IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL NETWORKS, VOL. 17, NO.

1, JANUARY 2006 243

Nonlinear Adaptive Control of Interconnected Systems where i = 1; 2; . . . ; N , x = [x ; x ; . . . ; x ] = i;1 i;2

T

[y ; y_ ; . . . ; y 0 ] 2 R is the state vector,  (x );  (x ) are

i i;n
(n 1) T n
Using Neural Networks
unknown smooth functions, 1 (x ; x ; . . . ; x ) is the interconnec-
i i i i i i i

i 1 2 N
S. N. Huang, K. K. Tan, and T. H. Lee tion term, ui 2 R is the input, and yi 2 R is the output of the ith
subsystem. [15] is an example for representing the classes above.
Abstract—In this letter, we solve the problem of decentralized adaptive
Since the functions i xi ; i xi are unknown, the traditional ( ) ( )
adaptive control methods are not applicable to such a control system.
( )
asymptotic tracking for a class of large scale systems with significant non-
Assumption 1: The signs of i xi are known, and there exist
linearities and uncertainties. Neural networks (NNs) are used as a control
part to cancel the effect of the unknown nonlinearity. Semiglobal asymp- known continuous functions i xi and constants 0i > such that ( ) 0
totic stability results are obtained and the tracking error converges to zero. ( )
i xi  ji xi j  0i , i ( ) ; ; N. = 1 2 ...
Index Terms—Adaptive control, interconnected systems, neural net- The above assumption implies that smooth functions i xi are ( )
works (NNs), stability. strictly either positive or negative. Define ei t yi 0 ydi ; ei t ()= _()=
yi 0 ydi ; ; ei(n 01) yi(n 01) 0 ydi
_ _ ... (n 01)
=
; ei(n ) yi(n ) 0 ydi
(n )
, and =
I. INTRODUCTION
e = [e i i;1 ; e 2; . . . ; e
i; i;n ] = e ; e_ ; . . . ; e
T
i i
(n 01) T
(2)
i
The study of large-scale systems has been motivated by their wide
applicability to many practical systems such as power systems and The ith subsystem (1) can be written as
spacecraft. For such systems, with possibly many interconnected e_ i;1 = e i;2
components, finding a centralized controller is often a technically chal-
e_ i;2 = e i;3
lenging design problem. Research on decentralized control for nonlinear
.. : (3)
systems is reported in [1]–[4]. While most of the results consider subsys- .
tems which are linear in a set of unknown parameters [1], [2], or consider e_ i;n = e(i
n )
= 0 y +  (x ) +  ( x )u + 1
(n )
di i i i i i i
the isolated subsystems to be known [3], [4] presents a decentralized
neural network (NN) control to approximate unknown functions in the By introducing esi i;1 i;2 i;n 1 = [e ; e ; . . . ; e 0 ] , the above state equa- T

isolated subsystems which may not be linearly parameterized. On the tions can be decomposited into the following two equations
other hand, there is a significant amount of effort on control design for 0 1 0 ... 0 0
systems with interconnection constraint. Most of the literature consider
0 0 1 ... 0 0
the first-order type condition (linearly bounded) on the interconnections e_ si = .. esi + .. e i;n (4)
[1], [2], [14]. The results on the higher-order interconnections are given . .
by [3], [13]. Specifically, [13] proposes a NN decentralized controller 0 0 0 ... 0 1
without requiring the knowledge of input gain functions as in [3]. e_ i;n = 0 y +  (x ) +  ( x )u + 1 :
(n )
di i i i i i i (5)
In this letter, by introducing a decomposition structure, we obtain the
solution to the problem of decentralized adaptive asymptotic tracking The problem in this letter is to find decentralized controllers ui that can
for a class of large scale systems with significant nonlinearities and un- stabilize the interconnected subsystems of error dynamics in (4), (5),
certainties. It is assumed that the states of the isolated subsystems are and render the equilibrium point stable.
available for feedback and nonlinear systems have full relative degree. Defining vi ki;1 ei ki;2 ei = ki;n 01 ei(n 02) and introducing
+ _ +. . .+
NNs are used as a control part to cancel the effect of the nonlinearity it to (4), we have
point wise in time. Intensive research on NN modeling and central-
ized control may be found in [5]–[12]. Our results focus on the area e_ si = A e + b (e + v )
i si i i;n i (6)
of decentralized adaptive nonlinear control. The current interconnec- e_ i;n = 0 y +  (x ) +  ( x )u + 1
(n )
di i i i i i i (7)
tion form in the system includes as special cases, various other forms
considered previously in the literature. In contrast to [4], [13], our con- where
troller does not depend on a limit for the ith subsystem input gain rate 0 1 ... 0 0
( )
of change [the derivative of i xi in (1)] and can handle the intercon-
A i = ..
. ; b i = ..
. (8)
nections which are bounded by general nonlinear functions in states.
In addition, the tracking error is proved converging to zero. 0k i;1 0k i;2 . . . 0k i;n 01 1
. . . ; k 01 are chosen such that the polynomial k 1 +
and ki;1 ; ki;2 ;
k 2 s +. . .+ k 01 s 02 + s 01 is strict Hurwitz. This implies that
i;n i;
n n
II. PRELIMINARIES
A is an asymptotically stable matrix. For a given Q > 0, there exists
i; i;n

i i
Let us consider the nonlinear interconnected subsystems given in the
following form a unique positive definite matrix P satisfying i

x_ i;1 = x i;2 A P T
+ P A = 0Q : (9)
x_ =
i i i i i

x
i;2
..
i;3
Assumption desired trajectory vector xdi
2: A =
. (1) [y ; y_ ; . . . ; y ]for the ith subsystem is continuous and
(n ) T

di di

x_ =  (x ) +  (x )u + 1 (x ; x ; . . . ; x ) available, and xdi 2 di  Rn +1 with di a compact set.

di

1 2
1
i;n i i i i i i N

y i = x i;1
Assumption 3: The interconnections i are bounded by
N

Manuscript received January 15, 2005; revised March 17, 2005. j1 (x ; . . . ; x )j 

i 1 N  (x
ij j ) (10)
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engi- j =1
neering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119260 (e-mail: elehsn@
nus.edu.sg). where ij xj , ( ) i = 1; . . . ; N , j = 1; . . . ; N , are unknown smooth
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TNN.2005.857948 functions.

1045-9227/$20.00 © 2006 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University. Downloaded on March 29,2020 at 06:57:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
244 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL NETWORKS, VOL. 17, NO. 1, JANUARY 2006

III. LOCAL CONTROLLER STRUCTURE the NN approximation error and system interconnections. Consider the
following update laws
In this section, a desired local controller is proposed, which is
free from control singularity for the isolated subsystems. For no- W^_ i = 0 1i $i 8i (zi )
tational convenience in this letter, we denote $i ei;n =vi .
(n 01)
+ _^M i = 2i j$i j
(18)

=[
Since xi ... ] =
xi;1 ; xi;2 ; ; xi;n T and ei;n xi;n 0 ydi , (19)
( ) ( ) = (
i xi can be defined as i xi +  i i ; $i
(n 01)
i1 with ) where W ^ i , ^M i are the estimates of Wi , M i [Wi is given in (29)],
3 3
i= [ ... ] =
xi;1 ; xi;2 ; ; xi;n 01 T and i1 ydi 0 vi . Note respectively, and 1i , 2i , are positive constants.
_ =
that i1 _  ...
ydi 0 ki;1 ei 0 ki;2 ei 0
(n )
0 ki;n 01 ei(n 01) . Let Define W ~ i = W^ i 0 Wi3 2
wi~ , ~M i = ^M i 0 M i 2
~i .
=
i2 0ydi+ _ +  +. . .+
(n )
=
ki;1 ei ki;2 ei ki;n 01 ei(n 01) 0ydi (n )
vi . +_ Introduce two vectors Ei = [eTsi ; $i ; W ~ iT ; ~M i ]T and E0i =
Define a smooth scalar function [9] [eTsi (0); $i (0); W~ iT (0)T; ~M i (0)]T . Notice that esi = Fei (xi ; xdi ) =
$ [ei;1 ; ei;2 ; . . . ; ei;n 01 ] , where Fei :
xi 2
di !
e , and
Vev = i d : $i = F$i (xi ; xdi ) = ei;n + ki;1 ei;1 + . . . + ki;n 01 ei;n 01 , where
i ( i ; i + i1 ) i F$i :
xi 2
di !
$i . Thus, the vector Ei can be viewed as a
(11)
0
function of the variables xi , xdi , W ~ i , ~M i
By mean value theorem, Vev can be rewritten as Vev w $i2 = = ~ i ; ~M i )
Ei = FEi (xi ; xdi ; W
( + ) (0 1)
i i ; w $i i1 with w 2 ; . This is positive definite as shown (20)
in [9]. Its time derivative (see [9, the proof of Lemma 3.1]) where FEi :
xi 2
di 2
wi 2
i !
Ei . Similarly,
= FE i (xi (0); xdi (0); W~ i (0); ~M i (0)), where
~ ~
we have E0i
0ydi + v_ i $i
(n ) 0
FE i :
x i 2
d i 2
w i 2
 i !
E i . Introduce the
V_ ev = i$(xii ) $_ i 0 i ( xi )
+ gi (zi )$i (12) 0 0 0
sets
E = fE = [E T ; E T ; . . . ; EN
1
~0 ~0
] jEi 2
Ei ; 1  i  N g and
T T
2
0

( )
where gi zi is given below. To design the local controller, we consider

E = fE = [E T ; E T ; . . . ; E TN ]T jE i 2
E i ; 1  i  N g. In-
0 0 01 02 0 0 0
troduce the largest ball which is included in
E : EBR = fE jkE k 
an isolated subsystem with i , 1 =0 Rg, R > 0, and the largest ball which is included in
E : E Br = 0 0

e_ si = Ai esi + bi $i fE jkE k  rg, r > 0. It is convenient to use the notations:

0 0
TEi = diagfPi ; (wi =i ( i ; w $i + i )); (1=2 i );(1=2 i )g,
(13)
e_ i;n = 0 ydin + i (xi ) + i (xi )ui : T i = diagfPi ; (wi =M i ); (1=2 i ); (1=2 i )g, where M i =
( ) 1 1 2
(14)
maxfi ( i ; wi $i + i ); xi 2
xi ; xdi 2
di ; wi 2 (0; 1)g, and
0 1 2
1
In the following lemma, a desired local controller similar to that used
in [9] is employed, which is free from control singularity.
T i = diagfPi ; (wi = i ); (1=2 i ); (1=2 i )g.
1 0 1 2
Theorem 4.1: For the subsystems consisting of plant (1) satisfying
Lemma 3.1: For the isolated subsystem of (13), (14), if a desired
the decentralized controller (17), (18), (19), if the initial error satisfies
the condition kE0 k  r and the condition T1M r2  T0m R2 holds,
local controller is chosen as

ui3 = 0ki;n $i 0 2esi T

P i b i 0  i (x i ) 0 gi ( zi ) where T1M and T0m are the maximum and minimum eigenvalues of
i ( xi ) = ...
T1 diagfT11 ; T12 ; T1N g and T0 diagfT01 ; T02 ; ; T0N g, = ...
(15)

with ki;n > 0 and gi (zi )= (1=$i ) 0 [i jn=1

$ 01 (@ 01 ( i ; i + respectively, then all the signals in the closed-loop system are bounded,
and the tracking error ei decreases asymptotically to zero.
i1 )=@xi;j )xi;j+1 + (i2 =i ( i ; i + i1 ))]di , zi = Proof: Consider the Lyapunov function V i=1 Vsi
N
= +
[xTi ; $i ; i1 ; i2 ]T , then the subsystem (13), (14) with the controller N
V , where V = e +
T
P e V [ V is given in (11)],
= [(1 2 ) ~ ~ + (1 2 )~ ]
i=1 wi si si i si ev ev
(15) is stable. Vwi = 1i WiT Wi = 2i 2M i . Using the control of ui , the
Proof: Taking a similar procedure as in Lemma 3.1 of [9], we can tracking error dynamics (7) may be expressed as
prove the conclusion.
From (15), the desired control ui3 can be rewritten as a function of zi e_ i;n = i (xi ) 0ki;n $i 0 2esiT Pi bi + W^ iT 8i 0 udi3
ui3 (zi ) = 0ki;n $i 0 2esi
T 3 (z i )
Pi bi + udi (16) 0gi (zi ) 0 ^M i sgn($i )] 0 ydin + v_ i 0 v_ i + 1i :( )
(21)
3 zi 0 i xi
with udi ( ) = ( ( )=i (xi )) 0 gi (zi ), zi 2
zi , where compact This equation can be rearranged as

e_ i;n + v_ i = 0ki;n $i 0 2esiT Pi bi + W^ iT 8i 0 udi3 0 gi (zi )
set z is defined as

z = f(xi ; $i ; i ; i )jxi 2
xi ; xdi 2
di g : i ( xi )
0^M i sgn($i ) + 0ydi i+(xv_ii) + 1i :
1 2
n ( )
(22)
IV. DECENTRALIZED CONTROLLER OF
By using (6) and the Lyapunov equation (11), we have the following
INTERCONNECTED SUBSYSTEMS _
time derivative of Vsi
( ) ( )
In the case that nonlinearities i xi and i xi are unknown, the
3 zi is not available. Based on the desired
( ) V_ si = 0eTsi Qi esi + 2esi
T
Pi bi $i + $i $_ i
desired local controller udi i ( xi )
0y + v_ i $i
local control structure (15), we propose the following decentralized n ( )
NN control for handling the unknown functions in the interconnected
subsystems (6) and (7)
0 dii (xi ) + gi ( zi ) $ i : (23)

ui = 0ki;n $i 0 2esi
T ^ iT 8i (zi )
Pi bi 0 ^M i sgn($i ) + W (17) Substituting (22) into the above equation produces

(1 2)
with ki;n > = . Here, the neural network term WiT i is used to ^ 8 V_ si  0eTsi Qi esi 0 ki;n $i2 + W^ iT 8i $i 0 udi3 $i
deal with the unknown functions, and M i ^ sgn( )
$i which is a sliding j$ j N  ( x )
mode (see [16, ch. 14]), is introduced for countering uncertainties in 0^M i j$i j + i j=1i ij j : (24)

Authorized licensed use limited to: Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University. Downloaded on March 29,2020 at 06:57:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL NETWORKS, VOL. 17, NO. 1, JANUARY 2006 245

From the definition (2) and the relationships among xj;k , $j , and j;1 , where Xi =[ ]
= ( )
eTsi ; $i T and i diag fmin Qi Ii ; ki;n 0 = g (1 2)
we have with Ii the ni 0 ( 1) (
2 ni 0 1)unit matrix. Since
(1 2) _ 0
ki;n > = , we have V  . Now, we need to establish
 (x
) =  (e + y ; e + y_ ; . . . ; $ +  ): (25)
ij j ij j;1 dj j;2 dj j j1
that E 2

E at any point in time t 0

 . Consider the Lya-
By mean value theory,  (x ) can be rewritten as ... punov function V = E T diagfTE1 ; TE2 ; ; TEN gE ,
ij j
...
E T diagfT01 ; T02 ; T0N gE  V 
 (x ) =  (e + y ; . . . ; 0 +  ) + $  ( ; $ ;  ) (26)
where
ij j ij j;1 dj j1 j ij j j j1 ...
E diagfT11 ; T12 ; T1N gE . Let vm be the minimum
T

value of the Lyapunov function V on the edge of

where  (1) is the smooth function and has been defined in Sec- : =
EBR vm minkEk=R V =
Tm R2 . Let v0M be the maximum
tion III. Notice that $ = 0 in the first term on the right hand side
ij j

of (26). This implies that e = e_ 0 = 0v . Since the parame-

j
value of the initial Lyapunov function V (0)on the edge of
ters k ; k ; . . . ; k
1
E0Br v0M : =maxkE k=r V (0) =T0M r2 . The conditions of
0 are chosen such that k + k s + . . . +
j;n j;n j

j;1 j;2 1 _ 0 j;1 j;2

Theorem 4.1 imply that V (0) T1M r2  T0m R2 .2 From V  ,
s 0 is strict Hurwitz, it is well-known that e ; e ; . . . ; e 0 are
j;n

() (0)
1
we have T0m kE k2  V t  V  T0m R . This implies
n
j;1 j;2 1
bounded. According to Assumption 2, this implies that e +y ; e +
j;n

y_ ; . . . ;  = y 0 0 k e 0 k e 0 . . . : 0 k 0 e 0 ,
0 j;1 dj j;2

that E 2 EBR , and, therefore, E stays in E for any time t  .

j1
n 1
j;1 j;1 j;2 j;2 1 j;n 1 ^ ^
This implies that esi , $i , Wi , M i , are bounded. This implies
are bounded. Thus, the function  (e + y ; e + y_ ; . . . ; 0+  )
dj dj j;n

j;1 j;2 j1
that kXi k is bounded. This also implies that xi is bounded. Since
is bounded, i.e., j (e + y ; e + y_ ; . . . ; 0+  )j  
ij dj dj

. Uti- 1 ( )
i   xj and xj is ensured to be bounded, we have that
j;1 j;2 j1 M 0ij N

lizing (26) and the inequalities 2ab  a + b and ( ab) 

ij dj dj

( ) = 1 2 ...
2 2 N 2 j =1 ij
the smooth functions ij xj , j ; ; ; N , are bounded. Because
( a )( b ), the last term of (24) can be written as
k=1 k k

_ _
N 2 N 2
k=1 k k=1 k of the boundedness of all the signals, from (6) and (22), esi , $i are
j$ j  ( x ) j$ j  bounded. This implies that
+ $2
N N 2
i



j =1


ij j i j =1 M 0ij i

i
d kX k = d e e + $ = 1 e_ e + e e_ + 2$ $_ (32)
0i

$  ( ; $;  )
T T
si si i i
N 2 si si

2
2 T

e e +$
N

+ : (27) dt dt j =1 j ij j j1 i si si i T 2
2 2
0i
si si i

V_ is given by is bounded. Moreover, since V is a positive definite, and

1 X
X  0 1 V_ dt = V (0) 0 V (1) < 1,
N
By substituting (27) into (24), i=1 si N T
i i i

this implies that kX k 2 L . Then by Barbalat’s lemma,

0 i=1 0

V_  0e Q e 0 k 0 21 $ + W^ 8 $
N N
2
lim !1 kX (t)k = 0.
i
T 2 T
si si i si i;n i i i i

Since kX k = e e + $ , it is easy to show that

t i
i=1 i=1 T 2

j$ j
i si si i
 N

0d (z )$ 0 ^ j$ j +  i i (28) i Mi i
i

lim ke k = 0; i:e:; lim je j = 0; lim je_ j = 0; . . . ;

j =1 M 0ij

0i
!1 sit !1 i t t !1 i

d (z ) = 0 u3di (zi ) lim e(in 02) = 0; tlim

!1 j$i j = 0:
where
(N$ =2)[([ ( ; $ ;  )] =2 )+([ ( + i ; $i ; i1 )] =202 )
t!1
i i
2 2 2 2

. .3.+([ ( ; $ ;  )] =2 )].
i 1i i i i1 01 2i

Using the inequality j$ j  je j+jv j  je j+k je j+k je_ +

2 2
Notice i1 that 0N
u (z ) = 0( (x )= (x )) 0 g (z ) as shown in (16). In . . .+k
Ni i i
i;1 i;2

0 je 0 j, it follows that
i i;n i i;n i i


(n 2)
the case that  (x ),  (x ),  ( ; $;  ) are unknown,
di i i i i i i i
i;n 1 i
i1

d (z ) is not available. Then, given a positive number  , there

i i i i ji i

i i

exists a NN approximation such that lim

!1 j$ j = 0  lim !1 je j + k lim !1 je j + lim
!1 k je_ j
Mi

t
i
t
i;n i;1
t
i
t
i;2 i

+ . . . + k 0 lim 0
d (z ) = W 3 8(z ) +  ; z 2
!1 e
T
(n 2)
i i (29) i i i z
i;n 1 i
i t

where W 3 is the representative value vector and 8 (z ) 2 R is the

i
= lim
!1 je j : (33)
i i
L
t
i;n

NN basis function, and  is the NN approximation error satisfying

j j   for all z 2
. The integer L denotes the number of Since je j 0 k je j 0 k je_ j 0 . . .0k 0 je 0 j  e j 0
i
(n 2)
i Mi i zi i i;n i;1 i i;2 i i;n 1 i;n

jv j  j$ j, we have
i
nodes of the ith NN. This approximation is considered with the linear i i
NNs. This is why we add the neural network term in the control (17).
(n 02)
Using this approximation property, we have
lim
!1 je j 0 k lim!1 je j 0 . . . 0 k
i;n i;1 i i;n 01 tlim
!1 ei
0 21 $
t t

V_ = lim
!1 je j
N N

si  0 min (Q )ke k 0 i si
2
k i;n i
2
t
i;n

i=1 i=1

!1 j$ j = 0:
 lim
+W~ 8 $ 0 ~ j$ j (30)
i
T t
i i i Mi i

where M i  =0i=( ) +  . For V_ , by using adaptations This together with (33) concludes that lim !1 je j = 0. Thus,
lim !1 e (t) = lim !1[e ] = 0. Q: E: D:
N t i;n
j =1 M 0ij
(18) and (19), we have
Mi
t i t
T
si ;e i;n
T

Remark 4.1: For the system (1), [4], [13] restrict the controllers
depending on the control gain rate _ (x) in the isolated subsystem.
V_ (V_ + V_ )
N

= si wi In this letter, we remove this restriction. For the interconnection con-

i=1
straint, [4] requires that it is bounded by a first-order polynomial. In
0 21 $
N

0  min ( Q ) ke k +
i si
2
k i;n
2
i
[13], the result of [4] is extended to a higher-order polynomial, that
1(
is i x1 ; x2 ; ... )
; xN  Nj=1 ij0 ij1 jsj j1 ij2 jsj j2 ( + + +... +
i=1
N
p p
)
ij jsj j , where sj is the filtered error. The interconnection constraint
=0 X
XT
i i i (31) in this letter, as shown in Assumption 3, includes as special cases, var-
ious other forms considered previously in the literature.
i=1

Authorized licensed use limited to: Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University. Downloaded on March 29,2020 at 06:57:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
246
Remark 4.2: The condition T1M r 2  T0m R2 in Theorem 4.1 is
used to ensure that the error E belongs to
E for any time t  0. for Pattern Association
Thus, an upper bound for the adaptation gains
1i ,
2i , i = 1; 2; . . . ; N
is placed.
Remark 4.3: The controller (17) contains the discontinuous
function sgn($i ) which raises a theoretical issue regarding the ex-
istence and uniqueness of solution. A continuous saturation function
sat($i=) with  constant (see [16]) can be used to solve this issue.
REFERENCES
[1] P. A. Ioannou, “Decentralized adaptive control of interconnected
systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 291–298,
1986.
[2] L. C. Fu, “Robust adaptive decentralized control of robot manipulators,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 37, pp. 106–110, 1992.
[3] L. Shi and S. K. Singh, “Decentralized adaptive controller design for
large-scale systems with higher order interconnections,” IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 1106–1118, 1992.
[4] J. T. Spooner and K. M. Passino, “Decentralized adaptive control of non-
linear systems using radial basis neural networks,” IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, vol. 44, no. 11, pp. 2050–2057, 1999.
[5] F. C. Chen and C. C. Liu, “Adaptively controlling nonlinear continuous-
time systems using multilayer neural networks,” IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1306–1310, 1994.
[6] S. Fabri and V. Kadirkamanathan, “Dynamic structure neural networks
for stable adaptive control of nonlinear systems,” IEEE Trans. Neural
Netw., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 1151–1167, 1996.
[7] F. L. Lewis, A. Yesildirek, and K. Liu, “Multilayer neural-net robot
controller with guaranteed tracking performance,” IEEE Trans. Neural
Netw., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 387–398, 1996.
[8] M. M. Polycarpou, “Stable adaptive neural control scheme for non-
linear systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 41, no. 3, pp.
447–451, 1996.
[9] T. Zhang, S. S. Ge, and C. C. Hang, “Stable adaptive control for a class
of nonlinear systems using a modified Lyapunov function,” IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 129–132, 2000.
[10] Y. Xia and J. Wang, “A recurrent neural network for solving linear pro-
jection equations,” Neural Netw., vol. 13, pp. 337–350, 2000.
[11] N. Hovakimyan, F. Nardi, A. Calise, and H. Lee, “Adaptive output feed-
back control of a class of nonlinear systems using neural networks,” Int.
J. Contr., vol. 72, pp. 1161–1169, 2001.
[12] J. Cao and J. Wang, “Global asympotic stability of a general class of re-
current neural networks with time-varying delays,” IEEE Trans. Circuits
Syst. I, Fundam. Theory Appl., vol. 50, pp. 34–44, 2003.
[13] S. N. Huang, K. K. Tan, and T. H. Lee, “A decentralized neural network
control for a class of interconnected systems,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw.,
vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1554–1557, 2002.
[14] K. Narendra and N. Oleng, “Exact output tracking in decentralized adap-
tive control systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 47, pp. 390–395,
2002.
[15] Y. Tang and M. Tomizuka, “Decentralized robust control for a class
of nonlinear systems,” in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., NM, 1997, pp.
374–378.
[16] H. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,
2002.
1045-9227/$20.00 © 2006 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University. Downloaded on March 29,2020 at 06:57:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL NETWORKS, VOL. 17, NO. 1, JANUARY 2006
Recurrent Neural Network as a Linear Attractor
Ming-Jung Seow and Vijayan K. Asari
Abstract—We propose a linear attractor network based on the obser-
vation that similar patterns form a pipeline in the state space, which can
be used for pattern association. To model the pipeline in the state space,
we present a learning algorithm using a recurrent neural network. A
least-squares estimation approach utilizing the interdependency between
neurons defines the dynamics of the network. The region of convergence
around the line of attraction is defined based on the statistical charac-
teristics of the input patterns. Performance of the learning algorithm is
evaluated by conducting several experiments in benchmark problems,
and it is observed that the new technique is suitable for multiple-valued
pattern association.
Index Terms—Learning rule, linear attractor, pattern association, recur-
rent neural network.
I. INTRODUCTION
Recurrent neural networks are feedback architectures which can be
used as associative memories where the stored memories are repre-
sented by the dynamics of the network convergence. In most models of
associative memory, memories are stored as attracting fixed points at
discrete locations in the state space [1]. Fixed-point attractor may not be
suitable for patterns which exhibit similar characteristics [2]–[5]. As a
consequence, it would be more appropriate to represent the pattern as-
sociation using a linear attractor network that encapsulates the attractive
fixed points scattered in the state space with a line of attraction, where
fixed points in the line correspond to similar patterns [5], [6]. Brody
et al. model a basic mechanism for graded persistent activity utilized
attractor networks in [2]. Stringer [3] and Seung [4] presented the
utilization of continuous attractors for modeling biological processes.
In this correspondence, we propose a simple methodology to construct
a linear attractor network suitable for multiple-valued pattern associa-
tion utilizing a fully connected recurrent neural network connecting all
neurons to each other. The dynamics of the linear attractor network con-
verge similar patterns and diverge dissimilar ones. Our experiments with
human skin exemplar patterns demonstrate that the proposed learning
rule can learn and characterize skin color as a linear attractor.
II. LEARNING MODEL
The relationship of each neuron with respect to every other neuron
in an N neuron network for stimulus-response pair (xs ; y s ), bias value
B s , and resultant memory W s corresponding to the sth pattern can be
expressed as
N 01
yis = N1 s xs + bs 0  i  N 0 1:
wij j ij for (1)
j =0
The weight matrix W s and B s can be described as
s s ... s
w00 w01 w0(N 01)
s s ... s
w10 w11 w1(N 01)
Ws = .. .. .. .. (2)
. . . .
w(sN 01)0 w(sN 01)1 ... w(sN 01)(N 01)
Manuscript received May 3, 2004; revised April 26, 2005.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA 23529 USA.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TNN.2005.860869