Event-Triggered Funnel Control for Output Reference Tracking of Unknown Nonlinear Systems

Janina Schaa and Thomas Berger

arXiv: 2610.22153v1 · PDF · 15 October 2026
Categories: math.OC
Licence: CC BY SA 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

We propose an event-triggered zero-order hold implementation of the funnel controller for output reference tracking of unknown nonlinear systems. The control input is updated only when the deviation between the current and the last transmitted input exceeds a prescribed threshold, reducing the number of input updates while maintaining closed-loop performance guarantees by incorporating an auxiliary integral state to compensate for the error introduced by the zero-order-hold input. We establish a uniform lower bound on the inter-event intervals excluding Zeno behavior, and show that the same closed-loop guarantees hold for any predefined sampling schedule with sufficiently short sampling intervals. The theoretical results are illustrated by numerical simulations.

Items 8

Definition

Definition 1

WT0M

For a parameter M > 0, let the update map \rho_M : \mathds{R}^n \times \mathds{R}^n \rightarrow \mathds{R}^n be given by

\rho_M(y,m) = \begin{cases} m&, \quad \text{ if } \left\| y-m \right\|_{ } < M \\ y&, \quad \text{ if } \left\| y-m \right\|_{ } \geq M. \end{cases}

Then, the event-triggered sampling operator S_M: C([0,\tau), \mathds{R}^n) \rightarrow L_{\text{loc}}^{\infty}([0,\tau), \mathds{R}^n) is defined via (S_Mu)(0) = u(0), and

(S_Mu)(t) = \rho_M(u(t), (S_Mu)(t_-)), \quad \forall t \in (0,\tau),

where (S_Mu)(t_-) = \lim_{s \uparrow t} (S_Mu)(s) denotes the left-hand limit.

Theorem

Theorem 2

MTI0

Consider the closed-loop system (?), (?). Assume that the initial values satisfy \varphi(0)\left\| y^0-y_{\text{ref}}(0) + I^0 \right\|_{ } < 1. Then the closed-loop system has a global solution satisfying

\varphi(t)\left\| e(t) \right\|_{ } < \varepsilon for all times t \geq 0 for some \varepsilon \in (0,1) depending on M and \alpha,
there exists a uniform lower bound t_{\text{min}}>0 depending on M and \alpha for the length of the intervals where S_M u is constant,
u remains bounded, and
\Vert I \Vert_{\infty} \leq \max \{ \frac{M}{\alpha}, \left\| I^0 \right\|_{ } \}.

Remark

Remark 3

YU5O

The presence of the correction term I allows the controller to accommodate arbitrarily large initial tracking errors y^0 - y_{\text{ref}}(0), provided that the initial tracking error is known with sufficient accuracy, in order to allow for a suitable I^0 that ensures \left\| e(0) \right\|_{ } \varphi(0) < 1.

Remark

Remark 4

X3KK

While the bound prescribed by \varphi holds for e(t) = y(t) - y_{\text{ref}}(t) + I(t), we can use the boundedness of I to conclude that the tracking error satisfies \Vert y(t) - y_{\text{ref}}(t) \Vert < \varphi(t)^{-1} + \tilde M. Since \tilde M>0 is determined through design parameters M,\alpha, \left\| I^0 \right\|_{ }, the right hand side can resemble an arbitrary bound \psi \in W^{1,\infty}(\mathds{R}_{\geq 0}, \mathds{R}_{\geq 0}) with \inf_{t \geq 0} \psi(t) > 0.

Remark

Remark 5

B7PE

The choice of \tilde{M} entails a trade-off between the admissable sampling interval lengths and the resulting transient performance bounds. Choosing \tilde{M} such that \frac{\tilde{M}}{c(\tilde{M})} is maximized yields the least restrictive a priori bound on the sampling interval length and hence allows for the coarsest sampling scheme. On the other hand, choosing \tilde{M} small reduces the offset from the prescribed performance bound, since \Vert I \Vert_{\infty} \leq \tilde{M}. Thus, when tighter safety margins are desired, \tilde{M} can be decreased, at the expense of a more restrictive bound on the lengths of the sampling intervals.

Lemma

Lemma 6

MU48

\alpha F\left(\frac{M}{\alpha}\right)^3 \rightarrow 0, \quad \text{ as } \alpha \downarrow 0,

where F is defined as in Step 3 of the proof of Theorem 2, then for each h\geq 0, there exist parameters \alpha, M > 0 such that t_{\min}(\tilde M) \geq h.

Used by Corollary 7, Remark 8

Corollary

Corollary 7

PSQ6

Consider the closed-loop system (?), (?) with the time-triggered sampling operator S_T replacing S_M in (?). Choose M,h >0 and assume that (6) holds, so that we can choose \alpha>0 small enough with t_{\min}(\tilde M) \geq h by Lemma 6. Let the sampling sequence (t_k) be such that t_{k+1} - t_k \le h for all k\in\mathds{N}. Assume that the initial values satisfy \Vert y^0 - y_{\text{ref}}(0) + I^0 \Vert < 1 and \left\| I^0 \right\|_{ } < \tilde{M}. Then the closed-loop system has a global solution satisfying \varphi(t) \left\| e(t) \right\|_{ } < \varepsilon for all times t\geq 0, for some \varepsilon \in (0,1), with u remaining bounded, and \Vert I \Vert_{\infty} \leq \tilde{M}.

Uses Lemma 6

Remark

Remark 8

JWJ2

Lemma 6 guarantees that, under a suitable growth condition on F, the parameters \alpha,M>0 can be chosen to accommodate an arbitrarily large bound t_{\min}(\tilde M)\ge h on the sampling intervals for given h>0. If this condition is not satisfied, the largest achievable bound may be limited. In either case, an upper bound on F, and hence some knowledge of the system dynamics, is required to select suitable parameters \alpha,M>0 for a given h, in contrast to the event-triggered controller in Theorem 2, which does not require such knowledge.

Uses Lemma 6

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2610.22153v1 by Janina Schaa and Thomas Berger, under the licence CC BY SA 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY SA 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2610/2610.22153.jsonl.