Understanding controllability indices
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm teaching myself linear control systems through various online materials and the book Linear Systems Theory and Design by Chen. I'm trying to understand controllability indices. Chen says that looking at the controllability matrix C as follows
$C=[B;AB;A^2B;...;A^nB];= [b_1;...;b_p;|;Ab_1;...;Ab_p;|;...|;A^{n-1}b_1;...;A^{n-1}b_p]$
that reading left to right, the columns are linearly independent until some column $A^ib_m$, which is dependent on the columns to the left - this makes sense - but that subsequent columns associated with $b_m$ (e.g. $A^{i+k}b_m$) are also linearly dependent on their proceeding columns, or that "once a column associated with $b_m$ becomes linearly dependent, then all columns associated with $b_m$ thereafter are linearly dependent". Unfortunately this last point isn't intuitive to me at all - if anyone can shed some light on this or help me see it I'd be very grateful!
Thanks in advance for any help.
Luke
control-theory linear-control
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm teaching myself linear control systems through various online materials and the book Linear Systems Theory and Design by Chen. I'm trying to understand controllability indices. Chen says that looking at the controllability matrix C as follows
$C=[B;AB;A^2B;...;A^nB];= [b_1;...;b_p;|;Ab_1;...;Ab_p;|;...|;A^{n-1}b_1;...;A^{n-1}b_p]$
that reading left to right, the columns are linearly independent until some column $A^ib_m$, which is dependent on the columns to the left - this makes sense - but that subsequent columns associated with $b_m$ (e.g. $A^{i+k}b_m$) are also linearly dependent on their proceeding columns, or that "once a column associated with $b_m$ becomes linearly dependent, then all columns associated with $b_m$ thereafter are linearly dependent". Unfortunately this last point isn't intuitive to me at all - if anyone can shed some light on this or help me see it I'd be very grateful!
Thanks in advance for any help.
Luke
control-theory linear-control
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm teaching myself linear control systems through various online materials and the book Linear Systems Theory and Design by Chen. I'm trying to understand controllability indices. Chen says that looking at the controllability matrix C as follows
$C=[B;AB;A^2B;...;A^nB];= [b_1;...;b_p;|;Ab_1;...;Ab_p;|;...|;A^{n-1}b_1;...;A^{n-1}b_p]$
that reading left to right, the columns are linearly independent until some column $A^ib_m$, which is dependent on the columns to the left - this makes sense - but that subsequent columns associated with $b_m$ (e.g. $A^{i+k}b_m$) are also linearly dependent on their proceeding columns, or that "once a column associated with $b_m$ becomes linearly dependent, then all columns associated with $b_m$ thereafter are linearly dependent". Unfortunately this last point isn't intuitive to me at all - if anyone can shed some light on this or help me see it I'd be very grateful!
Thanks in advance for any help.
Luke
control-theory linear-control
I'm teaching myself linear control systems through various online materials and the book Linear Systems Theory and Design by Chen. I'm trying to understand controllability indices. Chen says that looking at the controllability matrix C as follows
$C=[B;AB;A^2B;...;A^nB];= [b_1;...;b_p;|;Ab_1;...;Ab_p;|;...|;A^{n-1}b_1;...;A^{n-1}b_p]$
that reading left to right, the columns are linearly independent until some column $A^ib_m$, which is dependent on the columns to the left - this makes sense - but that subsequent columns associated with $b_m$ (e.g. $A^{i+k}b_m$) are also linearly dependent on their proceeding columns, or that "once a column associated with $b_m$ becomes linearly dependent, then all columns associated with $b_m$ thereafter are linearly dependent". Unfortunately this last point isn't intuitive to me at all - if anyone can shed some light on this or help me see it I'd be very grateful!
Thanks in advance for any help.
Luke
control-theory linear-control
control-theory linear-control
asked Mar 14 '15 at 20:45
Luke
112
112
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Say $A b_1$ is linearly dependent on the $b_i$, namely $A b_1 = lambda_i b_i$ (summation implicit). Then $A^2 b_1 = A lambda_i b_i = lambda_i A b_i$, so $A^2 b_1$ depends linearly on the columns $A b_i$ which are on its left.
I think this answers your question perfectly. I just want to add some intuition as I had too difficulties understanding controllability indices. The $i$th controllability index gives the dimension of the reachable space by only using the $i$th input that is not reachable by using previous inputs. Therefore, if the system is controllable, the sum of the controllability indices are $n$.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 17:58
Right. Notice also that the initial ordering of the inputs may affect the list of indices.
– Pait
Mar 16 '15 at 19:35
1
Yes, it may affect the ordering of the indices but the values are invariant under the ordering of the inputs.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 21:15
That is true. However they are not invariant under ordering of the columns of the controllability matrix, which itself is arbitrary. We're getting away from the original question but I do find this issue confusing, so it's useful to register that the concepts are indeed not completely transparent.
– Pait
Mar 17 '15 at 12:41
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I am studying the same subject now, from the same book and had exactly the same question you had.
The answer by @Pait doesn't show that the resulting set $mathit{lambda_iAb_i}$ is a subset of the LHS vectors relative to $mathit{A^2b_1}$ in the controllability matrix. However I had understood it myself, and I will post it here for reference.
Say $pmb{A^ib_m}$ is the first vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$ that is dependent on some of the vectors $pmb{v_k}$ at its left hand side (LHS).
That is: $$pmb{A^ib_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{v_k} (1)$$
Now, for the next vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$, i.e. $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$, we have: $$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{Av_k} (2)$$
Now we show (or clarify) that the set ${pmb{Av_k} | kinBbb{Z}, 1le k le (i*m-1)}$ is a subset of the vectors at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
The sum in (1) can be split into:
$$pmb{A^ib_m} = underbrace{sum_{k=0}^{i-1}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m}}_{Vectors which are\ associated with pmb{b_m}\ but are on LHS} + underbrace{(sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})}_{Vectors associated with pmb{b_j} columns\ which are before pmb{b_m} in the pmb{B} matrix}$$
Now by multiplying by $pmb{A}$ on both sides:
$$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m} = sum_{k=1}^{i}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m} + (sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})$$
Clearly, the vectors in the summations are subset of the vectors that are at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1189957%2funderstanding-controllability-indices%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Say $A b_1$ is linearly dependent on the $b_i$, namely $A b_1 = lambda_i b_i$ (summation implicit). Then $A^2 b_1 = A lambda_i b_i = lambda_i A b_i$, so $A^2 b_1$ depends linearly on the columns $A b_i$ which are on its left.
I think this answers your question perfectly. I just want to add some intuition as I had too difficulties understanding controllability indices. The $i$th controllability index gives the dimension of the reachable space by only using the $i$th input that is not reachable by using previous inputs. Therefore, if the system is controllable, the sum of the controllability indices are $n$.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 17:58
Right. Notice also that the initial ordering of the inputs may affect the list of indices.
– Pait
Mar 16 '15 at 19:35
1
Yes, it may affect the ordering of the indices but the values are invariant under the ordering of the inputs.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 21:15
That is true. However they are not invariant under ordering of the columns of the controllability matrix, which itself is arbitrary. We're getting away from the original question but I do find this issue confusing, so it's useful to register that the concepts are indeed not completely transparent.
– Pait
Mar 17 '15 at 12:41
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Say $A b_1$ is linearly dependent on the $b_i$, namely $A b_1 = lambda_i b_i$ (summation implicit). Then $A^2 b_1 = A lambda_i b_i = lambda_i A b_i$, so $A^2 b_1$ depends linearly on the columns $A b_i$ which are on its left.
I think this answers your question perfectly. I just want to add some intuition as I had too difficulties understanding controllability indices. The $i$th controllability index gives the dimension of the reachable space by only using the $i$th input that is not reachable by using previous inputs. Therefore, if the system is controllable, the sum of the controllability indices are $n$.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 17:58
Right. Notice also that the initial ordering of the inputs may affect the list of indices.
– Pait
Mar 16 '15 at 19:35
1
Yes, it may affect the ordering of the indices but the values are invariant under the ordering of the inputs.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 21:15
That is true. However they are not invariant under ordering of the columns of the controllability matrix, which itself is arbitrary. We're getting away from the original question but I do find this issue confusing, so it's useful to register that the concepts are indeed not completely transparent.
– Pait
Mar 17 '15 at 12:41
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Say $A b_1$ is linearly dependent on the $b_i$, namely $A b_1 = lambda_i b_i$ (summation implicit). Then $A^2 b_1 = A lambda_i b_i = lambda_i A b_i$, so $A^2 b_1$ depends linearly on the columns $A b_i$ which are on its left.
Say $A b_1$ is linearly dependent on the $b_i$, namely $A b_1 = lambda_i b_i$ (summation implicit). Then $A^2 b_1 = A lambda_i b_i = lambda_i A b_i$, so $A^2 b_1$ depends linearly on the columns $A b_i$ which are on its left.
answered Mar 16 '15 at 14:34
Pait
1,157916
1,157916
I think this answers your question perfectly. I just want to add some intuition as I had too difficulties understanding controllability indices. The $i$th controllability index gives the dimension of the reachable space by only using the $i$th input that is not reachable by using previous inputs. Therefore, if the system is controllable, the sum of the controllability indices are $n$.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 17:58
Right. Notice also that the initial ordering of the inputs may affect the list of indices.
– Pait
Mar 16 '15 at 19:35
1
Yes, it may affect the ordering of the indices but the values are invariant under the ordering of the inputs.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 21:15
That is true. However they are not invariant under ordering of the columns of the controllability matrix, which itself is arbitrary. We're getting away from the original question but I do find this issue confusing, so it's useful to register that the concepts are indeed not completely transparent.
– Pait
Mar 17 '15 at 12:41
add a comment |
I think this answers your question perfectly. I just want to add some intuition as I had too difficulties understanding controllability indices. The $i$th controllability index gives the dimension of the reachable space by only using the $i$th input that is not reachable by using previous inputs. Therefore, if the system is controllable, the sum of the controllability indices are $n$.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 17:58
Right. Notice also that the initial ordering of the inputs may affect the list of indices.
– Pait
Mar 16 '15 at 19:35
1
Yes, it may affect the ordering of the indices but the values are invariant under the ordering of the inputs.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 21:15
That is true. However they are not invariant under ordering of the columns of the controllability matrix, which itself is arbitrary. We're getting away from the original question but I do find this issue confusing, so it's useful to register that the concepts are indeed not completely transparent.
– Pait
Mar 17 '15 at 12:41
I think this answers your question perfectly. I just want to add some intuition as I had too difficulties understanding controllability indices. The $i$th controllability index gives the dimension of the reachable space by only using the $i$th input that is not reachable by using previous inputs. Therefore, if the system is controllable, the sum of the controllability indices are $n$.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 17:58
I think this answers your question perfectly. I just want to add some intuition as I had too difficulties understanding controllability indices. The $i$th controllability index gives the dimension of the reachable space by only using the $i$th input that is not reachable by using previous inputs. Therefore, if the system is controllable, the sum of the controllability indices are $n$.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 17:58
Right. Notice also that the initial ordering of the inputs may affect the list of indices.
– Pait
Mar 16 '15 at 19:35
Right. Notice also that the initial ordering of the inputs may affect the list of indices.
– Pait
Mar 16 '15 at 19:35
1
1
Yes, it may affect the ordering of the indices but the values are invariant under the ordering of the inputs.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 21:15
Yes, it may affect the ordering of the indices but the values are invariant under the ordering of the inputs.
– obareey
Mar 16 '15 at 21:15
That is true. However they are not invariant under ordering of the columns of the controllability matrix, which itself is arbitrary. We're getting away from the original question but I do find this issue confusing, so it's useful to register that the concepts are indeed not completely transparent.
– Pait
Mar 17 '15 at 12:41
That is true. However they are not invariant under ordering of the columns of the controllability matrix, which itself is arbitrary. We're getting away from the original question but I do find this issue confusing, so it's useful to register that the concepts are indeed not completely transparent.
– Pait
Mar 17 '15 at 12:41
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I am studying the same subject now, from the same book and had exactly the same question you had.
The answer by @Pait doesn't show that the resulting set $mathit{lambda_iAb_i}$ is a subset of the LHS vectors relative to $mathit{A^2b_1}$ in the controllability matrix. However I had understood it myself, and I will post it here for reference.
Say $pmb{A^ib_m}$ is the first vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$ that is dependent on some of the vectors $pmb{v_k}$ at its left hand side (LHS).
That is: $$pmb{A^ib_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{v_k} (1)$$
Now, for the next vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$, i.e. $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$, we have: $$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{Av_k} (2)$$
Now we show (or clarify) that the set ${pmb{Av_k} | kinBbb{Z}, 1le k le (i*m-1)}$ is a subset of the vectors at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
The sum in (1) can be split into:
$$pmb{A^ib_m} = underbrace{sum_{k=0}^{i-1}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m}}_{Vectors which are\ associated with pmb{b_m}\ but are on LHS} + underbrace{(sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})}_{Vectors associated with pmb{b_j} columns\ which are before pmb{b_m} in the pmb{B} matrix}$$
Now by multiplying by $pmb{A}$ on both sides:
$$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m} = sum_{k=1}^{i}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m} + (sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})$$
Clearly, the vectors in the summations are subset of the vectors that are at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I am studying the same subject now, from the same book and had exactly the same question you had.
The answer by @Pait doesn't show that the resulting set $mathit{lambda_iAb_i}$ is a subset of the LHS vectors relative to $mathit{A^2b_1}$ in the controllability matrix. However I had understood it myself, and I will post it here for reference.
Say $pmb{A^ib_m}$ is the first vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$ that is dependent on some of the vectors $pmb{v_k}$ at its left hand side (LHS).
That is: $$pmb{A^ib_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{v_k} (1)$$
Now, for the next vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$, i.e. $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$, we have: $$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{Av_k} (2)$$
Now we show (or clarify) that the set ${pmb{Av_k} | kinBbb{Z}, 1le k le (i*m-1)}$ is a subset of the vectors at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
The sum in (1) can be split into:
$$pmb{A^ib_m} = underbrace{sum_{k=0}^{i-1}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m}}_{Vectors which are\ associated with pmb{b_m}\ but are on LHS} + underbrace{(sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})}_{Vectors associated with pmb{b_j} columns\ which are before pmb{b_m} in the pmb{B} matrix}$$
Now by multiplying by $pmb{A}$ on both sides:
$$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m} = sum_{k=1}^{i}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m} + (sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})$$
Clearly, the vectors in the summations are subset of the vectors that are at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I am studying the same subject now, from the same book and had exactly the same question you had.
The answer by @Pait doesn't show that the resulting set $mathit{lambda_iAb_i}$ is a subset of the LHS vectors relative to $mathit{A^2b_1}$ in the controllability matrix. However I had understood it myself, and I will post it here for reference.
Say $pmb{A^ib_m}$ is the first vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$ that is dependent on some of the vectors $pmb{v_k}$ at its left hand side (LHS).
That is: $$pmb{A^ib_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{v_k} (1)$$
Now, for the next vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$, i.e. $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$, we have: $$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{Av_k} (2)$$
Now we show (or clarify) that the set ${pmb{Av_k} | kinBbb{Z}, 1le k le (i*m-1)}$ is a subset of the vectors at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
The sum in (1) can be split into:
$$pmb{A^ib_m} = underbrace{sum_{k=0}^{i-1}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m}}_{Vectors which are\ associated with pmb{b_m}\ but are on LHS} + underbrace{(sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})}_{Vectors associated with pmb{b_j} columns\ which are before pmb{b_m} in the pmb{B} matrix}$$
Now by multiplying by $pmb{A}$ on both sides:
$$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m} = sum_{k=1}^{i}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m} + (sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})$$
Clearly, the vectors in the summations are subset of the vectors that are at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
I am studying the same subject now, from the same book and had exactly the same question you had.
The answer by @Pait doesn't show that the resulting set $mathit{lambda_iAb_i}$ is a subset of the LHS vectors relative to $mathit{A^2b_1}$ in the controllability matrix. However I had understood it myself, and I will post it here for reference.
Say $pmb{A^ib_m}$ is the first vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$ that is dependent on some of the vectors $pmb{v_k}$ at its left hand side (LHS).
That is: $$pmb{A^ib_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{v_k} (1)$$
Now, for the next vector associated with $pmb{b_m}$, i.e. $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$, we have: $$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}= sum_{k=1}^{i*m-1}alpha_kpmb{Av_k} (2)$$
Now we show (or clarify) that the set ${pmb{Av_k} | kinBbb{Z}, 1le k le (i*m-1)}$ is a subset of the vectors at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
The sum in (1) can be split into:
$$pmb{A^ib_m} = underbrace{sum_{k=0}^{i-1}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m}}_{Vectors which are\ associated with pmb{b_m}\ but are on LHS} + underbrace{(sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=0}^ialpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})}_{Vectors associated with pmb{b_j} columns\ which are before pmb{b_m} in the pmb{B} matrix}$$
Now by multiplying by $pmb{A}$ on both sides:
$$pmb{A^{i+1}b_m} = sum_{k=1}^{i}alpha_{mk}^{'}pmb{A^kb_m} + (sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{1k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_1} +sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{2k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_2}+cdots+sum_{k=1}^{i+1}alpha_{(m-1)k}^{'}pmb{A^kb_{m-1}})$$
Clearly, the vectors in the summations are subset of the vectors that are at LHS of $pmb{A^{i+1}b_m}$ in the controllability matrix.
edited Nov 24 at 10:51
answered Nov 24 at 10:26
Abdo
11
11
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1189957%2funderstanding-controllability-indices%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown