4.7 Article

Event-Triggered Set-Membership State Estimation for Complex Networks: A Zonotopes-Based Method

期刊

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TNSE.2021.3137320

关键词

Complex networks; set-membership state estimation; event-triggered mechanism; zonotopes; unknown-but-hounded noises

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61703245, 61873082, 61873148, 61933007, 61973102]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018T110702]
  3. Postdoctoral Special Innovation Foundation of Shandong Province of China [201701015]
  4. Royal Society of the U.K.
  5. Alexander Von Humboldt Foundation of Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigates the set-membership slate estimation problem in complex networks using an event-triggered mechanism and zonotopes to restrain estimation errors. The proposed algorithm effectively calculates estimator parameters and demonstrates its efficiency through an illustrative example.
This paper studies the set-membership slate estimation (SMSE) problem for a class of complex networks under the event-triggered mechanism, where the external unknown-but-hounded (UBB) noises reside within a sequence of zonotopes. For the purpose of saving energy and reducing transmission burden, an event-triggered mechanism is employed for each node of the complex networks to schedule the signal transmissions between the nodes and the remote estimator. The aim of this paper is to design a set-membership estimator such that, in the presence of the UBB noises and the event-triggered scheduling scheme, the resultant estimation error is restrained into a set of zonotopes. According to the properties of zonotopes, a set of zonotopes confining the estimation error is first obtained by using the mathematical induction approach, and then the desired estimator parameters are recursively calculated by minimizing the F-radii of such a zonotopic set. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed zonotopic SMSE algorithm is demonstrated through an illustrative example.

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

4.7
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