a bipartite consensus are given. Conditions for the undirected signed graph to be structurally balanced and connected are shown to be the weakest assumptions on connectivity. Moreover, the structural unbalance case is studied in the presence of measurement noises. In this case, bipartite consensus value is proved to converge to zero in mean square for arbitrary initial conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据