Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
194 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Reduced-order Koopman modeling and predictive control of nonlinear processes (2404.00553v1)

Published 31 Mar 2024 in eess.SY and cs.SY

Abstract: In this paper, we propose an efficient data-driven predictive control approach for general nonlinear processes based on a reduced-order Koopman operator. A Kalman-based sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics method is employed to select lifting functions for Koopman identification. The selected lifting functions are used to project the original nonlinear state-space into a higher-dimensional linear function space, in which Koopman-based linear models can be constructed for the underlying nonlinear process. To curb the significant increase in the dimensionality of the resulting full-order Koopman models caused by the use of lifting functions, we propose a reduced-order Koopman modeling approach based on proper orthogonal decomposition. A computationally efficient linear robust predictive control scheme is established based on the reduced-order Koopman model. A case study on a benchmark chemical process is conducted to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed method. Comprehensive comparisons are conducted to demonstrate the advantage of the proposed method.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (56)
  1. Integrating operations and control: A perspective and roadmap for future research. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 115:179–184, 2018.
  2. Distributed model predictive control: A tutorial review and future research directions. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 51:21–41, 2013.
  3. X. Yin and J. Liu. Subsystem decomposition of process networks for simultaneous distributed state estimation and control. AIChE Journal, 65(3):904–914, 2019.
  4. Sustainability and process control: A survey and perspective. Journal of Process Control, 44:184–206, 2016.
  5. Economic model predictive control. Springer, 5(7):65, 2017.
  6. M. A. Henson. Nonlinear model predictive control: current status and future directions. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 23(2):187–202, 1998.
  7. H. Chen and F. Allgöwer. A quasi-infinite horizon nonlinear model predictive control scheme with guaranteed stability. Automatica, 34(10):1205–1217, 1998.
  8. M. Cannon. Efficient nonlinear model predictive control algorithms. Annual Reviews in Control, 28(2):229–237, 2004.
  9. Nonlinear model predictive control of a simulated multivariable polymerization reactor using second-order volterra models. Automatica, 32(9):1285–1301, 1996.
  10. A. Zheng. A computationally efficient nonlinear MPC algorithm. Proceedings of the American Control Conference, 1623–1627, 1997, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
  11. S. Jain and F. Khorrami. Decentralized adaptive control of a class of large-scale interconnected nonlinear systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 42(2):136–154, 1997.
  12. Distributed model predictive control of nonlinear process systems. AIChE Journal, 55(5):1171–1184, 2009.
  13. B. O. Koopman. Hamiltonian systems and transformation in Hilbert space. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 17(5):315–318, 1931.
  14. Generalizing Koopman theory to allow for inputs and control. SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems, 17(1):909–930, 2018.
  15. M. Korda and I. Mezić. Linear predictors for nonlinear dynamical systems: Koopman operator meets model predictive control. Automatica, 93:149–160, 2018.
  16. Koopman-theoretic modeling of quasiperiodically driven systems: Example of signalized traffic corridor. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems. In press, doi:10.1109/TSMC.2023.3253077, 2023.
  17. Koopman invariant subspaces and finite linear representations of nonlinear dynamical systems for control. PloS one, 11(2):1-19, 2016.
  18. A data-driven Koopman model predictive control framework for nonlinear partial differential equations. IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 6409–6414, 2018, Miami, FL, USA.
  19. P. J. Schmid. Dynamic mode decomposition of numerical and experimental data. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 656:5–28, 2010.
  20. Robust tracking model predictive control with Koopman operators. IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications, 1234–1239, 2022, Trieste, Italy.
  21. Hybrid Koopman model predictive control of nonlinear systems using multiple EDMD models: An application to a batch pulp digester with feed fluctuation. Control Engineering Practice, 118:104956, 2022.
  22. A. Narasingam, and J. S. I. Kwon. Koopman Lyapunov-based model predictive control of nonlinear chemical process systems. AIChE Journal, 65(11):e16743, 2019.
  23. Development of offset-free Koopman Lyapunov-based model predictive control and mathematical analysis for zero steady-state offset condition considering influence of Lyapunov constraints on equilibrium point. Journal of Process Control, 118:26–36, 2020.
  24. Robust tube-based model predictive control with Koopman operators. Automatica, 137:110114, 2022.
  25. G. Pannocchia, and J. B. Rawlings. Disturbance models for offset-free model-predictive control. AIChE Journal, 49(2):426–437, 2003.
  26. Linear offset-free model predictive control. Automatica, 45(10):2214–2222, 2009.
  27. Application of offset-free Koopman-based model predictive control to a batch pulp digester. AIChE Journal, 67(9):e17301, 2021.
  28. Handling plant-model mismatch in Koopman Lyapunov-based model predictive control via offset-free control framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.07239, 2020.
  29. Deep learning for universal linear embeddings of nonlinear dynamics. Nature Communications, 9(1):4950, 2018.
  30. Identification of MIMO Wiener-type Koopman models for data-driven model reduction using deep learning. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 161:107781, 2022.
  31. Deep learning of Koopman representation for control. IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 1890–1895, 2020, Jeju, South Korea.
  32. Learning deep neural network representations for Koopman operators of nonlinear dynamical systems. American Control Conference, 4832–4839, 2019, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  33. Linearizing nonlinear dynamics using deep learning. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 170:108104, 2023.
  34. Discovering governing equations from data by sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(15):3932–3937, 2016.
  35. SINDy with control: A tutorial. IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 16–21, 2021, Austin, TX, USA.
  36. F. Abdullah and P. D. Christofides. Data-based modeling and control of nonlinear process systems using sparse identification: An overview of recent results. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 108247, 2023.
  37. Time-variant digital twin modeling through the Kalman-generalized sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics. American Control Conference, 5217–5222, 2022, Atlanta, GA, USA.
  38. Proper orthogonal decomposition and its applications–Part I: Theory. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 252(3):527–544, 2002.
  39. M. Rathinam and L. R. Petzold. A new look at proper orthogonal decomposition. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 41(5):1893–1925, 2003.
  40. State estimation of a carbon capture process through POD model reduction and neural network approximation. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2304.05514, 2023.
  41. X. Yin and J. Liu. State estimation of wastewater treatment plants based on model approximation. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 111:79–91, 2018.
  42. J. L. Lumley. The structure of inhomogeneous turbulent flows. Atmospheric Turbulence and Radio Wave Propagation, 166–178, 1967.
  43. N. Aubry. On the hidden beauty of the proper orthogonal decomposition. Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics, 2(5-6):339–352, 1991.
  44. POD-DEIM model order reduction technique for model predictive control in continuous chemical processing. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 133:106638, 2020.
  45. H. V. Ly and H. T. Tran. Modeling and control of physical processes using proper orthogonal decomposition. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 33(1-3):223–236, 2001.
  46. Data-driven linear predictive control of nonlinear processes based on reduced-order Koopman operator. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 2023, Honolulu, HI, USA.
  47. A. Narasingam and J. S. I. Kwon. Application of Koopman operator for model-based control of fracture propagation and proppant transport in hydraulic fracturing operation. Journal of Process Control, 91:25–36, 2020.
  48. Extending data-driven Koopman analysis to actuated systems. IFAC-Papers OnLine, 49(18):704–709, 2016.
  49. A data–driven approximation of the Koopman operator: Extending dynamic mode decomposition. Journal of Nonlinear Science, 25:1307–1346, 2015.
  50. Deep neural network-based hybrid modeling and experimental validation for an industry-scale fermentation process: Identification of time-varying dependencies among parameters. Chemical Engineering Journal, 441:135643, 2022.
  51. A hybrid data-driven and mechanistic modelling approach for hydrothermal gasification. Applied Energy, 304:117674, 2021.
  52. Physics-informed machine learning. Nature Reviews Physics, 3(6):422–440, 2021.
  53. Physics-informed machine learning for MPC: Application to a batch crystallization process. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 192:556–569, 2023.
  54. Robust model predictive control of constrained linear systems with bounded disturbances. Automatica, 41(2):219–224, 2005.
  55. J. Zhang and J. Liu. Distributed moving horizon state estimation for nonlinear systems with bounded uncertainties. Journal of Process Control, 23(9):1281–1295, 2013.
  56. Iterative distributed moving horizon estimation of linear systems with penalties on both system disturbances and noise. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 194:878–893, 2023.
Citations (15)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now