Consensus for Multiple Euler-Lagrange Dynamics with

Arbitrary Sampling Periods and Event-Triggered Strategy

Abstract— This paper investigates the agreement
drawback of multi-agent systems with Euler-
Lagrange dynamics, below uniform sampling and
absolute heterogeneous sampling schemes, severally.
Firstly, we tend to propose a protocol mistreatment
each position and rate info and study the agreement
conditions. Then we have a tendency to extend the
results to the case of applying the event- triggered
strategy and analyze the corresponding agreement
property. Simulation examples and comparisons
verify the effectiveness of the planned ways.
INTRODUCTION
In applications the networked management systems
and multi- agent systems are enforced beneath a
sampled-data frame- work [1]. inside
the literature, beneath the sampled-data frame-
work, accord protocols are investigated by solely
mistreatment the position data of the agent and its
neighbors [2], [3] and
[4]. once endeavor the accord drawback, the
commonly used strategies embrace the property
analysis of infinite merchandise of random matrices,
linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) and Lyapunov
stability analysis [5], [6]. There are 2 main
schemes in line with the various sampling pattern:
Uniform sampling and heterogeneous sampling. In
[7], the authors propose a accord protocol supported
detectable position data of the agent and its
neighbors beneath sampled-data settings;
the projected protocol will increase the uniform
sampling amount such the agreement is bonded.
The heterogeneous sampling mode is
additionally studied in [7]. However, as a result of the
utilization of solely position data, the convergence
rate of the accord might not be quick. In observe,
if each position and rate data are measurable, then
intuitively and naturally, the convergence rate of
the accord would be expected to be quicker if they
are at constant time incorporated into the
protocol style. The “event-triggered”
strategy basically permits the heterogeneous samplin
g [8]. The management action is enabled
and enforced only if the state error norm satisfies a
pre- scribed criterion. A theoretical framework for
event-triggered accord protocol is studied in [10].
The sufficient conditions are derived to ensure
coordination by mistreatment the Input-to-State
Stability (ISS) theory. its price noting that less
attention has been paid
to endeavor the accord drawback for Euler-Lagrange
dynamics based mostly on the event-triggered
strategy. Euler-Lagrange equations are often used to
model several sensible systems like rigid body
dynamics and connected robotic manipulators [12].
The accord drawback of Euler- Lagrange systems is
studied in [13] [14]. In [13], the authors propose a
distributed, leaderless accord formula for Euler-
Lagrange systems; the convergence analysis is
conduct- impotence supported the algebraical graph
theory, Lyapunov theory and Morozov’s Theorem.
In lightweight of the higher than analysis, we've a
bent to are actuated to develop event-triggered accord
protocols for the linearized Euler-Lagrange
dynamics, by incorporating each position
and rate data of the agents. the rest of this chapter is
organized as follows. Section II reviews some
background and necessary definitions and
presents the matter formulation. Section III reports
the most results on making
certain accord beneath the whimsical uniform
and heterogeneous sampling ways, severally. In
Section IV, the centralized event-
triggered management protocol for the linearized
Euler-Lagrange dynamics is projected. In Section V,
simulation results supported the Euler-Lagrange
model for a revolute joint arm are provided to verify
the effectiveness of 978-1-4799-5825-2/14/$31.00
©2014 IEEE 2596 the planned algorithms. we have a
tendency to conjointly gift the comparison of the
convergence speed between the planned algorithms
and people solely mistreatment position info. Finally,
conclusions are offered in Section VI. " " − −
Notation: The superscript ‘T’ represents the matrix
trans- create. E denotes the mathematical expectation.
A matrix P > zero if and providing P is bilaterally
symmetrical and positive definite. ‘*’ during a matrix
stands for a term of block that's evoked by symmetry.
one denotes vector [1, 1..., 1] T, zero denotes zero
matrix with correct dimension and that i is that the
unit matrix. . denotes the Euclidian norm. C denotes
the complicated numbers and Rm×n stands m by n
matrices. Matrices are assumed to be compatible with
pure mathematics operations. drawback
FORMULATION
We have a tendency to denote a weighed graph with
n nodes by G = (V , E , A). V = represents the nodes
set and E ⊆ V × V is that the edge set. a footing (vj,
vi) ∈ E is that the and rate info of every agent and its
neighbors at the same time at a sequence of your time
instants zero, t1, t2,.. ., with tk < tk+1,k = 1, 2,.. ..
Considering a gaggle of n agents with Euler-
Lagrange dynamics (1), we've the subsequent
protocol:
τi = Ci (qi , q̇i )q̇I + Mi (qi )−1(−k1 (q̇i (t) − q̂˙i (tk ) − k2 (qi (t)
− q̂i (tk ))),
where
q̂i (tk ) = qi (tk ) + ρaij (qj (tk ) − qi (tk )), j∈Ni
q̂˙i (tk ) = q̇i (tk ) + ρ aij (q̇j (tk ) − q̇i (tk )). j∈Ni
Here, k1, k2 are positive management gains with
relevance rate and position info of the agent and its
neighbors, info flow from vj to vi.
The plus nearness and zero < ρ < 2max{Σ one ΣΣ Σ
ΣΣΣ j∈Ni aij,i=1,2,...,n} . By work (2) ∈≥∀ matrix A
= [aij]Rn×n, (aij0, i, j = 1, 2,..., n), models the
communication topology among the agents. If into
(1), the general system dynamics will be written
within the following form: there's an immediate link
from agent j to agent i, which suggests agent i
receives info from agent j, then aij ƒ= zero; q˙i(t)
q¨i(t) =01 −k2 −k1 qi(t) q˙i(t) alternatively aij = 0.
Associate in Nursing rudderless graph implies a
graph of Σ00 ΣΣ qˆ (t) Σ that the link from i to j still
because the link from j to i exist and disappear
synchronously during a graph. Otherwise the graph is
directed. A path from vertex i to a vertex j may be a
−−k2 −k1 iqˆ˙i(t) ,t ∈ [tk, tk+1). (3) sequence of
distinct vertices beginning with i and ending with j,
specified consecutive vertices are adjacent [15]. we
have a tendency to use Next, we have a tendency to
define the matrix W = [wij]: nickel to denote the
neighbor set of agent i. The neighbors of indicate the
agents from that i receives info. Thus, w = .Σρaij,i ƒ=
j .j∈Ni Σ N i = vj : (vj, vi). Assume that Associate in
Nursing agent doesn't receive info from itself. With
this assumption, we've aii = zero and aij ≥ 0 for all i,
j, i ƒ= j. The graph Laplacian L ∈ Rn×n is defined as:
lij = −aij, ∀i ƒ= j; 52 =aij, i,j = 1, 2,..., n. j∈NiBy
definition, there's a novel corresponding L to any A.
Euler-Lagrange systems are diagrammatic by ∈
Mi(qi)q¨i + Ci(qi, q˙i)q˙i = τi,i = 1,..., n.(1) wherever
qiRp is that the vector of generalised coordinates, ∈
Mi(qi)Rp×p is that the inertia matrix that is
bilaterally symmetrical ∈ and positive definite. Ci(qi,
q˙i)q˙i Rp is that the vector of Coriolis and
centrifugal torques. τi is that the vector of the torques
exerted to ith agent. we've the subsequent
assumptions: − "" ≤"" ≤" " ≤ There exist kilometer,
km¯ and kHz > zero, for any agent, zero kilometer
<Mi(qi)km¯ ; (2)Ci(qi, q˙i)kc q˙i ; (3) M˙ i(qi)2Ci(qi,
q˙i) is skew bilaterally symmetrical. during this
chapter, firstly we have a tendency to propose a
bearing protocol by incorporating each position and
rate info. Assume that the system measures and
obtains the position j∈Ni G ij1 − ρ aij, i = j
Remark 1: Compared with Σ the algorithmic rule in [7],
Σ
the pro- display protocol has incorporated the rate
feedback in (3). below the planned protocol, the
solvability of agreement drawback are going to be
studied within the sequel. we are going to study each
the uniform and therefore the heterogeneous
sampling schemes. Note that the properties of W are
going to be applied within the following analysis and
discussion. Lemma one in [7] shows that if A is
bilaterally symmetrical, so is W , and W may be a
double random matrix and diagonally dominant. If
the interaction topology includes a spanning tree, one
is that the algebraically straightforward eigenvalue of
W . Besides, there exists Associate in Nursing
orthogonal matrix P specified PWP T = diag(μ1,
μ2,..., μn), wherever μ1 = one, μ2,..., μn are eigen-
values of W in decreasing order. diag(μ1, μ2,..., μn)
rep- resents the square matrix with μi because the ith
entry on the diagonal.
AGREEMENT ANALYSIS OF THE MASS
WITH ABSOLUTE SAMPLING PERIODS
During this section, we are going to study the
agreement of the multiple Euler-Lagrange dynamics
in (1) with the planned protocol below uniform
sampling and heterogeneous sampling cases,
severally. Define xi(t) = [qi(t), q˙i(t)]T. when
resolution the equation in (3), we have a tendency to
acquire to analyze the eigenvalues of Di, we've det(sI
− D ) = (1 − μ )(s − eλ1h)(s − eλ2h) iix (t) =
eK(t−tk)x (t ) Σ ii k ΣΣΣ λ2eλ1h − λ1eλ2h + (I −
eK(t−tk)) 01 −k2 −k1 qˆi(tk) qˆ˙i(tk) , (4) + μi(s −
1)(s − Next, we want to indicate ).(6) λ2 − λ1
Define x(t) = Σx (t)T,x (t)T,...,x (t)TΣT, we've λ2 −
λ1 wherever K = Σ01 Σ is Hurwitz stable. λ eλ1h − λ
eλ2h two −k2 −k1 max < one< 1.(7) λ2−λ1 λ2−λ1 λ λ
one two n 1st, contemplate the case λ < λ . it's pronto
obtained x(tk + one) = I ⊗ e k k that λ2e 1 λ1e two >
λ2e 2 λ1e 2 = eλ2 > eλ1 . To prove the λ λ .K(t +1−t )
−− twelve K(t +1−t ) Σ 1k1 ΣΣ right-hand aspect of
the difference in (7), we've +W ⊗ (I − ek k )k2 00
x(tk). (5) λ2eλ1h − λ1eλ2h λ2 − λ1 − one = λ2(eλ1h
− 1) − λ1(eλ2h − 1) . λ2 − λ1 we have a tendency to
currently gift the agreement leads to the subsequent
Theorem. G Theorem 1: If the communication
topologyhas a span- ning tree, by applying the
protocol in (2), the agreement of The difference in (7)
holds if and providing eλ1 h−1 < eλ2 h−1 . λλ xh12 x
Let f (x) = e −1. Next we have a tendency to show f
(x) is monotonically decreasing once x < zero. the
multiple Euler-Lagrange dynamics system in (1) will
be achieved with any given sampling amount h once
Dapsang ≥ 4k2. f j(x) = 1+ (xh1)exh− . one 1 Proof:
we have a tendency to contemplate the cases once
Dapsang > 4k 4k2, severally. one two and Dapsang =
x2 Let z(x) = (xh − 1)exh, and zj(x) = xh2exh. it's
shown 1ΣΣ Case 1: Dapsang > 4k2. The Hurwitz
matrix K has 2 negativeλ−1 that z(x) is
monotonically decreasing once x < zero. we have a
tendency to haveminz(x) > z(0) = −1. Thus, f j(x) >
zero. With the sameeigenvalues λ1 and λ2. we have a
tendency to define T1 = and a pair of −λ11 argument,
for the case λ1 > λ2, the difference in (7) holds. ⊗
y1(t) = (PT1)x(t), wherever P is that the orthogonal Σ
matrix mentioned in Remark one . Thus, we've T KT
−1 = From the on top of analysis, it's shown that D1
has 2 that2− 1D ,i = 2, 3,..., n eigenvalues, i.e., one
and λ2eλ1 −λ1eλ2 . From (6) we have a tendency to
conclude λ1 zero 0λ2 Σ and 11λ λ ..ΣΣ.Σ∪ i, has 2
eigenvalues within the interval- smin eλ1h, eλ2h),
max(eλ1h, eλ2hλ2eλ1 −λ1eλ2 , 1 . Therefore, Di is
Schur stable. .λ2−λ1 I ⊗ eK(tk+1−tk) √ y1(tk+1) =
(P ⊗ T1) +W ⊗ (I − eK(t k+1 k1 −tk))k2 00 P is
Associate in Nursing orthogonal matrix with the first
row (1/ Σ one ΣΣ we've n)1T. × (P ⊗ T1)−1y1(tk). Σ
It will be any written as ⎡ D1 .⎢ . . y1(tk) = (P ⊗ T
)x(tk) = ⎣ k k ⎤ Dn ⎥⎦ y1(0) y1(tk + 1) = .I ⊗ eλ1h
zero 0eλ2h Σ + PWP T ⎡ D1⎤ ⊗ Σ− 1eλ1h 0 λ h Σ T1
k1 Σ Dapsang T1−1 y1(tk), = ⎢⎣ . . . ⎦⎥ (P ⊗ T )x(0).
01 − e 200DnΣ one − ⎤ Σ wherever h = tk+1 tk,k = 0,
1,.. .. is that the uniform samplingTherefore, period.
The on top of state matrix within the brackets may be
a diagonal block matrix with Di Σ eλ1h zero on the
diagonal line. Σ ⎡ D1 ⎢ x(tk) = (P ⊗ T )−1 ⎣ . . . k ⎦⎥
(P ⊗ T )x(0). Di = 0eλ2h .Σ + i1 one two λ1 1 μΣ −λ
(1 − eλ h) − λ2 (1 − eλ h) Σ 2 Dn(8) λ2 − λ1 λ1 (1 −
eλ2h)λ2(1 − eλ1h) Since D1 includes a 1 eigenvalue
and therefore the alternative eigenvalue in −
μiλ2(1−eλ1 h) stable. From (8), we have a tendency
to conclude that limk→+∞ ⎡ ⎤ λ2max, one eλ1h −
μiλ1(1−eλ1 h) two and Di,i = 2, 3,...,n are Schur x(tk)
asymp- μiλ1(1−eλ2 h) λ2(λ2−λ1) = ⎣2 − λ2−λ1 two
eλ2h + μiλ2(1−eλ2 h) λ2−λ1 λ1(λ2−λ1)⎦ .x(tk)
asymp- totically converges to some steady state. Case
2: Dapsang = 4k2. one Case 2: Dapsang = 4k2. two 2
k1 2 one 2 2 Let λ = − k1 , T = Σ 0−1 Σ and y (t) = (P
⊗ T ). within the interval (−1, 1). Therefore, we will
show that, with absolute sampling periods, the
planned protocol in (2) will equally, we have a
tendency to acquire the evolution of y2(t) as follows
y2(tk+1) = Ξy(tk), ⎡⎢ ⎦ wherever Ξ is additionally the
block diagonal system matrix. we've make sure the
agreement. within the next section, we are going to
propose a replacement centralized event-triggered
protocol. and D1j ⎣ Ξ = . . . Dnj ⎤⎥ , (9)
CENTRALIZED EVENT-TRIGGERED
STRATEGY
In sensible networked dynamic systems or networked
multi-agent systems, the network information
measure and resources are restricted. to form full use
of the restricted resources, if the concerned variables
or signals don't vary significantly, one might opt for
to not sample the signals sporadically with a Then Dij
= eλh − μiλheλh −λheλh + μiλheλhΣ μ (eλh 1)eλh + μ
(1eλh) Σ .i−i − quick frequency; instead, one will
sample or update the signals providing some pre-
scribed live are going to be satisfied. Here, we have a
tendency to propose a replacement protocol
supported the centralized event- det(sI − Dij) = (1 −
μi)(s − eλh)2 λhλh+ μi(s − 1)(s − e+ λhe ).(10) Next,
we want to indicate zero < eλh − λheλh < one. Let f
(x) = exh − xhexh, we've f j(x) = −xh2exh < zero,
once x < zero. so f (x) is monotonically decreasing.
limx→−∞ f (x) = zero and limx→0 f (x) = one. D1j ,
has 2 eigenvalues: one and triggered strategy
incorporating each position and rate info of the agent
and its neighbors. for every agent i (i = one, 2,..., n),
we have a tendency to contemplate the second- order
dynamics delineate by (3). Define the new variable
X(t) = [q1(t), q2(t),..., qn(t), q˙1(t), q˙2(t),..., q˙n(t)]T
. Then we've eλh − λheλh. Dij,i = 2, 3,...,n has 2
eigenvalues within the − ˙Σ0IΣ one interval (eλh
λheλh, 1). Dij is Schur stable. Then with the similar
analysis, once Dapsang = 4k2, the planned protocol
in (2) will make sure the agreement. wherever X(t) =
k2W˜ k1W˜ X(t),(11) Remark 2: In light-weight of
the elegant leads to [7], we have a tendency to
analyze the agreement conditions for the linearized
multiple Euler- Lagrange dynamics system below the
planned protocol that W˜ =⎡ − Σj∈N1 w1j
w12···w1n⎤ ⎢ incorporates not solely the position
however conjointly the rate infor- w21− . j∈N2 w2j
···w2n⎥ .Σ . . wn1wn2···− mation, whereas the lead
to [7] considers double-integrator⎢⎣. .. . ..⎥⎦ j∈Nn wnj
Σ systems and solely uses the position info. on an
analogous line, we have a tendency to study the case
once management gains k1 and Dapsang satisfy some
condition specified the planned control protocol in
(2) will make sure the agreement. Since the extra rate
info has been incorporated into the protocol Lemma
1: [16] (Gersgorin Theorem) Let ij=1, jƒ=iˇtt = [gij] ∈
≤ R (tt). Rn×n, and let Rt(tt) ≡ Σn|gij|, 1 ≤ i ≤ n. Then
all the eigenvalues of tt are settled within the union of
n discs: rate info has been incorporated into the
protocol style, unsurprisingly, the convergence speed
are going to be quicker than the leads to [7]. The
comparison study is provided within the simulations.
National Trust Σ i=1iLemma 2: [16] If M =AB ×−
CD Σ, where A, B, C, D are Remark 3: For the
heterogeneous sampling theme, Theorem two in [7]
proves that the management protocol while not rate
feedback will guarantee the agreement if any
sampling amount hk is larger than a given bound. the
most technique nn matrices and CD = DC, then
det(M ) = det(AD ΣΣ BC). Σ k2W˜ k1W˜ currently
we have a tendency to study the eigenvalues of R
=0I. of the proof lies within the following: One block
square matrix of the evolution equations for y(tk) is
with eigenvalues one FromLemma2,weobtaindet(sI −
R)= sI−I Σ det = det(s2 − k sW˜ − k W˜ ). of the
evolution equations for y(tk) is with eigenvalues one
and another real worth within the interval (−;
alternative block −k2W˜sI − k1W˜1 two 1, 1)
diagonal matrices are all Schur stable. Then it will be
tested that infinite merchandise of such system
matrices asymptomatically converge to bound values.
below the planned protocol mistreatment Lemma
one, we tend to acquire that W˜ is negative definite
(see Figure 1). Let ui < zero,i = 1, 2, ·· · , n be the
eigenvalues of two 2 √ W˜ . so we've s = k1ui± k u
−4uik2 . the $64000 a part of one i2 with further rate
info, we've tested that the system matrices of y1(tk)
and y2(tk) are each block diagonal matrices with one
eigenvalue one and alternative eigenvalues being s is
negative. we have a tendency to claim that R may be
a negative definite matrix. −∈ Define a blunder term
e(t) = X(tk)X(t),t[tk, tk+1). For the event-triggered
strategy, the management input are going to be ···−
unbroken as a relentless between any 2 triggering
time instants t0, t1, . If let R˜ = R, then R˜ is positive
definite. the general system will be delineate as X˙ (t)
= −R˜X(tk), t ∈ [tk, tk+1).(12) r ImRe Fig. 1. an
indication of Gerˇsgorin Theorem applied to W˜
.Consider the subsequent Lyapunov perform
willdidate can conclude that the velocities of the
agents converge to zero. Further, the positions are
adequate to a gradual state with the weighted average
with relevance W˜
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES
During this section, 2 numerical examples are going
to be given to verify the planned management
protocols for a gaggle of revolute joint arms. within
the first set of simulation, we have a tendency to
show that by applying the protocol in (2), agreement
will be reached and therefore the convergence rate is
improved compared to the algorithms given in [7].
The second set of simulation is conferred to
demonstrate the event-triggered strategy: agreement
will be achieved with quicker speed than the strategy
by solely mistreatment the position info [10]. ··· it's
assumed that for each joint arm the dynamics
parameters are the same: The mass of the link is
zero.6kg, the length of the link is zero.5m, the
distances from the joint to the middle of mass of the
link is zero.25m, the instant of inertia of the link is
zero.2kgm2. Six joint arms begin from random Then
we've V (t) = one XT two (t)R˜X(t). initial conditions
qi(0) and q˙i(0), i = 1, 2, , 6. Then the states of agents
evolve below the management protocol in (2) within
the following cases. Figure two shows the fixed
system topology 2 three one four vi five X˙ (t) =
−R˜X(t ) = −R˜(X(t)+ e(t)),t ∈ [t ,t), with a spanning
tree. k V˙ = −XT(t)R˜R˜(X(t)+ e(t)) = −"R˜X(t)"2 −
XT(t)R˜R˜e(t) k k+1 ≤ −"R˜X(t)"2 +
"R˜X(t)""R˜""e(t)".(13) so, if we have a tendency to
set ""≤ e(t)"R˜X(t)" ,(14) "R˜" we will enforce the
Lyapunov perform to remain negative. How- ever, it
can be sensitive and risky by setting the triggering ""
time directly supported e(t) = "R˜X(t)". Sometimes,
once "R˜" "" e(t) satisfies (14), however gets terribly
on the point of "R˜X(t)", consequent "R˜" Fig. 2.
Communication topology with a directed spanning
tree. Fig. three shows the comparison results
concerning the conver- gence speed between
management protocols with and while not the rate
info [7] once Dapsang > 4k . It will be discovered ≤
checking of "e(t)" might fail specified the spinoff of
the12 Lyapunov perform might not be negative.
Thus, we have a tendency to set the triggering time
once "e(t)" satisfies ""≥ e(t)σ "R˜X(t)" ,(15) "R˜"
≤−"" wherever zero < σ < one and V˙ (σ 1) R˜X(t)
two. Once the triggering is activated, the error is
about to zero and therefore the management input
remains constant as planned in (12) till consequent
triggering is activated. currently we have a tendency
to study the agreement property below the planned
protocol and therefore the triggering mechanism.
Theorem 2: If the communication topology is
connected, by applying the planned protocol and
presumptuous zero < σ < one, all the agents will
asymptotically reach the weighted average initial
position and therefore the velocities converge to zero.
Proof: Since V˙ ≤ (σ − 1)"R˜X(t)"2, we will see that
link→∞ R˜X(tk) = zero. From the structure of R˜ and
(12) we have a tendency to that: once the uniform
sampling periods are little (h 1), the protocol (2)
demonstrates higher performance; once the sampling
periods are massive, there's no obvious distinction on
the convergence speed between these 2 protocols. It
will be seen that the convergence speed has been
improved. The similar trend will be discovered for
the case Dapsang = 4k2; it's omitted here. one The
second set of simulation is to verify the event-
triggered strategy as shown in (12). we elect σ =
zero.6. Fig. four shows that the agreement is reached
supported the planned protocol (12) and therefore the
one while not rate info ([10]), whereas the previous
converges quicker that the latter case. Fig. five shows
the "e(t)" and therefore the certain of triggering.
CONCLUSION
During this paper, we've investigated the agreement
prob- lunar excursion module for multi-agent systems
with Euler-Lagrange dynamics,
we have a tendency to planned a protocol
incorporating the position and rate info, below
uniform and heterogeneous sampling schemes,
severally. Then, we tend to plan a replacement
centralized event-triggered strategy for the linearized
Euler-Lagrange dynamics. Simulation results verified
the effectiveness of the planned ways.
REFERENCES
[1]. T. Chen and B. Francis, optimum Sampled-data
management Systems. New York: Springer, 1995.
Control, vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 3230–3235, Dec. 2012.
[2]. Y. Cao and W. Ren, “Sampled-data discrete-
time coordination algo- rithms for double-
integrator dynamics under dynamic directed
interac- tion,” International Journal of Control,
vol. 53, no. 9, pp. 2142–2148, Oct. 2008.
[3]. J. Wu and Y. Shi, “Consensus in multi-agent
systems with random delays governed by a markov
chain,” System & Control Letters, vol. 60, no. 11,
pp. 863–870, Jun. 2011.
[4]. H. Li and Y. Shi, “Robust distributed model
predictive control of constrained continuous-time
nonlinear systems: A robustness con- straint
approach,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, Dec. 2013, “Distributed receding horizon
control of large-scale nonlinear systems: Handling
communication delays and disturbances,” Automat-
ica, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 1264–1271, Apr. 2014.