Decentralized Implementation of Centralized Controllers for Interconnected Systems

  • Somayeh SojoudiEmail author
  • Javad Lavaei
  • Amir G. Aghdam


Many real-world systems such as communication networks, large-space structures, power systems, and chemical processes can be modeled as interconnected systems with homogeneous or heterogeneous interacting subsystems [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. The classical control techniques often fail to control such systems, in light of some well-known computation or communication constraints. This has given rise to the emergence of the decentralized control area that aims to design non-classical structurally constrained controllers [6]. A decentralized controller comprises a set of non-interacting local controllers corresponding to disparate subsystems. The analysis and synthesis of a decentralized control system has long been studied by many researchers. In particular, the decentralized control theory has been recently developed for systems with geographically distributed subsystems in the context of distributed control for diverse applications, such as flight formation [7], consensus [8, 9] and Internet congestion control [10].


Null Space Centralize Controller Interconnect System Local Controller Block Column 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. Sojoudi and A. G. Aghdam, “Overlapping control systems with optimal information exchange,” Automatica, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 1176–1181, 2009.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. I. Zecevic, G. Neskovic, and D. D. Siljak, “Robust decentralized exciter control with linear feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 1096–1103, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Olfati-Saber, J. A. Fax and R. M. Murray, “Consensus and cooperation in networked multiagent systems,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 215–233, 2007.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Lavaei, A. Momeni, and A. G. Aghdam, “Spacecraft formation control in deep space with reduced communication requirement”, IEEE Transactions on Control System Technology, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 268–278, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    K. L. Kosmatopoulos, E. B. Ioannou, and P. A. Ryaciotaki-Boussalis, “Large segmented telescopes: centralized decentralized and overlapping control designs,” IEEE Control Systems Magazine, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 59–72, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. D. Siljak, Decentralized control of complex systems, Cambridge: Academic Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. M. Stipanovic, G. Inalhan, R. Teo and C. J. Tomlin, “Decentralized overlapping control of a formation of unmanned aerial vehicles,” Automatica, vol. 40 , no. 8, pp. 1285–1296, 2004.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Jadbabaie, J. Lin, and A. S. Morse, “Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 988–1001, 2003.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Kashyap, T. Basar and R. Srikant, “Quantized consensus,” Automatica, vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 1192–1203, 2007.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Chiang, S. H. Low, A. R. Calderbank and J. C. Doyle, “Layering as optimization decomposition,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 255–312, 2007.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. H. Wang and E. J. Davison, “On the stabilization of decentralized control systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 473–478, 1973.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    B. L. O. Anderson, “Transfer function matrix description of decentralized fixed modes,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1176–1182, 1982.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    E. J. Davison and T. N. Chang, “Decentralized stabilization and pole assignment for general proper systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 652–664, 1990.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Lavaei and A. G. Aghdam, “A graph theoretic method to find decentralized fixed modes of LTI systems,” Automatica, vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 2129–2133, 2007.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Z. Gong and M. Aldeen, “Stabilization of decentralized control systems,” Journal of Mathematical Systems, Estimation, and Control, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 1997.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    H. S. Witsenhausen, “A counterexample in stochastic optimum control,” SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 131–147, 1968.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    K. D. Young, ”On near optimal decentralized control,” Automatica, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 607–610, 1985.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Rotkowitz and S. Lall, “A characterization of convex problems in decentralized control,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 274–286, 2006.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Lavaei and A. G. Aghdam, “Decentralized control design for general interconnected systems with applications in cooperative control,” International Journal of Control, vol. 80, no. 6, pp. 935–951, 2007.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    V. Kariwala, “Fundamental limitation on achievable decentralized performance,” Automatica, vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 1849–1854, 2007.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    G. Zhai and M. Ikeda, “Decentralized H control of large-scale systems via output feedback,” in Proceedings of the 32nd Conference on Decision and Control, San Antonio, TX, 1993.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. J. Veillette, J. V. Medanić, and W. R. Perkins, “Design of reliable control systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 290–304, 1992.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    R. A. Paz and J. V. Medani´c, ”Decentralized H norm-bounding control for discrete-time systems,” in Proceedings of the 1992 American Control Conference, Chicago, IL, 1992.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    D. D. Sourlas and V. Manousiouthakis, “Best achievable decentralized performance,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 1858–1871, 1995.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    P. J. Campo and M. Morari, “Achievable closed-loop properties of systems under decentralized control: conditions involving the steady-state gain,” vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 932–943, 1994.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    G. C. Goodwin, M. E. Salgado, and E. I. Silva, “Time-domain performance limitations arising from decentralized architectures and their relationship to the RGA,” International Journal of Control, vol. 78, no. 13, pp. 1045–1062, 2005.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    H. Trinh and M. Aldeen, “A balancing realization approach to decentralized control of interconnected systems,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Singapore International Conference on Intelligent Control and Instrumentation, Singapore, 1992.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    G. C. Goodwin, M. M. Seron and M. E. Salgado, “H 2 design of decentralized controllers,” in Proceedings of the 1999 American Control Conference, San Diego, CA, 1999.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    R. A. Date and J. H. Chow, “A reliable coordinated decentralized control system design,” in Proceedings of the 28th Conference on Decision and Control, Tampa, FL, 1989.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    H. Kobayashi, H. Hanafusa, and T. Yoshikawa, “Controllability under decentralized information structure,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 182–188, 1978.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    B. D. O. Anderson and J. Moore, “Time-varying feedback laws for decentralized control,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 1133–1139, 1981.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    J. Lavaei and A. g. Aghdam, “Decentralized pole assignment for interconnected systems,” in Proceedings of the 2008 American Control conference, Seattle, WA, 2008.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    J. Lavaei and A. g. Aghdam, “Control of continuous-time LTI systems by means of structurally constrained controllers,” Automatica, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 141–148, 2008.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    H. Kimura, “A new approach to the perfect regulation and the bounded peaking in linear multivariable control systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 253–270, 1981.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    J. Lavaei, and A. G. Aghdam, ”Robust stability of LTI systems over semi-algebraic sets using sum-of-squares matrix polynomials,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 417–423, 2008.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    J. Lavaei and A. G. Aghdam, Performance improvement of robust controllers for polynomially uncertain systems, Automatica, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 110–115, 2010.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    A. G. Aghdam, E. J. Davison, and R. Becerril, “Structural modification of systems using discretization and generalized sampled-data hold functions,” Automatica, vol. 42, no. 11, pp. 1935–1941, 2006.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    S. Sojoudi, J. Lavaei, and A. G. Aghdam, ”Robust stabilizability verification of polynomially uncertain LTI systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 1721–1726, 2007.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer US 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Somayeh Sojoudi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Javad Lavaei
    • 1
  • Amir G. Aghdam
    • 2
  1. 1.Control & Dynamical Systems Dept.California Institute of TechnologyPasadenaUSA
  2. 2.Dept. Electrical & Computer EngineeringConcordia UniversityMontreal QuébecCanada

Personalised recommendations