Lyapunov stability of 4x4 matrix.
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Consider the following continuous-time state space representation of the form:
$frac{d}{dx}x(t) = Ax(t)+Bu(t), quad y(t)=Cx(t), quad tin mathbb{R}^{+}$
$A=begin{bmatrix}-1&3&0&0\-3&-1&0&0\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix} quad B = begin{bmatrix}0\1\0\0 end{bmatrix} quad C=begin{bmatrix}1&0&0&1 end{bmatrix}$
The corresponding eigenvalues are: $-1+3i, -1-3i, 0+3i text{and} 0-3i$.
The answer states that this system is Lyaponov stable.
But I'm wondering why.
Is it because the Jordan blocks of the eigenvalues with zero real-part are $1$x$1$. Because this matrix is in Jordan Form?
control-theory linear-control
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Consider the following continuous-time state space representation of the form:
$frac{d}{dx}x(t) = Ax(t)+Bu(t), quad y(t)=Cx(t), quad tin mathbb{R}^{+}$
$A=begin{bmatrix}-1&3&0&0\-3&-1&0&0\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix} quad B = begin{bmatrix}0\1\0\0 end{bmatrix} quad C=begin{bmatrix}1&0&0&1 end{bmatrix}$
The corresponding eigenvalues are: $-1+3i, -1-3i, 0+3i text{and} 0-3i$.
The answer states that this system is Lyaponov stable.
But I'm wondering why.
Is it because the Jordan blocks of the eigenvalues with zero real-part are $1$x$1$. Because this matrix is in Jordan Form?
control-theory linear-control
1
Your $A$ matrix in not in Jordan form, but in its real Jordan form, so you have to look at the size of each full real Jordan block.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:28
I thought that a 4x4 real jordan form had an identity matrix in the upper right corner? like this:$begin{bmatrix}-1&3&1&0\-3&-1&0&1\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix}$
– user463102
Nov 21 at 17:00
1
Yes, only your example is not a real Jordan block, because then both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal need to be the same.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 18:54
Thank you. I did not know that a right upper 2x2 identity only appears if both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal are the same.
– user463102
Nov 22 at 7:44
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Consider the following continuous-time state space representation of the form:
$frac{d}{dx}x(t) = Ax(t)+Bu(t), quad y(t)=Cx(t), quad tin mathbb{R}^{+}$
$A=begin{bmatrix}-1&3&0&0\-3&-1&0&0\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix} quad B = begin{bmatrix}0\1\0\0 end{bmatrix} quad C=begin{bmatrix}1&0&0&1 end{bmatrix}$
The corresponding eigenvalues are: $-1+3i, -1-3i, 0+3i text{and} 0-3i$.
The answer states that this system is Lyaponov stable.
But I'm wondering why.
Is it because the Jordan blocks of the eigenvalues with zero real-part are $1$x$1$. Because this matrix is in Jordan Form?
control-theory linear-control
Consider the following continuous-time state space representation of the form:
$frac{d}{dx}x(t) = Ax(t)+Bu(t), quad y(t)=Cx(t), quad tin mathbb{R}^{+}$
$A=begin{bmatrix}-1&3&0&0\-3&-1&0&0\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix} quad B = begin{bmatrix}0\1\0\0 end{bmatrix} quad C=begin{bmatrix}1&0&0&1 end{bmatrix}$
The corresponding eigenvalues are: $-1+3i, -1-3i, 0+3i text{and} 0-3i$.
The answer states that this system is Lyaponov stable.
But I'm wondering why.
Is it because the Jordan blocks of the eigenvalues with zero real-part are $1$x$1$. Because this matrix is in Jordan Form?
control-theory linear-control
control-theory linear-control
edited Nov 21 at 13:11
asked Nov 21 at 13:00
user463102
14213
14213
1
Your $A$ matrix in not in Jordan form, but in its real Jordan form, so you have to look at the size of each full real Jordan block.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:28
I thought that a 4x4 real jordan form had an identity matrix in the upper right corner? like this:$begin{bmatrix}-1&3&1&0\-3&-1&0&1\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix}$
– user463102
Nov 21 at 17:00
1
Yes, only your example is not a real Jordan block, because then both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal need to be the same.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 18:54
Thank you. I did not know that a right upper 2x2 identity only appears if both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal are the same.
– user463102
Nov 22 at 7:44
add a comment |
1
Your $A$ matrix in not in Jordan form, but in its real Jordan form, so you have to look at the size of each full real Jordan block.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:28
I thought that a 4x4 real jordan form had an identity matrix in the upper right corner? like this:$begin{bmatrix}-1&3&1&0\-3&-1&0&1\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix}$
– user463102
Nov 21 at 17:00
1
Yes, only your example is not a real Jordan block, because then both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal need to be the same.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 18:54
Thank you. I did not know that a right upper 2x2 identity only appears if both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal are the same.
– user463102
Nov 22 at 7:44
1
1
Your $A$ matrix in not in Jordan form, but in its real Jordan form, so you have to look at the size of each full real Jordan block.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:28
Your $A$ matrix in not in Jordan form, but in its real Jordan form, so you have to look at the size of each full real Jordan block.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:28
I thought that a 4x4 real jordan form had an identity matrix in the upper right corner? like this:$begin{bmatrix}-1&3&1&0\-3&-1&0&1\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix}$
– user463102
Nov 21 at 17:00
I thought that a 4x4 real jordan form had an identity matrix in the upper right corner? like this:$begin{bmatrix}-1&3&1&0\-3&-1&0&1\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix}$
– user463102
Nov 21 at 17:00
1
1
Yes, only your example is not a real Jordan block, because then both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal need to be the same.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 18:54
Yes, only your example is not a real Jordan block, because then both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal need to be the same.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 18:54
Thank you. I did not know that a right upper 2x2 identity only appears if both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal are the same.
– user463102
Nov 22 at 7:44
Thank you. I did not know that a right upper 2x2 identity only appears if both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal are the same.
– user463102
Nov 22 at 7:44
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Write $I_n$ for a $n times n$ identity matrix.
Take $P = (1/2)I_4$ and $V(x) = x^T P x$, which is clearly positive definite. Now calculate the directional derivative:
$$
begin{align}
dot{V}(x) &= dot{x}^T P x + x^T P dot{x} \
&= x^T A^T P x + x^T P A x \
&= x^T(A^T P + P A) x \
&= x^T Q x,
end{align}
$$
insert $A$ and $P$ and derive $Q$:
$$
begin{align}
Q = A^T P + P A &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & -3 & 0 & 0 \
3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -3 \
0 & 0 & 3 & 0
end{bmatrix} frac{1}{2} I_4 + frac{1}{2} I_4
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 3 & 0 & 0 \
-3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 3 \
0 & 0 & -3 & 0
end{bmatrix} \ &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 end{bmatrix} .
end{align}
$$
So your directional derivative is $dot{V}(x) = -x_1^2 - x_2^2$, which is negative semi-definite. Therefore, the system is Lyapunov stable (but not asymptotically Lyapunov stable).
1
In this case it might be even easier to just look at the eigenvalues, because they all have an algebraic multiplicity of one. Only if the algebraic multiplicity of an eigenvalue with zero real part is higher than one, you also need to check its geometric multiplicity.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:37
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Write $I_n$ for a $n times n$ identity matrix.
Take $P = (1/2)I_4$ and $V(x) = x^T P x$, which is clearly positive definite. Now calculate the directional derivative:
$$
begin{align}
dot{V}(x) &= dot{x}^T P x + x^T P dot{x} \
&= x^T A^T P x + x^T P A x \
&= x^T(A^T P + P A) x \
&= x^T Q x,
end{align}
$$
insert $A$ and $P$ and derive $Q$:
$$
begin{align}
Q = A^T P + P A &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & -3 & 0 & 0 \
3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -3 \
0 & 0 & 3 & 0
end{bmatrix} frac{1}{2} I_4 + frac{1}{2} I_4
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 3 & 0 & 0 \
-3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 3 \
0 & 0 & -3 & 0
end{bmatrix} \ &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 end{bmatrix} .
end{align}
$$
So your directional derivative is $dot{V}(x) = -x_1^2 - x_2^2$, which is negative semi-definite. Therefore, the system is Lyapunov stable (but not asymptotically Lyapunov stable).
1
In this case it might be even easier to just look at the eigenvalues, because they all have an algebraic multiplicity of one. Only if the algebraic multiplicity of an eigenvalue with zero real part is higher than one, you also need to check its geometric multiplicity.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:37
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Write $I_n$ for a $n times n$ identity matrix.
Take $P = (1/2)I_4$ and $V(x) = x^T P x$, which is clearly positive definite. Now calculate the directional derivative:
$$
begin{align}
dot{V}(x) &= dot{x}^T P x + x^T P dot{x} \
&= x^T A^T P x + x^T P A x \
&= x^T(A^T P + P A) x \
&= x^T Q x,
end{align}
$$
insert $A$ and $P$ and derive $Q$:
$$
begin{align}
Q = A^T P + P A &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & -3 & 0 & 0 \
3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -3 \
0 & 0 & 3 & 0
end{bmatrix} frac{1}{2} I_4 + frac{1}{2} I_4
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 3 & 0 & 0 \
-3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 3 \
0 & 0 & -3 & 0
end{bmatrix} \ &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 end{bmatrix} .
end{align}
$$
So your directional derivative is $dot{V}(x) = -x_1^2 - x_2^2$, which is negative semi-definite. Therefore, the system is Lyapunov stable (but not asymptotically Lyapunov stable).
1
In this case it might be even easier to just look at the eigenvalues, because they all have an algebraic multiplicity of one. Only if the algebraic multiplicity of an eigenvalue with zero real part is higher than one, you also need to check its geometric multiplicity.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:37
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Write $I_n$ for a $n times n$ identity matrix.
Take $P = (1/2)I_4$ and $V(x) = x^T P x$, which is clearly positive definite. Now calculate the directional derivative:
$$
begin{align}
dot{V}(x) &= dot{x}^T P x + x^T P dot{x} \
&= x^T A^T P x + x^T P A x \
&= x^T(A^T P + P A) x \
&= x^T Q x,
end{align}
$$
insert $A$ and $P$ and derive $Q$:
$$
begin{align}
Q = A^T P + P A &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & -3 & 0 & 0 \
3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -3 \
0 & 0 & 3 & 0
end{bmatrix} frac{1}{2} I_4 + frac{1}{2} I_4
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 3 & 0 & 0 \
-3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 3 \
0 & 0 & -3 & 0
end{bmatrix} \ &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 end{bmatrix} .
end{align}
$$
So your directional derivative is $dot{V}(x) = -x_1^2 - x_2^2$, which is negative semi-definite. Therefore, the system is Lyapunov stable (but not asymptotically Lyapunov stable).
Write $I_n$ for a $n times n$ identity matrix.
Take $P = (1/2)I_4$ and $V(x) = x^T P x$, which is clearly positive definite. Now calculate the directional derivative:
$$
begin{align}
dot{V}(x) &= dot{x}^T P x + x^T P dot{x} \
&= x^T A^T P x + x^T P A x \
&= x^T(A^T P + P A) x \
&= x^T Q x,
end{align}
$$
insert $A$ and $P$ and derive $Q$:
$$
begin{align}
Q = A^T P + P A &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & -3 & 0 & 0 \
3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & -3 \
0 & 0 & 3 & 0
end{bmatrix} frac{1}{2} I_4 + frac{1}{2} I_4
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 3 & 0 & 0 \
-3 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 3 \
0 & 0 & -3 & 0
end{bmatrix} \ &=
begin{bmatrix}
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 end{bmatrix} .
end{align}
$$
So your directional derivative is $dot{V}(x) = -x_1^2 - x_2^2$, which is negative semi-definite. Therefore, the system is Lyapunov stable (but not asymptotically Lyapunov stable).
answered Nov 21 at 13:57
SampleTime
52139
52139
1
In this case it might be even easier to just look at the eigenvalues, because they all have an algebraic multiplicity of one. Only if the algebraic multiplicity of an eigenvalue with zero real part is higher than one, you also need to check its geometric multiplicity.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:37
add a comment |
1
In this case it might be even easier to just look at the eigenvalues, because they all have an algebraic multiplicity of one. Only if the algebraic multiplicity of an eigenvalue with zero real part is higher than one, you also need to check its geometric multiplicity.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:37
1
1
In this case it might be even easier to just look at the eigenvalues, because they all have an algebraic multiplicity of one. Only if the algebraic multiplicity of an eigenvalue with zero real part is higher than one, you also need to check its geometric multiplicity.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:37
In this case it might be even easier to just look at the eigenvalues, because they all have an algebraic multiplicity of one. Only if the algebraic multiplicity of an eigenvalue with zero real part is higher than one, you also need to check its geometric multiplicity.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:37
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3007700%2flyapunov-stability-of-4x4-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Your $A$ matrix in not in Jordan form, but in its real Jordan form, so you have to look at the size of each full real Jordan block.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 14:28
I thought that a 4x4 real jordan form had an identity matrix in the upper right corner? like this:$begin{bmatrix}-1&3&1&0\-3&-1&0&1\0&0&0&3\0&0&-3&0 end{bmatrix}$
– user463102
Nov 21 at 17:00
1
Yes, only your example is not a real Jordan block, because then both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal need to be the same.
– Kwin van der Veen
Nov 21 at 18:54
Thank you. I did not know that a right upper 2x2 identity only appears if both 2x2 matrices on the diagonal are the same.
– user463102
Nov 22 at 7:44