A NEURO-FUZZY SUPERVISORY CONTROL SYSTEM

FOR INDUSTRIAL BATCH PROCESSES

Chr. W. Frey, H.-B. Kuntze
Fraunhofer Institute for Information and Data Processing IITB
Fraunhoferstraße 1, D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
phone: +49-721-6091-332 / fax: +49-721-6091-413 / email: fry@iitb.fhg.de

Abstract- The automation of complex industrial batch proc-
esses is a difficult problem due to the extremely nonlinear and
variable system behavior or the conflicting goals within the
different process phases. The introduction of a single multiple-
input multiple-output controller (e.g. fuzzy logic (FL)
controller) is not useful because of the rather high design
effort and the low transparency of its complex structure. A
more suitable hierarchical FL-based supervisory control
concept is proposed in this paper. It permits the decomposition
of the complex control problem into a series of smaller and
simpler ones. In the upper level of the hierarchy the FL-based
supervisory controller classifies the actual process phase in
terms of the available process sensor signals and activates
dynamically the appropriate situation specific low-level
controllers. This paper presents the generic concept of the FL
supervisory controller which comprises both a FL process
diagnosis and a control mode selection as well as experiences
with the industrial application.
I. INTRODUCTION
The number of successful industrial fuzzy logic (FL)
control applications has tremendously increased over
the last decades. Theoretically founded by Zadeh [1]
static system behavior depends strongly on the process
phase. Moreover, the performed requirements may
change in the different process phases, or situations
respectively. In order to cope with these difficulties a
two stage FL-based supervisory control scheme has
been developed and realized, which permits the
reliable identification of the actual process phase and
the decomposition of the complex control problem
into a series of smaller and more transparent ones. The
proposed concept is characterized by two hierarchical
levels. As illustrated in fig. 1, the lower stage of the
control structure consists of different low level
controllers which are optimized with respect to
specific process phases. The various low level
controllers, which may have any structure (FL control,
model-based or hybrid) are activated by a supervisory
controller in the upper stage of the hierarchy.
supervisory controller
fuzzy logic fuzzy logic
low level controller mode process
selector diagnosis
adaption

and explored by Mamdani [2] in the early 1970’s the fuzzy logic
controller 1
wide industrial application of FL control began almost nominal
values state
complex
a decade later in Japan [3]. With the availability of batch
values

commercial FL control development tools and the soft switch

process
fuzzy logic
better understanding of synthesis and analysis methods controller n control

more and more industrial companies in USA, Japan values

and Europe have successfully introduced this new
technology for their specific applications [4].
The vast majority of FL control concepts proposed
in the literature prefer a monolithic multiple-input
multiple-output (MIMO) control structure. While for
low order applications this is the most appropriate
architecture, however, for heavily disturbed high order
nonlinear industrial plants more flexible and trans-
parent hierarchical control schemes are required.
There are many complex industrial processes which
are difficult to control because their dynamic and
disturbances
Fig. 1: Scheme of the FL-based supervisory control
Depending on the identified process phase a FL
mode selector activates the most appropriate control
mode, which can comprise both
• the adaptation of control parameter sets without
structural changes, or
• the switching of different situation-specific low
level controller structures.
 In cases of slowly changing operating set points the
FL-based adaptation of control parameters is the most
suitable measure provided no stability problems occur.
Switching between the low level controllers is more
useful if the performance requirements have to be
changed. For a fast and precise change between very
different setpoints e.g. it may be useful to apply a
time-optimal bang-bang control strategy for large state
differences and a well damped PID controller in the
vicinity of the target state. Of course, structural
switching requires necessarily the compatibility of the
alternative controller structures. Moreover, shock
disturbances have to be avoided by introducing a FL-
based soft switching strategy as explained in [5,6].
Focal point of this paper is the functionality of the
higher level FL supervisory controller particularly
with regard to the underlying process diagnosis
scheme. The concept and performance of the lower
level FL control has been extensively discussed
elsewhere [11,21, 22].
II. PROCESS DIAGNOSIS
In order to diagnose automatically malfunctions and
special phases or states of a technical process the
successive steps of feature extraction and evaluation
have to be performed [7]. This general abstract model,
shown in fig. 2, allows a broad variety of different
realizations and implementations.
Sensor Feature Feature
Signals Generation Evaluation
Fig. 2: Fault and state diagnosis scheme
Within the feature extraction step the available
sensor signals of the process are preprocessed for the
purpose of extracting relevant signal characteristics.
The generated features can be regarded as a condensed
signal representation, ideally containing all important
signal information. Basically feature extraction in
technical processes is performed [7] by following
methods:
• signal based methods, e.g. threshold comparison,
frequency analysis, pattern recognition, or
• analytical process-model based methods, e.g.
parameter estimation techniques.
In the next stage, the feature evaluation, a small
number of meaningful features that optimally
represent the given process phase without redundancy
are identified. Finally the classification of the actual
situation is carried out, i.e. the selected features for a
given situation are assigned to a specific class by
suitable methods [7,8] like e.g. :
• statistical evaluation, e.g. bayes linear classifier, k-
nearest neighbor or polynomial classifier,
• artificial intelligence methods, e.g. neural
networks, fuzzy logic and neuro-fuzzy
classification.
A. Feature Extraction
Due to the complexity of industrial processes in the
majority of cases neither an analytical process model
nor a sufficient knowledge base for describing the
process behavior is available. Thus, feature generation
in the application considered in chapter 3 is focused
on signal based methods. Choosing adequate methods
for signal-based feature extraction strongly depends on
the type of signals to be processed [9]. Generally it is
possible to break down the measured sensor signals
into two broad categories: The first one concerned
with low bandwidth measurements such as trends e.g.
in temperature signals while the second one
exemplifies high-bandwidth measurements like e.g.
process values containing spikes and oscillations (cf.
fig. 3). The possible features of signals associated with
the first category may develop slowly over time and
Process
can be extracted with standard methods like e.g.
Phase
threshold evaluation or trend detection. High-
frequency phenomena usually require signal
processing methods evaluating the signal over an
adequate time span, e.g. the windowed Fourier
transform (WFT) or particular pattern classification
techniques [10].
Low bandwidth signal High bandwidth signal
Fig. 3: Different categories of measured signals
In the proposed diagnosis scheme advanced signal-
based feature extraction techniques for both types of
signals have been employed. They will be outlined in
the following sections.
B. FL Feature Extraction
The reliable identification of e.g. faults and process
phases in a technical process depends strongly on the
extracted signal features and their entropy. To point
out this relation threshold evaluation as a common
technique in feature extraction for low bandwidth
signals [9] is considered as an example. In order to
check whether a signal y is below or above given
thresholds ymin and ymax the following equation has to
be employed:
y min < y (t ) < y max (1)
Evaluating this relationship by standard logic gives
three possible signal features - the signal y can be
between (B), smaller (S) or larger (L) the given
thresholds ymin and ymax . Fig. 4 shows the result of
graphically evaluating the inequality with standard
logic.
standard evaluation
measured signal
fuzzy evaluation
Fig. 4: Conventional and FL based threshold evaluation
Obviously standard logic provides a poor
description of the transition between the possible
signal features, the information about how close the
signal y is to the thresholds is lost. In particular, for
diagnosis of processes (e.g. chemical plants) where the
different process phases can not be separated exactly,
the evaluation of these features would not give a
satisfying classification result. To overcome this
restriction the standard threshold evaluation can be
enhanced by FL. By introducing membership
functions and rules FL gives the possibility to describe
the transition between the signal features in a more
detailed and continuous way. The following set of
fuzzy rules has to be employed to perform threshold
evaluation with FL:
if y(t) is small then TH(y) is smaller (S)
if y(t) is between then TH(y) is between (B)
if y(t) is larger then TH(y) is larger (L)
As can be seen in fig 4 the FL evaluation of
equation 1 leads to a continuous transition between the
possible signal characteristics. In practical applications
the combination of FL with standard signal processing
methods gives a powerful tool for feature extraction.
Several other methods have been developed, e.g.
adaptive FL threshold evaluation or FL based trend
detection, a detailed illustration can be found in [11].
C. Wavelet Neural Networks for Feature Extraction
Measured sensor signals of dynamical processes are
frequently characterized by a nonstationary and
dynamic time behavior. Particularly faults or special
process phases can often be determined by typical
patterns in the measured process signals. For such
patterns time-frequency representations are highly
desirable, with a view to deriving meaningful features.
Generally the frequency characteristics in conjunction
with temporal behavior can be described with respect
to the Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle [10], from
the variety of different approaches in the developed
diagnosis scheme the linear one-dimensional wavelet
transform (WT) is preferred. In mathematical terms
the WT is expressed as an inner product of a signal s(t)
with a wavelet function ha,b(t) [12, 14]:
1 t −b
ha ,b (t ) = h  (2)
a  a 
1 * t −b
a∫
W ( a, b) = s (t )h a ,b  dt (3)
 a 
t
The variable a represents the scale parameter and b
the shift parameter of the wavelet function, h* denotes
the complex conjugate of h. The weighting factor
1/a1/2 normalizes the wavelet for all values of the scale
parameter to a constant energy. In contrast to the
Fourier transform, which breaks up the signal s into
sine and cosine functions of different frequencies, the
WT uses time limited analyzing functions localized in
time and frequency by the shift and scale parameters hand the WT provides time-frequency map of the
respectively. Wavelet analyzing functions h have to analyzed signal, enabling the extraction of frequency
satisfy several constraints, which are explained in features which vary in time. This attribute makes the
detail in the literature [14]. Frequently used wavelet WT an ideal tool for feature extraction of
functions are modulated windows, i.e. they are nonstationary signals.
composed as a product of two functions, e.g. an The concept of so-called wavelet neural networks
oscillating term that is modulated by a Gaussian (WNN) for classification tries to combine aspects of
function. A typical example of a wavelet function is the WT for the purpose of efficient frequency feature
the real Morlet wavelet: extraction with the decision capabilities of neural-
 1  t − b 2  network approaches [16,17]. WNN can be described
 t −b
ha ,b (t ) = cos ω 0  exp −    (4) as an expanded perceptron with so-called wavelet
 a   2 a  
  nodes as a frequency domain feature extraction
Depending on the scale parameter a, the wavelet preprocessing unit.
function is a dilated low-frequency function, whereas w
for small values of a the wavelet is constricted, which w
w
yields to a high-frequency function. Due to the time 1
limited analyzing function the WT is capable of w
1
simultaneously providing time and frequency sj w onet,j
information of a given signal.
1 w
w
w

Wavelet Layer Perceptron Layers

Fig. 6: Wavelet neural network for pattern recognition

The basic structure of a WNN is shown in fig. 6.

The bottom layer, composed of wavelet nodes, is
responsible for preprocessing the input signal s(t) and
extracting features which are passed to a multi-layer
perceptron (MLP) for class assignment. The wavelet
nodes are shifted and modulated versions of the
mother wavelet. The k-th wavelet is node is described
by the shift parameter bk and the scale parameter ak,
corresponding to the parameters of the WT. Formally,
the wavelet node’s output is the inner product of the
wavelet hk and the signal s, which is the input of the
WNN. Assuming only real valued wavelets the output
o of the k-th wavelet node is calculated by following
equation:
Fig. 5: Frequency domain analysis using WT
 t − bk 
As an example fig. 5 points out this advantage of the ∫
ok (a, b) = s (t )hk 
 ak
dt


(5)
WT in conjunction with analyzing a non-stationary t

signal. The given nonstationary signal s(t) is s ok

characterized by two different frequencies at different
time intervals. With the FT both frequencies can be The output of the wavelet node can be interpreted as
determined but the information at which time instant the correlation between the modified wavelet hk and
the different frequencies occur is lost. On the other the input signal s. The MLP in the upper part of the
WNN represents the classification part, which bases
the classification decision on the wavelet node’s
output. The neurons in the perceptron layers are
interconnected by directed and weighted links. A
neuron’s output is processed to all neurons in the
succeeding layer, its inputs are the weighted outputs of
the neurons in the preceding layer. A neuron’s output
om is defined by the weighted sum of the k outputs on,k
of the previous layer n and its activation function. In
the diagnosis scheme developed, sigmoid activation
functions are used, the output of a neuron in the layer
m is calculated as follows:
−1
  
om

= 1 + exp  −
  ∑ 

wk ,m o n ,k  
  k 
on,1 w1,m
on,2 om
on,k wk,m
During the training phase the training patterns sj are
repeatedly propagated through the network, whereas
the parameters are adjusted to minimize the least-
square error E of the distance between the desired
output d and the networks output onet:
∑ (d )2 = min
1
E= j − o net , j
2
j evaluation module which stores the decision
The minimization problem is solved by an iterative
gradient technique, the so-called generalized delta-rule
[15]. By backpropagation (BP) of the output error the
parameters of the neural network are adjusted by
calculating the partial derivatives of the error with
respect to the parameters of the network, i.e. the
weights wij, the shifts bk and the scales ak . For a
complete derivation of the learning algorithm several
approaches have been presented in detail in the
literature [15].
D. Neuro-Fuzzy Feature Evaluation
The purpose of the feature evaluation step is reliable
assignment of the available signal features to the
possible diagnosis statements (cf. fig. 7). The process
of feature evaluation can be understood as a
classification problem, i.e. with respect to the problem
considered in chapter III. The generated features
within a typical process phase are classified and
assigned to the corresponding process phase. Several
methods for feature evaluation have been proposed in
the past [7, 18], which can roughly be divided into
statistical and artificial intelligence based methods. All
methods differ considerably in with respect to their
realizations and the developer interaction in the design
phase. E.g. developing an evaluation system based on
the Bayes linear classifier, as one of the most
commonly used statistical method [7], the user has to
select the relevant features manually and adjust the
parameters of the probability distributions carefully by
hand to obtain an optimal classification system. On the
other hand artificial neural networks (ANN) are
capable of managing this user-controlled tuning
automatically by applying their learning strategy in a
(6)
self organizing optimal manner. Beside these aspects
concerning the implementation and design of the
evaluation module, in practical applications the
interpretability of the system and the possibility to
include expert knowledge is of outmost importance.
Standard neural networks, e.g. the MLP, can not
provide these essential features. The inherent decision
knowledge is implied in specific weight coefficients of
the underlying network structure and cannot accessed
or supplemented easily. The so-called black-box-
behavior represents a substantial restriction of
(7) standard neural networks. Desirable is a feature
knowledge in an interpretable and modifiable form. In
this respect FL provides an ideal tool for realizing
feature evaluation modules. FL gives the possibility to
describe knowledge by linguistic rules like e.g.:
if feature 1 is small and
feature n is big
then process phase is …
The implementation of a fuzzy module for feature
evaluation can be very difficult with an increasing
number of features taken into account. The problem of
finding appropriate membership functions and rules is
often a tiring process of trail and error, just like linear
classifiers FL systems require in contrast to ANNs
manual tuning to obtain good classification results. In
order to automate the design phase of the FL system in
the proposed diagnosis scheme neuro-fuzzy
approaches are used for designing FL feature
evaluation modules. Basically neuro-fuzzy approaches
can be understood as the employment of learning
strategies derived from the domain of neural network
theory to support and accelerate the development of a
FL system. Several neuro-fuzzy concepts have been ously an inert gas is blown into the cylinder in order to
described in the literature, in the proposed diagnosis create a difference pressure p. The controlled
scheme we follow the NEFCLASS (NEuro Fuzzy geometrical variables are the tube diameter D and the
CLASSification) approach proposed by Nauck et. al. wall thickness W. The process is characterized by the
[20]. The NEFCLASS model provides a neuro-fuzzy following difficulties:
classification approach derived from the generic fuzzy • high complexity of system
perceptron [19]. The structure of the model is dynamics due to a highly gas pressure

illustrated by fig. 7. The neuro-fuzzy model is non-linear rheology,

characterized by a three layer topology. The input • non-linear coupled multi- furnace
glass
cylinder

nodes I in the input layer are connected by fuzzy sets µ variable system behavior
with the rule nodes R in the hidden layer. For with time varying, distrib-
semantical reasons each rule unit is assigned to a uted parameters, temperature

single output node C in the output layer, in order to • large time varying dead-
avoid weighted rules, this weights are fixed to 1. To times caused by large sen-
obtain an optimal classification result the learning sor distances and changing reaction
zone
diameter
wall thickness

algorithm creates the rules and adjusts the fuzzy sets pulling speed, pulling speed

from training examples. • stochastic disturbances

tractor
caused by inhomogeneous
µ glass tube

1 material
• large drift disturbances
µ caused by thermal effects Fig 8:manufacturing
Scheme of a glass tube
Process Phases

plant
1
during start, transient and
Features

end phases of the process.

1 Fig. 9 gives an overview of the normalized meas-
ured control variables diameter D, wall thickness W
µ
1 and temperature ϑ over a whole charge. The process
can be divided into three major process phases – the
start, stationary and transient phase. Particularly the
Input Layer Hidden Layer Output Layer transient process phase, resulting from welds in the
raw glass cylinder, is characterized by heavy distur-
Fig. 7: NEFCLASS system for feature evaluation
bances of the process variables.
For initialization the user has to define the initial
fuzzy sets for partitioning the domains of the several
inputs and the maximum number of rules that may be
created in the hidden layer. After training the system
corresponds to a simple fuzzy system, the
classification knowledge can be easily accessed and
extended by the user. A detailed description of the
NEFCLASS system is given in [20].

III. APPLICATION TO AN INDUSTRIAL PROCESS

The proposed supervisory control concept has been
applied to an industrial glass tube manufacturing plant
shown in fig. 8. During operation of the process a
glass cylinder is fed with constant speed into a furnace
where it is heated up to its softening temperature ϑ
start stationary transient stationary
and pulled out with a controllable speed v. Simultane-
Fig. 9: Control values over a whole charge
A. Supervisory Control Concept
In the last years several control strategies for the
different process phases have been developed. A
detailed discussion of the FL controllers is presented
in [21]:
• A FL start-up control strategy which brings up the
process state as fast as possible to the desired
setpoints without overshooting.
• A stationary FL control concept which is applied in
the stationary process phases in order to minimize
stochastic disturbances while considering the
extraordinarily large dead times.
• A heuristic FL control concept for transient process
phases with heavy disturbances in order to minimize
the waste within this period.
So far these control schemes have been manually
activated by operators. Often the operators have been
overwhelmed by the task of choosing the adequate
time instant for activating the several control schemes.
Therefore it was of outmost importance to develop a
supervisory control scheme, which is capable of
activating automatically the different process phase
specific low-level controllers.
ϑ
Process
FLC Diagnosis
Start Phase
D0 eD p D
FLC Mode Batch
- eW v
Stationary Selector Process
W0 - W
FLC
Transient
Fig. 10: Developed control scheme for an industrial batch process
Fig. 10 shows the basic structure of the developed
control scheme. The lower level contains the well-
tried controllers of the different process phases. Based
on the identified actual process phase these control
strategies are activated by the mode selector [5]. To
achieve fast recognition of the process phases only the
sensor signals of the diameter D and the temperature ϑ
are used as inputs to the diagnosis module. The
measured wall thickness W is ignored due to its large
measuring dead time.
B. Process Diagnosis
The functionality of the developed control scheme
depends strongly on the reliable identification of the
actual process phase by the diagnosis scheme. Due to
the complexity of the considered industrial batch
process, only the functionality of a simplified
diagnosis module for detecting the three process
phases will be outlined.
As already mentioned above transient process
phases result from welds in the raw glass cylinder. A
typical time response of the diameter within a transient
process phase is shown in fig. 11. In order to detect
such typical patterns in the diameter D a WNN signal
classifier is trained, the generated feature FW testifies
if the pattern occurs in the considered signal or not.
Fig. 11 shows the structure of the implemented WNN.
The network contains six wavelet nodes and four and
one sigmoid neuron respectively in the hidden and
output layer.
PD
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
Desired
Training Patterns Output
Fig 11:WNN for detecting welds
To obtain a reliable pattern classification result
several training patterns have been extracted from
different recorded process cycles. With respect to the
supervised learning algorithm of the WNN all patterns
are assigned to corresponding output values, i.e. if the
pattern results from a weld the desired output FW of
the network is 1 otherwise 0.

Fig 12:Feature Weld over a whole charge
Fig 12 shows the simulated feature FW over a whole
charge. Two welds are detected, the first weld occurs
during the start phase, the second one in the transient
process phase. The generated feature PD is capable of
detecting welds, but it is not sufficient to distinguish
between the start and transient process phase. To
determine the transient process phase correctly more
features have to be incorporated into the feature
evaluation module. Thus the process variables
diameter D and temperature ϑ are analyzed by FL
setpoint evaluation realized by the following set of
fuzzy rules:
if y(t) is small then SY(y) is no (N)
if y(t) is between then SY(y) is yes (Y)
if y(t) is larger then SY(y) is no (N)
Fig. 13 shows the generated features SD (setpoint
diameter) and ST (setpoint temperature) over the
process time. As can be seen in fig 12 and 13 the
feature evaluation step leads to a significant
compression of the signal information from which the
different process phases can be identified by the
following FL evaluation module. Fig 14 illustrates the
implemented neuro-fuzzy module. The three generated
features are used as inputs to the process phase
evaluation module. Before training the system is
initialized with 2 fuzzy sets per input and three outputs
corresponding to the process phases to be classified.
The training data is composed out of several different
recordings from measured process data. As an
example in fig 14 in the left column the three features
within the three different process phases are displayed.
Fig 13. FL setpoint detection
During the training phase the learning algorithm
generated 5 rules and adjusted the fuzzy sets until the
classification performance goal was reached. After
training the evaluation module represents a simple FL
system, it can be interpreted in the form of rules, e.g.
the rule for classifying the transient phase is:
if Weld is yes (Y) and
Diameter Setpoint is no (N) and
Temperature Setpoint is yes (Y)
then
Process Phase is transient
In the left column of fig 14 the simulated output of
the FL module is shown. As can be seen the classifi-
cation result is very accurate compared with the
desired response.
The presented diagnosis module for detecting the
different process phase is exemplary. The developed
and implemented diagnosis systems uses 16 different
features generated out of 12 measured process signals
and contains 7 neuro fuzzy modules to determine
several process phases and states of the manufacturing
process.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, a new two-level FL based approach for
process diagnosis is outlined. In combination with the
presented supervisory control concept it permits the
decomposition of difficult control problems into a
series of smaller and simpler ones. The concept has
been successfully applied to an industrial batch
process.

Fig 14. Process Phase evaluation with a neuro-fuzzy module
REFERENCES
[1] L. Zadeh, “Outline of a new approach to the analysis of
complex synhesis with a fuzzy logic controller”, Int. J. Amn
Machines Studies, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp1-13, 1975
[2] E. H. Mamdani, “Application of Fuzzy Logic to Approximate
Reasoning Using Linguistic Synthesis”, IEEE Transactions on
Computers, vol. C-26, no. 12, pp. 1182-1191, Dec. 1977.
[3] M. Sugeno, Ed., “Industrial Applications of Fuzzy Control”,
Amsterdam Holland, 1985
[4] Zimmermann, H.-J., v. Altrock, “Fuzzy Logic – Anwen-
dungen”, Oldenburg Verlag, München, 1994
[5] Bonissone, P. P., ”Industrial Applications of Fuzzy Logic at
General Electric”, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 83, No. 3,
March 1995
[6] M. Koch, Th. Kuhn, J. Wernstedt, “Fuzzy Control”,
Oldenburg Verlag, München, 1996
[7] P. M. Frank, “Diagnoseverfahren in der Automatisierungs-
technik” at – Automatisierungstechnik Februar 1994, S. 47-64
[8] Willsky, A.S.,Jones, H. L.,”A generalized likelihood ratio
testing approach for the detection and estimation of jumps in
linear systems”, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 21, pp. 108-112,
Jan. 1976
[9] R. Isermann (Hrsg.), “Ueberwachung und Fehlerdiagnose”,
VDI-Verlag GmbH, Duesseldorf 1994
[10] Kristian Kroschel: „Statistische Nachrichtentheorie“, Springer-
Verlag 1996
[11] Chr. W. Frey, H.-B Kuntze: „A Neuro-Fuzzy Supervisory
Control System for Industrial Batch Processes“, Proc. The
Ninth International Conference on Fuzzy Systems FUZZ-
IEEE 2000, San Antonio Texas USA, 7-10 May 2000, S.116-
121
[12] A. K. Louis, P. Maaß, A. Rieder, “Wavelets”, Teubner
Studienbücher, Stuttgart 1998
Start
Trans. Stat.
[13] G. Strang, T. Nguyen, “Wavelets and Filter Banks”,
Wellesley-Cambridge Press, Wellesley MA, 1996
[14] S. Mallat, “Wavelet Signal Processing”, Academic Press, 1996
[15] Y. Mallat, D. Coomans, J. Kautsky, O. De Vel: „Classification
Using Adaptive Wavelets for Feature Extraction“ IEEE
Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence,
Vol 19 No. 10, October 1997
[16] Q. Zhang, A. Benveniste: „Wavelet Networks“ IEEE
Transactions on Neural Networks, Vol 3, No. 6, November
1992
[17] H. Dickhaus, H. Heinrich, ”Classifying Biosignals with
Wavelet Networks”, IEEE Enigineering in Medicine and
Biology Magazine, Vol 15, No. 5, September / October 1996
[18] H. Kiendl, “Fuzzy Control methodenorientiert”, Oldenburg
Verlag, München, 1997
[19] D. Nauck, “Neuro-Fuzzy Systems: Review and Prospects” 5.
European Congress on Intelligent Techniques and Soft
Computing (EUFIT’97), Aachen, Sep. 8-11, 1997, pp. 1044-
1053
[20] D. Nauck, F. Klawonn, R. Kruse, “Neuronale Netze und Fuzzy
Systeme”, Vieweg Verlag, 1994
[21] M. Sajidman, H.-B. Kuntze, A. Jacubasch, „A Fuzzy-Logic
Concept for Highly Fast and Accurate Position Control of
Industrial Robots”, IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation ICRA'95, Nagoya (Japan), 21.-27.
Mai 1995.
[22] Chr. W. Frey, M. Sajidman, H.-B. Kuntze, „Ein neuro-
adaptives Regelungskonzept mit on-line-fähigem Kalman-
Filter Lernverfahren für stochastisch gestörte nichtlineare
Prozesse“, VDI/VDE-GMA-Tagung Computational
Intelligence, Berlin, 3./4. März 1998, VDI-Berichte 1381,
S. 381-392, VDI-Verlag, Duesseldorf 1998.