AI & ML
Fast Sampling or High Gain? iP versus PI Control
arXiv cs.SY0 views
arXiv:2611.13153v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Intelligent proportional (iP) controllers, introduced in the framework of model-free control, are often presented as an alternative to proportional-integral (PI) controllers that requires no model of the plant. This paper studies this property for a first-order linear plant under sampled-data implementation with a zero-order hold. When the time derivative of the output is estimated by a backward difference, the discrete-time iP and PI controllers are known to obey the same control law under a one-to-one correspondence between their parameters. Building on this correspondence, the paper derives necessary and sufficient conditions for exponential stability of the iP closed loop, in closed form, in terms of the controller parameters KP and alpha, the sampling period h, and the plant parameters. It then shows that, when the iP parameters are held fixed and the sampling period tends to zero, the closed-loop decay rate tends to the iP gain KP, provided that KP is positive and that the ratio rho between the input gain of the plant and alpha satisfies 0 < rho < 2. One closed-loop pole then behaves as 1 - h KP, while the other tends to 1 - rho. With fixed PI gains, by contrast, the decay rate tends to that of the continuous-time PI loop, which depends on the plant parameters. The two parametrizations therefore suggest different tuning procedures, although they achieve the same closed loops at every fixed sampling period. High gain for the PI is, in some sense, replaced by fast sampling of the iP. The results also make explicit which plant information the iP controller requires: the sign of the input gain and a bound on its magnitude in the limit of fast sampling, and bounds on both plant parameters at a given sampling period. Numerical experiments illustrate these results.
Source:https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.13153PreviousControl Barrier Functions for Counting Tasks in Multi-Agent SystemsNextRisk-Aware Dynamic Operating Envelopes for Battery Arbitrage in Unbalanced Distribution Networks
Related posts
HPE7-A11 Exam: A Design-Artifact Guide to Campus Access Architecture
0dev.to

Railway's Breach Cost $740,000 in Fraudulent AI Charges — and Up to 100,000 Workspaces May Have Leaked Secrets
0dev.to
Nod Reports 98% Agent Task Completion and 93.2% Long-Term Memory Recall in Tests
0dev.to
How to get business location data for a whole US state in bulk
0dev.to
OpenAI Cost Tracking Middleware: Build a Logging Wrapper That Shows Every Call's Price
0dev.to

3,500 laser-armed AI submarine drones patrol Norwegian salmon farms, killing sea lice and protecting 112 million fish
0Tom's Hardware