Identification and observer synthesis of nonlinear systems using
Laguerre multiple models
Ghassen MAROUANI1 and Abdelkader MBAREK, Tarek GARNA and Hassani Messaoud
Abstract— This paper proposes a new nonlinear model
entitled decoupled state Laguerre multiple models approach
used for modeling nonlinear systems. This representation is a
combination between the classical multiple models approach
and the Laguerre orthogonal bases used for modeling the
sub-systems. The goal of this combination is to reduce the
complexity of the identification algorithm of multiple models
approach and to make a parametric reduction. The resulting
multiple models prods with its parameter complexity reduction
and with its simple structure offers the possibility to applying
online identification algorithms and, therefore, the synthesis of
adaptive control algorithms. The parameter identification of
the Laguerre multiple models is achieved by using the Newton-
Raphson algorithm. The performances of the Laguerre multiple
models and the proposed identification approach are illustrated
by numerical simulations.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Technological development increases the complexity of
industrial processes and multiplies the economic and en-
vironmental constraints. This complexity can be presented
under different aspects: high nonlinearity, non-stationarity,
and the wide domain of functionality. Thus, the modeling
of physical processes can be presented as a main step to
providing strategies of control and diagnosis. The multimodel
approach is presented as a potential candidate, among mod-
eling techniques of nonlinear systems such as NARMAX
model [1], [2], the Volterra model [3], [4], and the Winner-
Hammerstein model [5]. Indeed, this technique is based on
the representation of a nonlinear system by a set of linear
sub-model valid in operating zones from the operating space
of the real system, ensuring both the modeling simplicity and
the faithfulness of real process representation. In fact, the use
of the tools of analysis and synthesis of linear systems is
considered. In practice, multiple model approach is obtained
by identification, linearisation around different operating
points or by convex polytopic transformation [6]. In this
work we adopt the use of the first technique, identification
of non linear systems as a black box [7], for the simple
reason that we don’t often have the mathematical model
that describe systems which is necessary to use the second
and the third technique to obtain multiple model. At this
level one of the most problem that we have to confront
by using identification technique is parametric complexity,
problem which we opt for solving the use of orthogonal basis
as Laguerre basis, that solution is explained by the linear
character of sub-models, modeled parametric reduction and
1 Ghassen MAROUANI is with Research Laboratory of Automatic Signal
and Image Processing, National School of Engineers of Monastir, University
of Monastir, 5019, Tunisia ghassen.marouani@gmail.com
simplicity manipulation of state equations describing sub-
systems [8], [9], [10]. Regarding these pioneering points, we
propose in this work the use of Laguerre basis for modeling
of nonlinear systems with the multiple model approach, a
technique which called Laguerre multiple models approach.
In this paper we will explain different steps used to identify
non linear systems by mixing the use of multiple model
approach and Laguerre basis.
This paper will be organized as follow: The Second section
presents the principle and the structures of multiple model
approach. The third section describes the Laguerre multiple
models. Fourth section explains the procedure of Laguerre
multiple models identification by applying the Newton-
Raphson algorithm for optimizing the vector of poles specific
for each sub-models. Fifth section describes the design
of Proportional observer using Laguerre multiple models.
Finally, Section 6 illustrates, through simulation example,
the proposed algorithm for Laguerre multiple models poles
optimization and the P observer design using the Laguerre
multiple models.
II. P RINCIPLE OF MULTIPLE MODELS APPROACH
A multiple models is a set of L Linear Time Invariant
(LTI) and causal sub-models aggregated by an interpolation
mechanism to characterize the dynamic behavior of the
overall system. It is characterized by the number of sub-
models, by their structure and by the choice of weighting
functions. A multiple models structure is represented as
follows:
∑L
ŷ(k) = µi (ξ(k))ŷi (k) (1)
i=1
where, ŷ(k) is the multiple models output, L is the sub-
models number, µi (ξ(k)) is the weighting function associ-
ated with the ith sub−model, ξ(k) is the decision variable
and ŷi (k) is the output of the ith sub-model. The weighting
functions µi (ξ(k)) allow to determine the relative contribu-
tion of each sub-model according to the zone where the
system operates and there respect the convexity properties
given as follow :
∑
L
µi (ξ(k)) = 1, 0 ≤ µi (ξ(k)) ≤ 1 ∀ i = 1, · · · , L (2)
i=1
The weighting functions can be constructed from continuous
functions derivatives such as Gaussian functions as follows
:  ( ) The quadratic criterion is defined as:
 (ξ(k) − ci )2

 wi (ξ(k)) = exp − 1

2

 σi2 J(ζ) =
E(z, ζ)
(11)
wi (ξ(k)) 2
(3)


µi (ξ(k)) = L
∑
The optimum Fourier coefficients are obtained by minimiza-


 wj (ξ(k)) tion of the quadratic criterion (9). The gradient of J(ζ) with
j=1 respect to gi,n for (n = 0, . . . , Ni − 1) and (i = 1, . . . , L)
where σi and ci are the dispersion and the centre, respec- is written as follows:
⟨ ⟩
tively, of the indexed variable ξ(k) and L is the number of ∂J(ζ) E(z, ζ)
operations zones (number of sub-models). = , E(z, ζ) = 0 (12)
∂gi,n ∂gi,n
III. L AGUERRE MULTIPLE MODELS From relation (9) and (10) the gradient of truncation error
Consider a nonlinear system decomposed into L Linear with respect to gi,n is written as:
Time Invariant (LTI) and causal sub-systems where each E(z, ζ) ∑L
describes a operating mode and represented by a transfer =− µi (ξ(z))Li,n (z, ζi )U (z) (13)
∂gi,n
function Gi (z) ∈ H 2 (Dc ) (Hardy space). The system output i=1
is described by a multiple models as follows: Defining Xi,n the output of the nth filter relative to the ith
∑
L sub-model:
Y (z) = µi (ξ(z))Gi (z)U (z) (4) Xi,n (z) = Li,n (z, ζi )U (z) (14)
i=1
From relations (12), (13) and (14) we can define the normal
Wahlberg [11] proved that the development of a transfer equation: ⟨ ⟩
function, Gi (z) ∈ H 2 (Dc ), in Laguerre functions is com- Xi,n (z), E(z, ζ) = 0 (15)
plete if ζ ∈] − 1, 1[. This allows to formulate Gi (z)
accurately, using a series of Laguerre functions as follows: By combining the recurrent form (7) of Laguerre orthonor-
mal functions with relation (14), we can formulate a recur-
∞
∑ rence relation for the filter Xi,n (z), for (n = 0, 1, . . .) and
Gi (z) = gi,n Li,n (z, ζi ) (5)
by using the inverse Z-transform we obtain for:
n=0  √
gi,n are the Fourier coefficients of the ith sub-model  xi,0 (k + 1) = ζi xi,0 (k) + 1 − ζi2 u(k)
1) = (1 − ζi )xi,0 (k) + ζi xi,1 (k)−
xi,1 (k + √ (16)
From (4) and (5) the output system Y (z) can be written in 
term of L Laguerre bases as follow: ζi 1 − ζi2 u(k)
(∞ ) for (n ≥ 2) and by successive substitution we obtain:
∑L ∑
Y (z) = µi (ξ(z)) gi,n Li,n (z, ζi ) U (z) (6) xi,n (k + 1) = ζi xi,n (k)
∑n−2
i=1 n=0
+(1 − ζi2 ) j=0 (−ζi )(n − j − 1)xi,j (k)
√
where Li,n (z, ζi ) also named discreet Laguerre filters is the +(1 − ζi )2 xi,n−1 (k) + (−ζi )n 1 − ζi2 u(k)
Z-transform of the nth Laguerre function of the ith sub- (17)
model given by: Defining the following vector xi,Ni (k) containing the La-
 √ guerre filters output:
 L (z, ζ ) = 1 − ζi z
 2
 i,0 i [ ]T
√z − ζi (7) Xi,Ni (k) = xi,0 (k) xi,1 (k) · · · xi,Ni −1 (k)

 1 − ζi (18)
 Li,n (z, ζi ) = zLi,n−1 (z, ζi )
z − ζi and the vector Ci grouping the Fourier coefficients gni (n =
The Laguerre multiple models given by (6) can be truncated 0, . . . , Ni − 1) and (i = 1, . . . , L) :
at finite orders Ni , (i = 1, . . . , L), as follow: [ ]T
Ci = gi,0 gi,1 · · · gi,Ni −1 (19)
(N −1 )
∑L ∑i
The output of ith sub-model of the Laguerre multiple models
Y (z) = µi (ξ(z)) gi,n Li,n (z, ζi )U (z) + E(z, ζ)
is written:
i=1 n=0 {
(8) Xi,Ni (k + 1) = Ai Xi,Ni (k) + bi u(k)
(20)
where E(z, ζ) is the truncation error defined as follow: ŷi = CiT Xi,Ni (k)
( ∞ ) The decoupled multiple models approach expansion on La-
∑L ∑
E(z, ζ) = µi (ξ(z)) gi,n Li,n (z, ζi )U (z) (9) guerre orthonormal bases titled Laguerre multiple models is
i=1 n=Ni written as follow:

The truncation error can be written as : 
 Xi,Ni (k + 1) = Ai Xi,Ni (k) + bi u(k)
(N −1 ) 
 ŷi = ĈiT Xi,Ni (k)
∑
L ∑i

E(z, ζ) = Y (z) − ∑L (21)

µi (ξ(z)) gi,n Li,n (z, ζi )U (z) 

i=1 n=0 
 ŷ(k) = µi (ξ(k))ŷ i (k)
(10) i=1
with, for (r = 1, · · · , Ni ) and (s = 1, · · · , Ni ) Y is a vector include the system output for (k = 1, . . . , H):

 ζi if r = s Y = [y(1), . . . , y(H)]
T
(31)
Ai (r, s) = (−ζi )(r−s−1) (1 − ζi2 ) if r > s (22)

0 if r < s The matrix X can be written as follow:
and √ X = [X1,N1 , . . . , Xi,Ni , . . . , XL,NL ] (32)
bi (r) = (−ζi )r−1 1 − ζi2 · · · , Ni ) (23)
where
The output ŷ(k) of Laguerre multiple models given by
[ ]T
relation (21) can be written in the vector form as: Xi,Ni = µi (ξ(1))Xi,N T
i
T
(1), . . . , µi (ξ(H))Xi,N i
(H)
(33)
ŷ(k) = Ĉ T X(k) (24)
The criterion (27) is nonlinear with respect to the poles ζ, the
with: minimum can be found by an iterative method: we start with
an initial estimate of ζ then we refine at each step until the
   
Ĉ1 µ1 (ξ(k))X1,N1 (k) poles converge. Note that, for most nonlinear optimization
 ..   ..  methods, the minimum obtained is a local minimum located
 .   . 
    in the neighborhood of the initial estimate.
Ĉ =  
 Ĉi  , X(k) = 
 iµ (ξ(k))X i,Ni (k)  (25)
 Once the initial poles ζ are choose, we proceed to their
 .   .. 
 ..   .  refinement using the Newton-Raphson method as follow:
µL (ξ(k))XL,NL (k)  
ĈL  ∂ 2 J (ζ) −1 ( ∂J (ζ) )
 2  2
The identification of Laguerre multiple models Fourier coef- ζ m+1
= ζ − µ
m
 (34)
 ∂ζ 2  m ∂ζ ζ=ζ m
ficients Ĉ is made by the Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) as ζ=ζ
follows:
ζ m+1 and ζ m design the poles vector at iteration (m + 1)
( )−1 T and at iteration (m), respectively. µ at for role to reduce or
Ĉ = XT X X Y (26)
amplify the effect of the Hessian inverse, generally choice
IV. O PTIMIZATION OF L AGUERRE MULTIPLE MODEL µ=1
POLES The gradient of criterion J2 (ζ) with respect to ζ is obtained
by differentiating (29).
The Laguerre multiple models poles ζ are optimized in
terms of minimizing the quadratic criterion of the truncation [ ]T
∂J2 (ζ) ∂J2 (ζ) ∂J2 (ζ) ∂J2 (ζ)
error given by (10): = ··· (35)
∂ζ ∂ζ1 ∂ζ2 ∂ζL
( )2
1∑ ∑
H L
with:
J2 = y(k) − T
µi (ξ(k)Ĉi Xi,Ni (k) (27)
2 i=1
k=1 ∂J2 (ζ) ∂X ∂ Ĉ
= −ET Ĉ − ET X , i = 1···L (36)
where y(k) is the measurement output and Xi,Ni (k) and Ĉi ∂ζi ∂ζi ∂ζ
are the state vector and the Fourier coefficients of the ith From the normal equation given by (15) the gradient (36)
Laguerre sub-model given by (18) and (19), respectively. can be simplified to:
From relations (21) and (24), the quadratic criterion given
by (27) can be written as: ∂J2 (ζ) ∂X
= −ET Ĉ (37)
∂ζi ∂ζi
1 ∑( )2
H
J2 = y(k) − Ĉ T X(k) Differentiating (37) the hessian matrix is given by:
2
k=1 (28)  2 
1 ∑H
∂ J2 (ζ) ∂ 2 J2 (ζ)
= (e(k))
2
 ∂ζ ∂ζ ···
∂ζ1 ∂ζL 
∂ 2 J2 (ζ)  
2 1 1
i=1  .. .. 
=  (38)
where e(k) is the truncation error given by (10). For H ∂ζ 2  2 . . 
 ∂ J2 (ζ) ∂ J2 (ζ) 
2
measurements this criterion can be written in matrix form ···
as follow: ∂ζL ∂ζ1 ∂ζL ∂ζL
1
2
1 with:
J2 = Y − XĈ) = ET E (29) ( )
2 2
∂ 2 J2 (ζ) ∂XT ∂ Ĉ T T ∂X
with X is a matrix that include the state vectors X(k), for = T
Ĉ + X Ĉ
∂ζi ∂ζj ∂ζi ∂ζi ∂ζj
(k = 1, 2, . . . , H) given by (25), as follow: (39)
[ ]T ∂2X ∂X ∂ Ĉ
−E (
T
Ĉ + )
X = X T (1), . . . , X T (i), . . . , X T (H) (30) ∂ζi ∂ζj ∂ζj ∂ζi
The gradient of the Fourier coefficients vector Ĉ with respect by (7) the derivative of nth Laguerre function given by (49)
to ζ is formulated from (26) as follow: is written, for (n = 0, . . . , Ni − 1):
( ) 
∂ Ĉ ( T )−1 ∂XT ( )−1 

∂Li,0 (z, ζi )
= X X Yp − XT X  = Ki Li,1 (z, ζi )
∂ζ ∂ζ  ∂ζi
( T ) (40) ∂Li,n (z, ζi ) (50)
∂X ∂X 
 =
X + XT Ĉ 
 ∂ζ i
∂ζ ∂ζ Ki [(n + 1) Li,n+1 (z, ζi ) − nLi,n−1 (z, ζi )]
where [ ]T 1
∂X ∂X ∂X ∂X with Ki = for (i = 1, . . . , L)
= ··· (41) 1 − ζi2
∂ζ ∂ζ1 ∂ζ2 ∂ζL The substitution of (50) in (48) and the Z-transform inverse
and allow to write, for (i = 1, . . . , L):
[ ]T
∂2X ∂2X ∂2X ∂2X 
= ··· (42)  ∂xi,0 (k)
∂ζ 2 ∂ζ12 ∂ζ22 ∂ζL2  = Ki xi,1 (k)
∂ζi (51)
 [ ]
From relation (33), in the following we give the gradient and  ∂xi,n (k) = Ki (n + 1)xi,(n+1) (k) − nxi,(n−1) (k)
∂ζi
the hessian of X with respect to ζi :
[ ] for n = 1, . . . , Ni − 1
∂X ∂Xi,Ni
= 0(H×N1 ) · · · · · · 0(H×NL ) (43) Using the notations introduced previously in (46), we can
∂ζi ∂ζi deduce the expression of the first derivative of Xi,Ni (k) with
[ ] respect to ζi :
∂2X ∂ 2 Xi,Ni
= 0(H×N1 ) ··· ··· 0(H×NL ) ∂Xi,Ni (k)
∂ζi2 ∂ζi2 = Ki ΨNi +1 Xi,Ni +1 (k) (52)
(44) ∂ζi
From (43) and (44) the gradient and the Hessian of the with ΨNi +1 is a Ni × (Ni + 1)-dimensional matrix
quadratic criterion J2 (ζ) with respect to ζ are obtained by
the determination of the first and the second derivatives of 0 1 0 0 ··· 0 0 0
Xi,Ni with respect to ζi . The gradient of Xi,Ni with respect −1 0 2 0 ··· 0 0 0
to ζi is given from relation (33) by: 0 −2 0 3 ··· 0 0 0
[ ]T ΨNi +1 = 0
∂Xi,Ni
T
∂Xi,N (1) T
∂Xi,N (H) 0 −3 0 ··· 0 0 0
i i
= µi (ξ(1)) , . . . , µi (ξ(H)) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
∂ζi ∂ζi ∂ζi . . . . . . . .
(45) 0 0 0 0 ··· −(Ni − 1) Ni0
where, from (18) the first derivative of Xi,Ni (k) with respect (53)
to ζi is: From relation (52) we can deduce the first derivatives of
Xi,Ni with respect to ζi .
T [ ]T
∂Xi,N (k) ∂xi,0 (k) ∂xi,Ni −1 (k) ∂Xi,Ni
i
= ··· (46) = Ki Xi,Ni +1 ΨTNi +1 (54)
∂ζi ∂ζi ∂ζi ∂ζi
It remains to find the analytical expression of the first and The second derivative of Xi,Ni with respect to ζi can be
second derivative of xi,n (k) with respect to ζi for (n = formulated from differentiating (54) as follows:
0, . . . , Ni − 1) and (i = 1, . . . , L).
∂ 2 Xi,Ni
−1 =
xi,n (k) = Z {Xi,n (z)} , Xi,n (z) = Li,n (z, ζi )U (z) ∂ζ[i2 ]
(47) Ki 2 ζi Xi,Ni +1 ΨTNi +1 + Xi,Ni +2 ΨTNi +2 ΨTNi +1
2

From relations (47) we obtain: (55)

∂Xi,n (z) ∂Li,n (z, ζi ) V. D ESIGN OF P OBSERVER
= U (z), (n = 0, . . . , Ni − 1) (48)
∂ζi ∂ζi An observer’s allows the reconstruction of state vectors
From the Z-transform of nth Laguerre function given by (7) using information provided from input/output [12]. In this
paper we use the Laguerre multiple models to design ob-
the derivative of the Laguerre function with respect to ζi servers for nonlinear systems. The observer used to estimate
(i = 1, . . . , L) is: the state variables of the Laguerre multiple models is a
∂Li,0 (z, ζi ) Li,1 (z, ζi ) proportional gain observers given as follow:
= 
∂ζi 1 − ζi2 
 X̂i,Ni (k + 1) = Ai X̂i,Ni (k) + bi u(k) + Ki (y(k) − ŷ(k))

 ŷi (k) = CiT X̂i,N (k)
[ ] i
∂Li,n (z, ζi ) Li,n (z, ζi ) −n(z − ζi )2 + (n + 1)(1 − ζi z)2  ∑L
= 
 µi (ξ(k))CiT X̂i,Ni (k)
∂ζ 1 − ζ2 (z − ζ )(1 − ζ z)  ŷ(k) =
i i i i i=1
(49) (56)
for (n = 1, . . . , Ni − 1) with X̂i,Ni (k) ∈ RNi is the estimate state vector corre-
From the recurrent relation linking the Laguerre filters given sponding to ith sub-models, ŷ(k) is the estimate output, Ki
is the gain of ith observer to determinate, and Ai , bi and The weighting functions are obtained by normalizing gaus-
Ci are given by (22), (23) and (19), respectively. Some sian functions:
modifications are appointed to equation given by (56), so (ξ(k) − ci )
: ωi (ξ(k)) = exp −( ) (66)
[ ]T σ2
X(k) = T
X1,N1
(k) ··· T
Xi,Ni
(k) ··· T
XL,N L
(k) and
(57) ωi (ξ(k))
µi (ξ(k)) = L (67)
also: ∑
    ωj (ξ(k))
A1 0 0 0 0 b1
 ..   ..  j=1
 0 . 0 0 0   . 
    with ci are the centers of the gaussian functions and σ is the
à = 
 0 0 Ai 0 0 
 and B̃ =  bi 
  dispersion coefficient that reflects the degree of interference
 ..   . 
 0 0 0 . 0   . 
. between the different gaussian functions.We also define a
0 0 0 0 AL bL coefficient named normalized mean square error (NMSE)
(58) ∑
M

and y(k) − ym (k))2

 T
µ1 (ξ(k))C1T N M SEdB = 20log10 k=1 (68)
 ..  ∑
M
 .  y(k)2
 
C̃(k) =  µ
 i (ξ(k))C T
i

 (59) k=1
 .. 
 .  A. Identification of Laguerre multiple models
µL (ξ(k))CLT 1) Structural identification: The structural identification
consists to determine the optimal sub-model number and
also
[ ]T the truncation order of each Laguerre sub-model. In Figure
K̃ = K1T ··· KiT ··· KLT (60) 1 we draw the variation of the NMSE according to the L
sub-models for truncation order N = 7. By examination of
then, the observer given by (56) is:
this figure, we can specify the optimal sub-model number
{
X̂(k + 1) = Aobs (k)X̂(k) + B̃u(k) + K̃(y(k) − ŷ(k)) as Lopt = 3. We set the number of sub-model L = 3,
ŷ(k) = C̃ X̂(k) −15
(61)
with: −20
Aobs (k) = Ã − K̃ C̃(k) (62)
−25
the gains Ki of observers are determined so that the estima-
NMSE(dB)

tion error converges to zero. −30

e(k) = X(k) − X̃(k) (63) −35

The necessary conditions to assure the convergence of esti- −40

mations errors is given by the following theorem :
Theorem:[12] The state estimation error converge to zero if −45
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Sub−models number
there is a symmetric matrix defined positif P and a matrix
G which resolve this LMI : Fig. 1. Variation of the NMSE depending on the sub-model number L
[ ]
(1 − 2α)P ÃT P − C̃iT GT
>0 (64)
P Ã − GC̃i P centers of weighting functions respectively c1 = −0.4, c2 =
0 and c3 = 0, 4, and the dispersion coefficient σ = 0.9,
where 0 < α < 0.5 and the gain of observer is given by
and we have chosen as the variable indexing for weighting
K̃ = P −1 G.
functions the input u(k), we have determined the N M SE
VI. A PPLICATION respect to each truncation order N and draw this variation in
Figure 2 to identify an optimal order. By examining Figure
The system is defined by: 2 we opt for a truncation order Nopt = 3, truncation order
 which corresponds to N M SEdb = −39.24dB.
 0.6 − 0.6y(k)
a (k) = 2) Poles optimization: In Figure 3 we plot the evolution
1 + 0.2y(k) (65)
 of the pole vectors, for a truncation order N = 3 and by
y (k) = 0.6(0.1 − 0.6a(k))y(k) + a(k)u(k)
setting the number of sub-models L = 3, which each pole is
with y(k) is the output at the time instant k, u(k) is the relative to a sub-model. Indeed the pole related to sub-models
control signal applied at the same time, and a(k) is a specific converge respectively to [0.2605 −0.0882 −0.2523].
variable to this system.
 −34
errors to zero which confirm the success of the synthesis of
−35
P observer.

1
−36
NMSE(dB)

−37 0.8

−38 0.6

−39 0.4

−40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.2
Truncated order N

0
Fig. 2. Determining the optimal truncation order

−0.2
0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50
ζ1
0.3 ζ2 Fig. 5. Validation of decoupled Laguerre multi−model observer
0.2 ζ
3

0.1
vector of poles

0
VII. C ONCLUSION
−0.1

−0.2
In this paper, we propose to use a Laguerre multiple
models for modeling a non linear systems. This approach
−0.3
is based on the use of the multimodel approach which is a
−0.4
solution to model non linear systems, and the Laguerre basis
−0.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 which allows the modeling of linear systems. To identify
Measures number
the parameters (Fourier coefficients and Laguerre poles) of
Fig. 3. Poles convergence
the Laguerre multiple models, we propose, in this work, an
algorithm based on the OLS and Newton Raphson methods.
The Laguerre multiple models is used to synthesis a P
observer for non linear systems. In order to validate the
3) Validation: Indeed to validate the modeling technique Identification algorithm and the P observer, a simulation
we represent the output of real system and the output of results are presented using numerical example.
the Laguerre multiple models. By examining the Figure
R EFERENCES
0.6
Real output
0.5 Laguerre multiple models output [1] S. Chen and S. A. Billings, “Representation of non-linear systems: the
NARMAX model,” International Journal of Control, vol. 49, no. 3,
0.4 pp. 1013–1032, March 1989.
0.3 [2] A. Rahrooh and S. Shepard, “Identification of nonlinear systems
using NARMAX model,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods &
0.2 Applications, vol. 71, no. 12, pp. 1198–1202, 2009.
0.1 [3] A. da Rosa, R. Campello, and W. Amaral, “Choice of free parameters
in expansions of discrete-time volterra models using kautz functions,”
0 Automatica, vol. 43, no. 12, p. 10841091, June 2007.
−0.1 [4] K. Bouzrara, A. Mbarek, and T. Garna, “Non-linear predictive con-
troller for uncertain process modelled by gobf-volterra models,” In-
−0.2 ternational Journal of Modelling, Identification and Control, vol. 19,
−0.3
no. 4, pp. 307–322, 2013.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 [5] E. W. Bai and M. Fu, “A blind approach to hammerstein model
identification,” IEEE Transactions on signal processing, vol. 50, no. 7,
Fig. 4. Validation of decoupled multi−model pp. 1610–1619, August 2002.
[6] A. Nagy, G. Mourot, G. Schutz, and J. Ragot, “Modelling a biological
reactor using a multiple model structure,” Journal Européen des
(4), the error resulting from the modeling is almost zero, Systèmes Automatisés, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 423–443, January 2010.
a performance which ensures the success of the modeling [7] J. A. K. Suykens, Nonlinear Modeling: Advanced Black-Box Tech-
niques. Springer-Verlag New York Inc., 2012.
approach. [8] S. Gunnarsson and B. Wahlberg, “Some asymptotic results in recursive
identification using laguerre models,” International Journal of Adap-
B. Validation of P observer tive Control and Signal Processing, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 313–333, October
Then to validate the synthesis of P observer we draw in 1991.
[9] M. A. Masnadi-Shirazi and N. Ahmed, “Optimum laguerre networks
Figure 5 the errors related of different components of state for a class of discrette-time systems,” IEEE Transactions on Signal
vectors of a sub-model, we remark the convergence of this Processing, vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 2104 – 2108, Septembre 1991.
[10] A. Mbarek, K. Bouzrara, and H. Messaoud, “Optimal expansion
of linear system using generalized orthogonal basis,” in Electrical
Engineering and Software Applications (ICEESA), International Con-
ference on, Hammamet, Tunisia, March 2013.
[11] B. Wahlberg, “System identification using laguerre models,” Automatic
Control, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 551–562, May 1991.
[12] R. Orjuela, B. Marx, J. Ragot, and D. Maquin, “Observer design
for nonlinear systems described by multiple models,” in 7th IFAC
Symposium on Fault Detection, Supervision and Safety of Technical
Processes, Safeprocess, Barcelona, Espagne, Jun 2009.