Identification of systems with unknown inputs using indirect input measurements

References

• Abed-Meraim, K., Qiu, W., & Hua, Y. (1997). Blind system identification. Proceedings of the IEEE, 85, 1310–1322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aljanaideh, K., Ali, A., Holzel, M., Kukreja, S., & Bernstein, D. (2012). Sensor-to-sensor identification of Hammerstein systems. In Proceedings of the 51st IEEE conference on decision & control (pp. 2846–2851), Maui, Hawaii, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Anguelova, M. (2007). Observability and identifiability of nonlinear systems with applications in biology ( PhD thesis). Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Bazanella, A.S., Gevers, M., & Miškovic, L. (2010). Closed-loop identification of MIMO systems: A new look at identifiability and experiment design. European Journal of Control, 16, 228–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellman, R., & Åström, K. (1970). On structural identifiability. Mathematical Biosciences, 7, 329–339.
   Google Scholar
• D’Amato, A.M., Brzezinski, A.J., Holzel, M.S., Ni, J., & Bernstein, D.S. (2009). Sensor-only noncausal blind identification of pseudo transfer functions. In Proceedings of the 15th IFAC symposium on system identification (pp. 1698–1703), Saint-Malo, France.
   Google Scholar
• Dankers, A. (2014). System identification in dynamic networks ( PhD thesis). Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Diop, S., & Fliess, M. (1991). Nonlinear observability, identifiability, and persistent trajectories. In Proceedings of the 30th IEEE conference on decision and control, Brighton, England.
   Google Scholar
• Forssell, U., & Chou, C. (1998). Efficiency of prediction error and instrumental variable methods for closed-loop identification. In Proceedings of the 37th IEEE conference on decision and control (Vol. 2, pp. 1287–1288), Tampa, FL, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Forssell, U., & Ljung, L. (1999). Closed-loop identification revisited. Automatica, 35, 1215–1241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garnier, H., & Wang, L. (2008). Identification of continuous-time models from sampled data
   Google Scholar
  . Advances in industrial control. London: Springer
   Google Scholar
• Garnier, H., & Young, P.C. (2014). The advantages of directly identifying continuous-time transfer function models in practical applications. International Journal of Control, 87, 1319–1338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilson, M., Garnier, H., Young, P.C., & Van den Hof, P.M. (2011). Optimal instrumental variable method for closed-loop identification. IET Control Theory & Applications, 5, 1147–1154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilson, M., & Van den Hof, P. (2005). Instrumental variable methods for closed-loop system identification. Automatica, 41, 241–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermann, R., & Krener, A. (1977). Nonlinear controllability and observability. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 22, 728–740.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou, M., & Müller, P. (1994). Disturbance decoupled observer design: A unified viewpoint. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 39, 1338–1341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou, M., & Patton, R. (1998). Optimal filtering for systems with unknown inputs. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 43, 445–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung, Y., & Enqvist, M. (2013). Estimating models of inverse systems. In Proceedings of the 52nd IEEE conference on decision & control, Firenze, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Lancaster, P., & Tismenetsky, M. (1985). The theory of matrices: With applications. Computer Science and Applied Mathematics. San Diego: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Linder, J., & Enqvist, M. (2015). On indirect input measurements. In Proceedings of the 17th IFAC symposium on system identification, Beijing, China.
   Google Scholar
• Linder, J., Enqvist, M., Fossen, T.I., & Johansen, T.A. (2015a). Modeling for IMU-based online estimation of ship's mass and center of mass. In Proceedings of the 10th IFAC conference on manoeuvring and control of marine craft (MCMC), Copenhagen, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Linder, J., Enqvist, M., Fossen, T.I., & Johansen, T.A. (2015b). Online estimation of ship's mass and center of mass using inertial measurements. In Proceedings of the 10th IFAC conference on manoeuvring and control of marine craft (MCMC), Copenhagen, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Linder, J., Enqvist, M., & Gustafsson, F. (2014). A closed-loop instrumental variable approach to mass and center of mass estimation using IMU data. In Proceedings of the 53rd IEEE conference on decision & control, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Linder, J., Enqvist, M., Gustafsson, F., & Sjöberg, J. (2014). Identifiability of physical parameters in systems with limited sensors. In Proceedings of the 19th IFAC World congress, Cape Town, South Africa.
   Google Scholar
• Ljung, L. (1999). System identification: Theory for the user (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Ljung, L., & Glad, T. (1994). On global identifiability for arbitrary model parametrizations. Automatica, 30, 265–276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahata, K., & Garnier, H. (2006). Identification of continuous-time errors-in-variables models. Automatica, 42, 1477–1490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shumway, R., & Stoffer, D. (2010). Time series analysis and its applications: With R examples. Springer Texts in Statistics. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Söderström, T. (2007). Errors-in-variables methods in system identification. Automatica, 43, 939–958.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Söderström, T., & Stoica, P. (1989). System identification. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Söderström, T., Wang, L., Pintelon, R., & Schoukens, J. (2013). Can errors-in-variables systems be identified from closed-loop experiments ? Automatica, 49, 681–684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stockham, T.G., Cannon, T.M., & Ingebretsen, R.B. (1975). Blind deconvolution through digital signal processing. Proceedings of the IEEE, 63, 678–692.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tangirala, A. (2014). Principles of system identification: Theory and practice. Florida: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Hof, P., Dankers, A., Heuberger, P., & Bombois, X. (2013). Identification of dynamic models in complex networks with prediction error methods. Basic methods for consistent module estimates. Automatica, 49, 2994–3006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter, É. (1982). Identifiability of state space models: With applications to transformation systems. Lecture Notes in Biomathematics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar