Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477

www.elsevier.com/locate/compeleceng

Principle of frequency-domain balanced structure in

linear systems and model reduction
P. Karim Aghaee, Ali Zilouchian *, S. Nike-Ravesh, Abbas H. Zadegan
Department of Electrical Engineering, Florida Atlantic University, P.O. Box 3091, Boca Raton, FL 33431-0991, USA
Received 18 November 1997; received in revised form 14 April 1999; accepted 9 September 1999

Abstract
In this paper a novel model reduction technique for linear time-invariant systems is presented. The
proposed technique is based on a conceptual viewpoint regarding the balancing of the controllability and
observability Gramians of a multivariable system in a given range of frequency. The conditions for the
stability of the reduced model are also provided. From a real-time applicability viewpoint, the frequency-
domain balanced structure provides an attractive approach to the model reduction of large scaled systems.
The simulation results establish the effectiveness of this proposed method compared to the effectiveness of
existing techniques.
Ó 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Frequency-domain; Model reduction technique; Linear time-invariant

1. Introduction

The incentive for obtaining a reduced model arises when one is confronted with a complex high
order system for real-time computations and controls. Because a model is a mathematical rep-
resentation of a physical system or the characterization of a given system from the input–output
data information, the simplification of this model is highly desirable in various synthesis and
analysis problems. However, the purpose, motivation, and error criterion between a full-order
model and a reduced-order system in a given frequency range of operation should be specified
before a true justification and conclusion can be reached regarding the replacement of the reduced
model with the original one. In other words, the reduced model should represent the physical

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-561-297-3468; fax: +1-561-297-2336.
E-mail address: zilouchi@acc.fau.edu (A. Zilouchian).

0045-7906/02/$ - see front matter Ó 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 4 5 - 7 9 0 6 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 4 5 - 3
464 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477

system with sufficient fidelity such that performance objectives can be met using the reduced
model instead of the original model in a given bandwidth.
In the opinion of many investigators of model reduction, two developments have dramatically
changed the status of the model reduction theory within the last two decades. These are the the-
ories of Moore’s balanced realization [1] and Optimal Hankel–Norm approximation [2]. The main
advantage of these two methods is that they address the problem of Kalman’s minimal realization
theory. Specifically, because the rank of a matrix is a relative number, by observation of singular
values of the controllability and the observability Gramians of the Hankel matrix of a system, the
minimality of the system can be determined. However, the operational frequency bandwidth of a
system is a critical factor which should be addressed as an integrated part of any reliable model
reduction scheme [3–5,8,12]. In Ref. [5] model reduction for linear time-invariant systems of low
frequency range has been addressed. Furthermore, balanced structure for any single frequency x0
has been investigated in Ref. [6]. In addition, therein, the high frequency as well as low frequency
approximations have been addressed and the interrelations between various structures have been
obtained. In addition, several results related to model reduction of unstable systems have been
reported [9–11]. Although Enns in Ref. [3] has proposed inputs and outputs frequency weighting
blocks for the balanced structures, there has not been any systematic balanced realization ap-
proach to address the problem of model reduction in a range of frequency of operation.
In this paper, we present a systematic approach toward model reduction of a time-invariant
system in a given range of frequency. The frequency bandwidth of a system is a pivotal factor from
both theory as well as application. We show that the proposed frequency-domain balanced struc-
ture is a natural approach from a practical viewpoint of model reduction for large scaled systems.

2. Frequency-domain balanced structure

2.1. Background: time-domain balanced approach [1]

Consider a high order controllable and observable model of the form

x_ ðtÞ ¼ AxðtÞ þ BuðtÞ; ð1aÞ

yðtÞ ¼ CxðtÞ; ð1bÞ

where x 2 Rn is a state vector, u 2 Rp represents the input vector, and y 2 Rq is the output vector
with matrices A, B, and C in the appropriate dimensions.
The controllability and observability Gramians of the system are, respectively, defined as:
Z T
D Tt
Wc ¼ eAt BBT eA dt; ð2aÞ
0

Z T
D T
Wo ¼ eA t C T CeAt dt: ð2bÞ
0

For an asymptotically stable system, the Gramian matrices satisfy the following Lyapunov
equations [1]:
 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477 465

AWc þ Wc AT ¼ BBT ; ð3aÞ

AT Wo þ Wo A ¼ C T C: ð3bÞ
In Ref. [1], a similarity transformation was found such that the matrices Wc and Wo are both
equal and diagonal (i.e., balanced):
W c ¼ W o ¼ R2 ¼ diag½ri ; i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; n: ð4Þ
Therefore, the balanced form of system (1) can be represented as:
x_ ðtÞ ¼ AxðtÞ þ BuðtÞ; ð5aÞ

yðtÞ ¼ CxðtÞ: ð5bÞ

The second order modes [ri ] provide a quality measurement for the systems (5a) and (5b) to be
considered as two interconnected ‘‘dominant’’ and ‘‘weak’’ subsystems of Eqs. (5a) and (5b)
described by the following:
      
x_ 1 ðtÞ A  12 x1 ðtÞ
 11 A 1
B
x_ 2 ðtÞ ¼ A  22 x2 ðtÞ þ B
 21 A  2 uðtÞ; ð6aÞ

 
  x1 ðtÞ
yðtÞ ¼ C 1 C2 ð6bÞ
x2 ðtÞ
with
 
R11 0
R¼ ; ð7Þ
0 R22
where
kR11 k2 kR22 k2 : ð8Þ
Matrices A11 , B1 , C 1 denote the approximation and the reduced model of system (1). It is also
possible to obtain a fixed error tolerance as discussed in Refs. [2–4].

2.2. Frequency-domain characteristics

In this section, new results related to the frequency-domain controllability and observability
Gramians and their properties from an input–output energy distribution viewpoint are presented.
Furthermore, the relationships between frequency-domain and time-domain balanced structures
are established.

Theorem 2.1 (Extension of Parseval’s theorem). Assume AðtÞ 2 Rm n , BðtÞ 2 Rn p

are real matrix
functions with elements that are continuous, bounded, and squared integrable:
Z þ1 Z þ1
1
AðtÞBðtÞ dt ¼ AðjxÞBðjxÞ dx: ð9Þ
1 2p 1
466 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477

Proof. The results can be attained in a manner similar to the scalar case [6].

We will apply the above theorem to derive the relationship between the controllability and the
observability Gramians in the time domain and frequency domain.

Definition 2.1. The controllability and observability Gramians in the frequency domain are
defined as follows:
Z þ1
ðWx Þc ¼ ðjxI  AÞ1 BBT ðjxI  AT Þ1 dx; ð10aÞ
1
Z þ1
ðWx Þo ¼ ðjxI  AT Þ1 C T CðjxI  AÞ1 dx: ð10bÞ
1

Lemma 2.1. For an asymptotically stable linear time-invariant system (1) the following relationship
between time-domain Gramians (2) and frequency-domain Gramians (10) can be proven as:

ðWx Þc ¼ 2pWc ; ð11aÞ

ðWx Þo ¼ 2pWo : ð11bÞ

Proof. We apply Fourier transform to controllability Gramian in the time domain. Then we use
Parseval’s extension theorem to convert the Gramian into frequency domain as follows:
Z þ1 Z þ1
At T AT t
Wc ¼ e BB e dt ¼ EðtÞET ðtÞ dt; ð12aÞ
0 0

1
EðtÞ ¼ eAt B and EðjxÞ ¼ ðjxI  AÞ B: ð12bÞ

Now, by using Parseval’s theorem and Eqs. (9) and (12a) can be written as:
Z þ1 Z þ1
1 1 1
Wc ¼ EðjxÞE ðjxÞ dx ¼ ðjxI  AÞ1 BBT ðjxI  AT Þ1 dx ¼ ðWx Þc ;
2p 1 2p 1 2p
ð13Þ
where the symbol ( ) represents complex conjugate transpose, and that for Eq. (14) we apply a
similar approach to attain the result
1
Wo ¼ ðWx Þc : ð14Þ
2p
It should be mentioned that Wcf and Wof are in the general form of:
Z þ1
EðjxÞE ðjxÞ dx: ð15Þ
1

The value of EðjxÞE ðjxÞ inside the integral represents the energy distribution of the signal in a
particular frequency x. In the proceeding section, the relationship between the various elements of
 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477 467

above matrix integral (15) as well as the input–output energy distribution of a given linear system
is presented. 

3. Physical interpretation of the frequency-domain Gramians

It is convenient to use the signal flow graphs similar to the one in Ref. [1] to present the physical
interpretation of newly defined Gramians. Suppose we apply a test signal uðtÞ to the input of Fig.
1 with all the initial conditions set equal to zero. We obtain a matrix D in the frequency domain by
the following formula:
Z þ1 Z þ1
1
D¼ xðtÞxT ðtÞ dt ¼ ðjxI  AÞ1 BuðjxÞu ðjxÞBT ðjxI  AT Þ1 dx: ð16Þ
0 2p 1

For white noise test signal ½juðjxÞj2 ¼ 1, Eq. (16) can be represented as following:
Z þ1
1 1
D¼ ðjxI  AÞ1 BBT ðjxI  AT Þ1 dx ¼ ðWx Þc : ð17Þ
2p 1 2p
The diagonal elements of matrix D represent the energy distribution of each state due to the
following relation:
2 R þ1 R þ1 3
Z þ1 x1 ðtÞxT1 ðtÞ dt 0 x1 ðtÞxT2 ðtÞ dt . . .
6 R þ1 x ðtÞxT ðtÞ dt R þ1 x ðtÞxT ðtÞ dt . . . 7
0

D¼ xðtÞxT ðtÞ dt ¼ 6
4 0
2 1 0 2 2 7: ð18Þ
0 . . . ... ...5
... ... ...
For unstable systems the diagonal elements could reach infinity if the input test signal is white
noise. If we apply the unit step test input uðtÞ with the following characteristic:
2 1 x1 < jxj < x2 ;
juðjxÞj ¼ ð19Þ
0 otherwise;
then matrix D in Eq. (16) can be rewritten as follows:
Z x2
1
D¼ ðjxI  AÞ1 BBT ðjxI  AT Þ1 dx: ð20Þ
2p x1
The following definition is given as an extension of Eq. (10a).

Fig. 1. Signal injection view of the controllability Grammian.

468 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477

Definition 3.1. The frequency-domain controllability Gramian within the range of ½x1 ; x2  is
defined as:
Z x2
D
Wc ½x1 ; x2  ¼ Wcf ¼ ðjxI  AÞ1 BBT ðjxI  AT Þ1 dx: ð21Þ
x1

A similar property holds for the observability Gramian according to Fig. 2 as follows:
Z þ1 Z þ1
T 1
Eo ¼ output energy ¼ y ðtÞyðtÞ dt ¼ y ðjxÞyðjxÞ dx
0 2p 1
Z þ1
1
¼ xT0 ðjxI  AT Þ1 C T CðjxI  AÞ1 xT0 dx
2p 1
 Z þ1 
1 T T 1 T 1
¼ x0 ð  jxI  A Þ C CðjxI  AÞ dx x0 : ð22Þ
2p 1

1 T
Eo ¼ x Wof x0 : ð23Þ
2p 0
With white noise initial condition vector x0 , Eq. (23) becomes
1
Eo ¼ Wof : ð24Þ
2p
Now if the injected test input signal is band limited, then the output energy will be as follows:
Z x2
1
Eo ¼ ðjxI  AT Þ1 C T CðjxI  AÞ1 dx: ð25Þ
2p x1

Definition 3.2. The frequency-domain observability Gramian within the frequency range ½x1 ; x2 
is given by:
Z x2
D
Wo ½x1 ; x2  ¼ Wof ¼ ðjxI  AT Þ1 C T CðjxI  AÞ1 dx: ð26Þ
x1

A straightforward method for the computation of Wcf in Eq. (21) and Wof in Eq. (26) is the
direct computation of the integrals using truncation sum within the given range of frequency.
Through use of finite sum, the frequency Gramians can be readily programmed. Eqs. (21) and (26)
were computed using a recursive sum formula with Matlab package. In general, if the number of

Fig. 2. Signal injection and initial conditions for the observability Grammian.
 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477 469

iterations is sufficiently large, the numerical results for Eqs. (21) and (26) will represent a very
good approximation of the frequency-domain Gramians. This point was investigated by using
various frequency intervals, as well as several number of iterations. It was found that the singular
values of the frequency-domain Gramians converge to singular values of the Gramians of the
original system, if the frequency range is selected to be sufficiently large. However, this approach
needs some amount of computation time. In order to overcome the computational deficiencies
related to time in the above method, the algorithms in Refs. [13,14] can also be utilized. Trans-
formation matrix P has been computed using Cholesky singular value decomposition method [15].

4. Properties of the frequency-domain Gramians

In this section, we define properties of frequency-domain balanced structure to support the

following theorems and lemmas.

Definition 4.1. The system represented by Eqs. (1a) and (1b) is controllable in the interval ½x1 ; x2 
if for an input function u 2 FH2 , an arbitrary state x0 can be transferred to the origin. Symbol
FH2 represents Hardy’s space of analytic input functions uðsÞ with ReðsÞ > 0 in the interval
½x1 ; x2  in H2 norm sense.

Definition 4.2. The system represented by Eqs. (1a) and (1b) is observable in the interval ½x1 ; x2  if
for an output y 2 FH2 , the initial state x0 can be detected. Symbol FH2 represents Hardy’s space
of analytic output functions yðsÞ with ReðsÞ > 0 in the interval ½x1 ; x2  in H2 norm sense.

Lemma 4.1. A linear time-invariant system as described by Eqs. (1a) and (1b) is controllable (ob-
servable) if and only if for a given frequency range of ½x1 ; x2  the frequency-domain controllability
(observability) is non-singular.

Proof. It can be proven similar to the time-domain approach. 

p
Lemma 4.2. For a linear time-invariant system ðA; B; CÞ ! ðAf ; Bf ; C f Þ, the following relations hold:
W cf ¼ P 1 Wcf P T ; ð27Þ

W of ¼ P T Wof P : ð28Þ

Proof. The result follows using direct substitutions. 

Theorem 4.1. For a controllable, observable, and asymptotically stable linear system, the following
Lyapunov equations hold:
AWcf þ Wcf AT ¼ ðBBT F þ FBBT Þ; ð29aÞ

AT Wof þ Wof A ¼ ðC T CF þ F C T CÞ; ð29bÞ

where matrix F is defined by:
470 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477
Z x2
F ¼ ðjxI  AÞ1 dx; ð29cÞ
x1

and the complex conjugate transpose of matrix F is defined as:

Z x2
F ¼ ðjxI  AT Þ1 dx: ð29dÞ
x1

Proof. Please see Appendix A. 

Definition 4.3. A controllable, observable, and asymptotically stable linear system is frequency-
domain balanced if the following conditions are satisfied:
W cf ¼ W of ¼ Rf ð30Þ

Lemma 4.3. For a controllable, observable, and asymptotically stable linear system, there exits a
unique similarity transformation which converts the time-domain system to a frequency-domain
balanced realization.

Proof. The result follows directly from Definition 4.3, Lemmas 4.1, and 4.2. 

Theorem 4.2. For an original asymptotically stable system there is a corresponding reduced model
which is asymptotically stable if and only if Rf in Eq. (4) does not have any repeated entries in the
diagonal elements.

Proof. The above theorem can be proven similar to Ref. [7]. 

Based on the above theorems, an algorithm can be developed to reduce the order of a system’s
model in any frequency range of operation. The significance of the results is the applicability of
the algorithm to various applications that operate at a limited range of frequencies. The results
take full advantage of such an issue to resolve the model reduction problem. It is worth men-
tioning that the proposed algorithm is also valid for a zero to infinite frequency range as it is in
Moore’s time-domain balanced structure. Given such flexibility, the proposed method can be
considered in any frequency range as a generalized version of Moore’s balanced realization.
In the above discussions, only stable systems have been considered. For unstable systems, two
approaches could be utilized. The first approach is similar to Enns [16] in which the unstable
modes of the system are separated from the stable ones by partial fraction expansions
GðsÞ ¼ Gunstable ðsÞ þ Gstable ðsÞ;
where Gunstable ðsÞ represents the transfer function of the unstable mode and Gstable ðsÞ represents the
transfer function of the stable mode of an unstable system. After performing the above separa-
tion, the proposed frequency-domain balancing technique can be applied to the stable part of the
unstable system for model reductions. An alternative method is to utilize the poles shifting
technique for generalizations of balanced structure. However, model reduction of unstable sys-
tems based on the poles shifting method often has serious deficiencies due to the alteration of
 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477 471

unstable modes of the original systems. Therefore, the first approach for model reduction of
unstable systems is the preferred method.

5. Proposed algorithm for model reduction

According to the discussions in the previous sections, the proposed algorithm for model re-
duction of the system described by Eqs. (1a) and (1b) can be summarized by the following steps:

Step 1: Calculate Wcf and Wof in a given frequency range using Eqs. (21) and (26) respectively.
Step 2: Obtain a similarity transformation P so that Eq. (30) holds.
Step 3: Obtain the frequency-domain balanced structure ðAf ; Bf ; C f Þ using similarity transfor-
mation matrix P of step 2.
Step 4: Partition the system according to the singular values of Rf similar to Eqs. (6a) and (6b).
Step 5: New matrices ðA11f ; B1f ; C 1f Þ describe the reduced model of the system in a given range
of frequency.

The proposed matrix provides models reduced at different intervals for various fixed ranges of
frequencies. If we consider the frequency range of ½0; 1Þ, then we obtain the equivalent of Moore’s
balanced structure as we described in Section 2.

6. A numerical example

In this section a numerical example is presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of the pro-
posed method in comparison to Moore’s balanced structure [1]. The selected numerical example
is a controllability canonical realization found in Ref. [1, p. 29] as example # 1.
2 3 2 3
0 1 0 0 0
6 0 0 1 0 7 607
A¼6 4 0
7; B ¼ 6 7; C ¼ ½ 50 15 1 0 : ð31Þ
0 0 1 5 405
50 79 33 5 1
The transfer function of the above system can be represented by
s2 þ 15s þ 50 ðs þ 10Þðs þ 5Þ
GðsÞ ¼ 4 3 2
¼ : ð32Þ
s þ 5s þ 33s þ 79s þ 50 ðs þ 1 þ j4:9Þðs þ 1  j4:9Þðs þ 1Þðs þ 2Þ
The singular values of the balanced controllability and observability Gramians based on the
provided algorithm are given by Moore in Ref. [1] as:
 2 2 2 2
r1 ; r2 ; r3 ; r4 ¼ f0:576; 0:147; 0:0904; 0:0192g: ð33Þ
Moore reduced the above fourth order system to a second order system by eliminating the small
singular values in the third and fourth entries of Eq. (33). Based on Moore’s balanced realization,
the following state-space form can be attained:
472 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477
   
2:1954 1:4503 0:8047
Ab ¼ ; Bb ¼ ; C b ¼ ½ 0:8047 0:7729 : ð34Þ
1:4503 0:5183 0:7729

For the proposed reduced system in the frequency range of ½0:1; 0:5 Hz, the following state
space realization is obtained:
   
5:00284 0:84823 0:84065
Af ¼ ; Bf ¼ ; C f ¼ ½ 0:84065 0:86046 : ð35Þ
0:84823 0:72063 0:86046

Figs. 1–4, respectively, illustrate the simulation results of the above example. In Figs. 3 and 4
the Nyquist and Bode plots are shown to compare the original system GðsÞ with the Moore’s
balanced structure Gb ðsÞ and our proposed frequency-domain system Gf ðsÞ. In Figs. 5 and 6 the
time-domain response of the original system GðsÞ, the reduced order system based on Moore’s
balanced structure Gb ðsÞ, and the proposed structure Gf ðsÞ in the frequency range of ½0:1; 0:5 Hz
are shown. It is observed that inside the given frequency range, the proposed method is superior to
Moore’s balanced structure method. Outside the given frequency range, Moore’s balanced
structure may provide a better approximation model than our proposed algorithm. When the

Fig. 3. Nyquist plots of the numerical example (original GðsÞ, balanced Gb ðsÞ, and proposed frequency domain Gf ðsÞ).
 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477 473

Fig. 4. Bode plots of the numerical example (original GðsÞ, balanced Gb ðsÞ, and proposed frequency domain Gf ðsÞ).

frequency range is between zero to infinity, the proposed algorithm is equivalent to Moore’s
model reduction.

7. Conclusion

The central contribution of this paper is the development of frequency-domain balanced

structure theory. Simulation results have confirmed the effectiveness of the proposed technique for
model reduction of linear time-invariant asymptotically stable control systems.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions
for improving the manuscript.
474 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477

Fig. 5. Step responses of the numerical example (original, balanced, and proposed frequency-domain systems).

Appendix A

In this section, we prove Eq. (29a). Consider an asymptotically stable, controllable, and ob-
servable system in the form of Eqs. (1a) and (1b). If we add and subtract the term jxWc to the
right hand side of the Lyapunov equation (3a) we achieve
 jxWc þ AWc þ jxWc þ Wc AT ¼ BBT ;
ðjxWc þ AWc Þ þ ðjxWc þ Wc AT Þ ¼ BBT ; ðA:1Þ
T T
ðjxI þ AÞWc þ Wc ðjxI þ A Þ ¼ BB :

Now, we multiply Eq. (A.1) from left by ðjxI  AT Þ1 and from right by ðjxI  AT Þ1 to
arrive at

Wc ðjxI  AT Þ1 þ ðjxI  AÞ1 Wc ¼ ðjxI  AÞ1 BBT ðjxI  AT Þ1 : ðA:2Þ
Now, we take the integral of both sides of Eq. (A.2) over the frequency range of ½x1 ; x2  to
attain
 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477 475

Fig. 6. Impulse responses of the numerical example (original, balanced, and proposed frequency-domain systems).

Z x2 Z x2 Z x2
1 T 1 T 1
T
ðjxI  AÞ BB ðjxI  A Þ dx ¼ Wc ðjxI  A Þ dx þ ðjxI  AÞ1 Wc dx:
x1 x1 x1

ðA:3Þ
The left hand side of Eq. (A.3) is the frequency-domain controllability Gramian Wcf . Now, we
construct a new Lyapunov equation using Wcf as follows:
Z x2 Z x2 
AWcf þ Wcf AT ¼ A Wc ð  jxI  AT Þ1 dx þ ðjxI  AÞ1 Wc dx
x x
 Z 1 x2 Z x1 2 
T 1 1
þ Wc ðjxI  A Þ dx þ ðjxI  AÞ Wc dx AT
x x
Z 1x2  Z 1x2 
T 1 1
¼ AWc ðjxI  A Þ dx þ A ðjxI  AÞ dx Wc
x1 x1
 Z x2   Z x2 
T 1 T 1
þ Wc ðjxI  A Þ dx A þ ðjxI  AÞ dx Wc AT : ðA:4Þ
x1 x1
476 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477
Rx Rx
Now, we replace F for x12 ðjxI  AÞ1 dx and F for x12 ðjxI  AT Þ1 dx as defined by Eqs.
(29c) and (29d) respectively.
At this point Eq. (A.4) can be simplified to
AWwc þ Wwc AT ¼ AWc F þ AFWc þ Wc F AT þ FWc AT : ðA:5Þ
After rearrangement of the right hand side of Eq. (A.5), we arrive at
   
AWcf þ Wcf AT ¼ AWc F þ Wc F AT þ AFWc þ FWc AT : ðA:6Þ
At this point we can show that matrices A and F are commutative as follows:
Z x2 Z x2 Z x2
1 1  1
AF ¼ A ðjxI  AÞ dx ¼ AðjxI  AÞ dx ¼ ðjxI  AÞA1 dx
x x x1
Z x2 1 Z 1 x2  Z x2 
 1
1  1 1 1
¼ jxA  I dx ¼ A ðjxI  AÞ dx ¼ ðjxI  AÞ dx A ¼ FA:
x1 x1 x1
ðA:7Þ
Hence, Eq. (A.6) is written as:
AWcf þ Wcf AT ¼ ðAWc þ Wc AT ÞF þ F ðAWc þ Wc AT Þ ¼ ðBBT F þ FBBT Þ: ðA:8Þ
This proves Eq. (29a). Similarly, we derive Eq. (29b).

References

[1] Moore B. Principle component analysis in linear systems: Controllability, observability, and model reduction.
IEEE Trans Automat Contr 1981;20(1):17–31.
[2] Glover K. All optimal Hankel-norm approximation of linear multivariable systems. Int J Control 1984;39(6):1115–
93.
[3] Enns DF. Model reduction with balanced realization: An error bound and frequency weighted generalization. In
Proc. 23rd Confer Decision and Control, 1994. p. 127–32.
[4] Parkash R, Rao SV. Model reduction by low frequency approximation of internally balanced representation. Proc.
28th Confer Decision and Control, 1989. p. 2425–30.
[5] Anderson BO, Liu Y. Controller reduction: concept and approach. Int J Control 1989. p. 802–12.
[6] Brockett RW. Finite dimensional linear systems. New York: Wiley; 1970.
[7] Pernebo L, Silverman LM. Model reduction via balanced state-space representation. IEEE Trans Automat Contr
1982;27(2):382–7.
[8] Parkash R. Properties of a low frequency approximation balancing method for unstable systems. IEEE Trans
Automat Contr 1994;39:1135–41.
[9] Chiu TY. Model reduction by the low frequency approximation balancing method for unstable systems. IEEE
Trans Automat Contr 1996;41(7):995–7.
[10] Zilouchian A. Balanced structure and model reduction of unstable systems. Proc IEEE SouthCon, 1992. p. 457–61.
[11] Meyer DC, Srivivasan S. Balancing and model reduction for second-order form linear systems. IEEE Trans
Automat Contr 1996;41(11):1632–44.
[12] Zilouchian A, Aghaee K, Nike-Ravesh S. Model reduction of large scaled systems via frequency-domain balanced
structures. Proc Am Control Confer, 1997.
[13] Pernaratue K, Jury EI, Mansour M. An algorithm for model reduction of 2-D discrete time systems. IEEE Trans
Circuits and systems 1990;37(9):1116–33.
[14] Agathoklis P. On the various forms and methods of solution of the Lyapunov equation for 2-D discrete systems. In
Proc 24th Confer Decision and Control, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, 1985.
 P.K. Aghaee et al. / Computers and Electrical Engineering 29 (2003) 463–477 477

[15] Laub AJ. Computations of balancing transformation. Proc JACC, Session FA8-E, 1980.
[16] Enns DF. Model reduction for control system design. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA, 1984.

Parknosh Karim Aghaee has received his B.S. degree in electrical engineering from Shiraz University, Iran and his M.S. degree in
Electrical and Control Engineering from Amir-Kabir University of Technology in Tehran in 1984. He is currently a PhD student in the
Department of Electrical Engineering at Amir-Kabir University of Technology. His current research interests include model reduction,
multidimensional systems and stochastic processes.

Ali Zilouchian is currently a professor and the director of the Intelligent Control Laboratory partially funded
by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the Department of Electrical Engineering at Florida Atlantic
University, Boca Raton, FL. His recent works involve the applications of soft computing methodologies to
industrial processes including oil refineries, desalination processes, fuzzy control of jet engines, fuzzy con-
trollers for car engines, kinematics and dynamics of serial and parallel robot manipulators. Dr. Zilouchian’s
research interests include the industrial applications of intelligent controls using neural network, fuzzy logic,
genetic algorithms, data clustering, multidimensional signal processing, digital filtering, and model reduction
of large scale systems. His recent projects have been funded by NSF and Motorola Inc. as well as several other
sources.He has taught more than 22 different courses in the areas of intelligent systems, controls, robotics,
computer vision, digital signal processing, and electronic circuits at Florida Atlantic University and George
Washington University. He has supervised 13 Ph.D. and M.S. students during the last 15 years. In addition,
he has served as a committee member on more than 25 M.S. theses and Ph.D. dissertations. He has published over 100 book chapters,
textbooks, scholarly journal papers, and refereed conference proceedings. In 1996 and 2001, Dr. Zilouchian was honored with a
Florida Atlantic University Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching. Dr. Zilouchian is a senior member of IEEE, member of
Sigma Xi and New York Academy of Science and Tau Beta Pi. He received the outstanding leadership award for IEEE branch
membership development activities for Region III in 1988. He has served as session chair and organizer of nine different sessions in the
international conferences within the last five years. He was a keynote speaker at the International Conference on Seawater Desali-
nation Technologies in November 2000. Dr. Zilouchian is currently an associate editor of the International Journal of Electrical and
Computer Engineering out of Oxford, UK. He is also the Local Chairman of the next WAC 2002 to be held in June 2002 in Orlando,
Florida.

Seied-Kamal Nike-Ravesh was born in Tehran, Iran, in 1944. He received his B.Sc. in Electrical Engineering
from Tehran Polytechnic in 1968, his M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from University of
Missouri, Rolla (1970) and Colombia (1972) respectively. In 1973, he joined Amir-Kabir University of
Technology, where he is currently a professor at the Department of the Electrical Engineering. His general
research interest lie in the areas of systems modeling and system stability.

Abbas H. Zadegan holds an M.S. in mathematics from the University of Florida, and an M.S. in electrical
engineering from Florida International University. He is studying for the Ph.D. in electrical engineering at
Florida Atlantic University . His current research is in the area of intelligent control and neural networks.