Network-Realised Model Predictive Control Part I: NRF-Enabled Closed-loop Decomposition

Alessio Iovine; Andrei Speril\u{a}; Patrick Panciatici; Sorin Olaru

arxiv: 2502.13042 · v4 · submitted 2025-02-18 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Network-Realised Model Predictive Control Part I: NRF-Enabled Closed-loop Decomposition

Andrei Speril\u{a} , Alessio Iovine , Sorin Olaru , Patrick Panciatici This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 02:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY

keywords model predictive controldistributed controltwo-layer architectureclosed-loop decompositionfeedback-feedforwardnetwork realizationscalable controlconstraint management

0 comments

The pith

A two-layer architecture decomposes closed-loop maps via distributed feedback-feedforward to enable scalable model predictive control.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes a two-layer control architecture to enable scalable implementations for constraint-based decision strategies such as model predictive controllers. The bottom layer relies on a distributed feedback-feedforward scheme that directs information flow in the controlled network according to a pre-specified communication infrastructure. Explicit expressions for the resulting closed-loop maps are derived, followed by an offline model-matching procedure to design the first layer. The control laws are realized through distributed state-space implementations that support predictive control design in a companion paper while aiming to retain the original constraint-handling capability.

Core claim

The authors establish that a distributed feedback-feedforward scheme, directed by a pre-specified communication infrastructure, produces closed-loop maps with explicit expressions. An offline model-matching procedure then designs the upper layer of the two-layer architecture to align with a target model. These steps yield distributed state-space-based control laws whose closed-loop models enable scalable predictive control for constraint management.

What carries the argument

The distributed feedback-feedforward scheme that directs the controlled network's information flow according to a pre-specified communication infrastructure, producing explicit closed-loop maps for offline model matching.

If this is right

Closed-loop models obtained from the bottom layer enable predictive control design for the constraint management procedure in the companion paper.
Control laws are deployed through distributed state-space-based implementations.
The architecture supports scalable implementations for constraint-based decision strategies such as model predictive controllers.
Explicit expressions for closed-loop maps are obtained directly from the distributed scheme.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The decomposition separates network-level communication design from performance tuning, potentially allowing reuse of the same infrastructure across different upper-layer objectives.
If the communication infrastructure is fixed in advance, the method may reduce the need for real-time centralized optimization in large-scale systems.
The approach could be tested by checking whether the explicit maps preserve stability margins or feasibility sets under the original constraints when the network size increases.

Load-bearing premise

The pre-specified communication infrastructure must be sufficient for the distributed feedback-feedforward scheme to produce closed-loop maps that can be matched offline to a target model without losing the original system's constraint-handling capability.

What would settle it

Demonstration on a concrete network that the closed-loop maps from the distributed scheme cannot be explicitly expressed or matched to the target model without violating constraints or requiring centralized information.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.13042 by Alessio Iovine, Andrei Speril\u{a}, Patrick Panciatici, Sorin Olaru.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Feedback loop of a network’s model G(z) with the NRF-based implementation KD(z) Φ ∈ R(z) nu×nu and Γ ∈ R(z) nu×nx are proper and which forms an NRF representation of K(z), allows for the computation of the signal u[k] in (1a)-(1c) as follows u[k] = Φ(z) ⋆ u[k] + Γ(z) ⋆ x[k]. (7) Indeed, since elmii(Φ(z)) ≡ 0, ∀ i ∈ {1 : nu}, this enables a distinct feedback-feedforward expression of the resulting control … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Implementation scheme for the i th area’s NRF-based subcontroller Doing so will ensure that, when transmitting information from an arbitrarily chosen i th area, all the other areas whose index j satisfies i ∈ Nj will receive the same information from the i th area. It is this fact, alongside the sparsity conditions in (17), which ensures that the signal structures in Figures 2 and 3 are the same, thus ena… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The i th area’s desired closed-loop response, as designated by the choice of TFMs in (23a)-(25d). 5.2 Formulating the Model-Matching Problem The most straightforward of the four stated requirements is the one from point a), which places restrictions upon the sparsity pattern of the pair (Φ(z),Γ(z)). This communication constraint, first introduced in (17), can be written in more explicit form via the pair… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Interconnection topology of the grid’s dynamics [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

A two-layer control architecture is proposed to enable scalable implementations for constraint-based decision strategies, such as model predictive controllers. The bottom layer is based upon a distributed feedback-feedforward scheme that directs the controlled network's information flow according to a pre-specified communication infrastructure. Explicit expressions for the resulting closed-loop maps are obtained, and an offline model-matching procedure is proposed for designing the first layer. The obtained control laws are deployed via distributed state-space-based implementations, and the resulting closed-loop models enable predictive control design for the constraint management procedure described in our companion paper.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper gives explicit state-space closed-loop maps from a distributed feedback-feedforward layer on a fixed communication graph, then an offline matching step to set up the upper MPC layer.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this work gives a way to realize closed-loop dynamics explicitly using a distributed feedback-feedforward controller tied to a pre-given communication network, followed by an offline procedure to match those dynamics to a desired model for the MPC layer on top. What the paper does well is derive those explicit expressions for the closed-loop maps in state-space form. This allows the bottom layer to be implemented in a distributed manner while providing the upper layer with a model that can be used for prediction and constraint handling. The offline matching is a nice practical touch because it separates the design from the online computation. The argument holds up without obvious flaws in the logic presented. The stress-test note is right that it's a constructive proposal rather than an existence proof, so no hidden assumptions that break it. One soft spot is the lack of discussion on how the choice of communication infrastructure affects the quality of the match or the overall performance. The paper takes the infrastructure as given, but in real applications, that might be a key design variable. Another is that since this is part I, the constraint management is in the companion paper, so the full picture isn't here. Also, the abstract mentions no validation, so practical gains are not shown. Readers who work on distributed model predictive control for infrastructure systems would get value from the explicit realizations and the decomposition method. It's not revolutionary, but the details on the closed-loop maps could be handy for implementation. I think it deserves peer review. The technical content is there to be evaluated by specialists in networked control.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a two-layer control architecture to enable scalable implementations of constraint-based strategies such as model predictive control. The bottom layer consists of a distributed feedback-feedforward scheme whose information flow follows a pre-specified communication infrastructure; explicit closed-loop maps are derived from this layer. An offline model-matching procedure is then used to design the upper layer. The resulting control laws are realized via distributed state-space implementations whose closed-loop models support predictive control design for the constraint-management procedure in the companion paper.

Significance. If the explicit state-space realizations and the offline matching procedure function as described, the architecture supplies a constructive route to distributed realizations of centralized-style MPC while respecting a given communication graph. The emphasis on explicit maps and an offline design step, rather than asymptotic guarantees or existence results, makes the contribution potentially useful for large-scale networked systems where communication constraints are fixed a priori.

minor comments (2)

[Introduction / Section 3] The abstract and introduction state that the model-matching procedure preserves constraint-handling capability, but the precise conditions under which this preservation holds (e.g., rank conditions on the communication graph or matching error bounds) should be stated explicitly in the main text.
[Notation and Preliminaries] Notation for the closed-loop maps (e.g., the distinction between the network-realized map and the target model) is introduced without a consolidated table of symbols; adding such a table would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive summary and positive assessment of the proposed two-layer architecture for scalable constraint-based control. The recommendation of minor revision is noted. No specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The manuscript presents a constructive proposal: a distributed feedback-feedforward bottom layer whose closed-loop maps are explicitly derived from a pre-specified communication graph, followed by an offline model-matching procedure for the upper layer. No equation reduces a claimed prediction or uniqueness result to a fitted parameter or self-referential definition; the companion-paper reference is only for the subsequent constraint-management step and does not bear the load of the Part I derivations. The argument is therefore self-contained on its own stated constructions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review provides insufficient detail to enumerate free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; standard assumptions of linear state-space control and graph-based communication are implicit but not stated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5629 in / 1044 out tokens · 21421 ms · 2026-05-23T02:26:20.401850+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Network-Realised Model Predictive Control Part II: Distributed Constraint Management
eess.SY 2025-02 unverdicted novelty 4.0

Proposes a two-layer MPC architecture with set-based methods for distributed constraint management that delivers recursive feasibility and resembles classical MPC formulations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Distributed and Localized Model-Predictive Control–Part I: Synthesis and Implementation.IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 10(2):1058– 1068, 2023

Carmen Amo Alonso, Jing Shuang Li, James Anderson, and Nikolai Matni. Distributed and Localized Model-Predictive Control–Part I: Synthesis and Implementation.IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 10(2):1058– 1068, 2023

work page 2023
[2]

Distributed and Localized Model Predictive Control—Part II: Theoretical Guarantees.IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 10(3):1113– 1123, 2023

Carmen Amo Alonso, Jing Shuang Li, Nikolai Matni, and James Anderson. Distributed and Localized Model Predictive Control—Part II: Theoretical Guarantees.IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 10(3):1113– 1123, 2023

work page 2023
[3]

Birkhäuser, 2015

Franco Blanchini and Stefano Miani.Set-Theoretic Methods in Control, Second Edition. Birkhäuser, 2015

work page 2015
[4]

Cambridge University Press, 2017

Francesco Borrelli, Alberto Bemporad, and Manfred Morari.Predictive Control for Linear and Hybrid Systems. Cambridge University Press, 2017

work page 2017
[5]

Dunbar and Derek S

William B. Dunbar and Derek S. Caveney. Distributed Receding Horizon Control of Vehicle Platoons: Stability and String Stability.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 57(3):620–633, 2012

work page 2012
[6]

Reference and command governors for systems with constraints: A survey on theory and applications

EmanueleGarone,StefanoDiCairanoandIlyaKolmanovsky. Reference and command governors for systems with constraints: A survey on theory and applications. Automatica, 75:306–328, 2017

work page 2017
[7]

Distributed predictive control: A non-cooperative algorithm with neighbor-to-neighbor communication for linear systems

Marcello Farina and Riccardo Scattolini. Distributed predictive control: A non-cooperative algorithm with neighbor-to-neighbor communication for linear systems. Automatica, 48(6):1088–1096, 2012

work page 2012
[8]

Distributed mpc of vehicle platoons with guaranteed consensus and string stability

Yangyang Feng, Shuyou Yu, Hao Chen, Yongfu Li, Shuming Shi, Jianhua Yu, and Hong Chen. Distributed mpc of vehicle platoons with guaranteed consensus and string stability. Scientific Reports, 13:1–21, 06 2023

work page 2023
[9]

An Input–Output Parametrization of Stabilizing Controllers: Amidst Youla and System Level Synthesis.IEEE Control Systems Letters, 3(4):1014–1019, 2019

Luca Furieri, Yang Zheng, Antonis Papachristodoulou, and Maryam Kamgarpour. An Input–Output Parametrization of Stabilizing Controllers: Amidst Youla and System Level Synthesis.IEEE Control Systems Letters, 3(4):1014–1019, 2019

work page 2019
[10]

AmericanMath

FeliksGantmacher.TheTheoryofMatrices. AmericanMath. Society, 1959

work page 1959
[11]

Distributed model predictive control using a chain of tubes

Bernardo Hernandez and Paul Trodden. Distributed model predictive control using a chain of tubes. In2016 UKACC 11th International Conference on Control, pages 1–6, 2016

work page 2016
[12]

Prentice-Hall, 1980

Thomas Kailath.Linear Systems. Prentice-Hall, 1980

work page 1980
[13]

Harcourt College Publishers, 1980

Benjamin Kuo.Digital Control Systems. Harcourt College Publishers, 1980

work page 1980
[14]

Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering

José Maestre and Rudy Negenborn.Distributed Model Predictive Control Made Easy. Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering. Springer, 2014

work page 2014
[15]

Nob Hill Publishing, 2020

James Rawlings, David Mayne, and Moritz Diehl.Model Predictive Control: Theory, Computation, and Design, Second Edition. Nob Hill Publishing, 2020

work page 2020
[16]

A Characterization of Convex Problems in Decentralized Control.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 51(2):274–286, 2006

Michael Rotkowitz and Sanjay Lall. A Characterization of Convex Problems in Decentralized Control.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 51(2):274–286, 2006

work page 2006
[17]

Optimal Distributed Control for Platooning via Sparse Coprime Factorizations.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 62(1):305–320, 2017

Şerban Sabău, Cristian Oară, Sean Warnick, and Ali Jadbabaie. Optimal Distributed Control for Platooning via Sparse Coprime Factorizations.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 62(1):305–320, 2017

work page 2017
[18]

Network Realization Functions for Optimal Distributed Control.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 68(12):8059–8066, 2023

Şerban Sabău, Andrei Sperilă, Cristian Oară, and Ali Jadbabaie. Network Realization Functions for Optimal Distributed Control.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 68(12):8059–8066, 2023

work page 2023
[19]

Architectures for distributed and hierarchical Model Predictive Control – A review.Journal of Process Control, 19(5):723–731, 2009

Riccardo Scattolini. Architectures for distributed and hierarchical Model Predictive Control – A review.Journal of Process Control, 19(5):723–731, 2009

work page 2009
[20]

Grid Phase Synchronization via Distributed Control.To appear in Proc

Andrei Sperilă, Alessio Iovine, Sorin Olaru, and Patrick Panciatici. Grid Phase Synchronization via Distributed Control.To appear in Proc. of the16 th IEEE PowerTech Conference, pages 1–6, 2025. Available Online: https://hal.science/hal-05056697

work page 2025
[21]

Network-Realised Model Predictive Control Part II: Distributed Constraint Management

Andrei Sperilă, Alessio Iovine, Sorin Olaru, and Patrick Panciatici. Network-Realized Model Predictive Control – Part II: Distributed Constraint Management, 2025. Available Online: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.13073

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[22]

Distributed Control of Descriptor Networks: A Convex Procedure for Augmented Sparsity.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 68(12):8067–8074, 2023

Andrei Sperilă, Cristian Oară, Bogdan Ciubotaru, and Şerban Sabău. Distributed Control of Descriptor Networks: A Convex Procedure for Augmented Sparsity.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 68(12):8067–8074, 2023

work page 2023
[23]

Trodden and J.M

Paul A. Trodden and J.M. Maestre. Distributed predictive control with minimization of mutual disturbances. Automatica, 77:31–43, 2017

work page 2017
[24]

Deployment Architectures for Cyber-Physical Control Systems.In Proc

Shih-Hao Tseng and James Anderson. Deployment Architectures for Cyber-Physical Control Systems.In Proc. of the 2020 American Control Conf., pages 5287–5294, 2020

work page 2020
[25]

String Stable Model Predictive Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control for Heterogeneous Platoons.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 4(2):186–196, 2019

Ellen van Nunen, Joey Reinders, Elham Semsar-Kazerooni, and Nathan van de Wouw. String Stable Model Predictive Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control for Heterogeneous Platoons.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 4(2):186–196, 2019

work page 2019
[26]

A. Varga. Computation of least order solutions of linear rational equations.In Proc. of the International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems, 2004

work page 2004
[27]

A. Varga. Reliable algorithms for computing minimal dynamic covers for descriptor systems.In Proc. of the International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems, 2004

work page 2004
[28]

A. Varga. On Computing Nullspace Bases - a Fault Detection Perspective.In Proc. of the17 th IFAC World Congress, pages 6295–6300, 2008

work page 2008
[29]

Park, and Ge Guo

Jiange Wang, Xiaolei Li, Ju H. Park, and Ge Guo. Distributed MPC-Based String Stable Platoon Control of Networked Vehicle Systems.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 24(3):3078–3090, 2023

work page 2023
[30]

A System-Level Approach to Controller Synthesis.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 64(10):4079–4093, 2019

Yuh-Shyang Wang, Nikolai Matni, and John Doyle. A System-Level Approach to Controller Synthesis.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 64(10):4079–4093, 2019

work page 2019
[31]

Yuh-Shyang Wang, Nikolai Matni, and John C. Doyle. Separable and Localized System-Level Synthesis for Large- Scale Systems.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 63(12):4234–4249, 2018

work page 2018
[32]

System-level, input–output and new parameterizations of stabilizing controllers, and their numerical computation

Yang Zheng, Luca Furieri, Maryam Kamgarpour, and Na Li. System-level, input–output and new parameterizations of stabilizing controllers, and their numerical computation. Automatica, 140:110211, 2022

work page 2022
[33]

On the Equivalence of Youla, System-Level, and Input–Output Parameterizations.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 66(1):413–420, 2021

YangZheng,LucaFurieri,AntonisPapachristodoulou,NaLi, and Maryam Kamgarpour. On the Equivalence of Youla, System-Level, and Input–Output Parameterizations.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 66(1):413–420, 2021

work page 2021
[34]

Karl Hedrick

Yang Zheng, Shengbo Eben Li, Keqiang Li, Francesco Borrelli, and J. Karl Hedrick. Distributed Model Predictive Control for Heterogeneous Vehicle Platoons Under Unidirectional Topologies.IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 25(3):899–910, 2017

work page 2017
[35]

eY(z)− eX(z) −eN(z) fM(z) #

Kemin Zhou, John Doyle, and Keith Glover.Robust and Optimal Control. Prentice-Hall, 1996. 15 A System-Theoretical Notions A.1 Matrix Pencils A matrix pencilA−zEwhich is square and which sat- isfiesdet(A−zE)̸≡0is calledregular. Note that when- everEequals the identity matrix, said pencil is guar- anteed to be regular. With respect to a setCg ⊆C, we say tha...

work page 1996
[36]

A22 −zI n2 Bu2CM Bu2DM O A M −zI nM BM C2 O O # =

and [22]. For a network described by (1a)-(1c) and partitionedasin(4)-(5),theNRFpairstowhichwerefer inthispaperareproducedbyfirstobtainingaDCFover Cg ofG u(z), as previously described, and then forming    eYQ(z) := eY(z) +Q(z) eN(z), eXQ(z) := eX(z) +Q(z)fM(z), eYdiag Q (z) := diag elm11 eYQ(z) , . . . ,elm nunu eYQ(z) , (A.2) for aQ∈ R(z) nu×nx that...

work page

[1] [1]

Distributed and Localized Model-Predictive Control–Part I: Synthesis and Implementation.IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 10(2):1058– 1068, 2023

Carmen Amo Alonso, Jing Shuang Li, James Anderson, and Nikolai Matni. Distributed and Localized Model-Predictive Control–Part I: Synthesis and Implementation.IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 10(2):1058– 1068, 2023

work page 2023

[2] [2]

Distributed and Localized Model Predictive Control—Part II: Theoretical Guarantees.IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 10(3):1113– 1123, 2023

Carmen Amo Alonso, Jing Shuang Li, Nikolai Matni, and James Anderson. Distributed and Localized Model Predictive Control—Part II: Theoretical Guarantees.IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 10(3):1113– 1123, 2023

work page 2023

[3] [3]

Birkhäuser, 2015

Franco Blanchini and Stefano Miani.Set-Theoretic Methods in Control, Second Edition. Birkhäuser, 2015

work page 2015

[4] [4]

Cambridge University Press, 2017

Francesco Borrelli, Alberto Bemporad, and Manfred Morari.Predictive Control for Linear and Hybrid Systems. Cambridge University Press, 2017

work page 2017

[5] [5]

Dunbar and Derek S

William B. Dunbar and Derek S. Caveney. Distributed Receding Horizon Control of Vehicle Platoons: Stability and String Stability.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 57(3):620–633, 2012

work page 2012

[6] [6]

Reference and command governors for systems with constraints: A survey on theory and applications

EmanueleGarone,StefanoDiCairanoandIlyaKolmanovsky. Reference and command governors for systems with constraints: A survey on theory and applications. Automatica, 75:306–328, 2017

work page 2017

[7] [7]

Distributed predictive control: A non-cooperative algorithm with neighbor-to-neighbor communication for linear systems

Marcello Farina and Riccardo Scattolini. Distributed predictive control: A non-cooperative algorithm with neighbor-to-neighbor communication for linear systems. Automatica, 48(6):1088–1096, 2012

work page 2012

[8] [8]

Distributed mpc of vehicle platoons with guaranteed consensus and string stability

Yangyang Feng, Shuyou Yu, Hao Chen, Yongfu Li, Shuming Shi, Jianhua Yu, and Hong Chen. Distributed mpc of vehicle platoons with guaranteed consensus and string stability. Scientific Reports, 13:1–21, 06 2023

work page 2023

[9] [9]

An Input–Output Parametrization of Stabilizing Controllers: Amidst Youla and System Level Synthesis.IEEE Control Systems Letters, 3(4):1014–1019, 2019

Luca Furieri, Yang Zheng, Antonis Papachristodoulou, and Maryam Kamgarpour. An Input–Output Parametrization of Stabilizing Controllers: Amidst Youla and System Level Synthesis.IEEE Control Systems Letters, 3(4):1014–1019, 2019

work page 2019

[10] [10]

AmericanMath

FeliksGantmacher.TheTheoryofMatrices. AmericanMath. Society, 1959

work page 1959

[11] [11]

Distributed model predictive control using a chain of tubes

Bernardo Hernandez and Paul Trodden. Distributed model predictive control using a chain of tubes. In2016 UKACC 11th International Conference on Control, pages 1–6, 2016

work page 2016

[12] [12]

Prentice-Hall, 1980

Thomas Kailath.Linear Systems. Prentice-Hall, 1980

work page 1980

[13] [13]

Harcourt College Publishers, 1980

Benjamin Kuo.Digital Control Systems. Harcourt College Publishers, 1980

work page 1980

[14] [14]

Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering

José Maestre and Rudy Negenborn.Distributed Model Predictive Control Made Easy. Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering. Springer, 2014

work page 2014

[15] [15]

Nob Hill Publishing, 2020

James Rawlings, David Mayne, and Moritz Diehl.Model Predictive Control: Theory, Computation, and Design, Second Edition. Nob Hill Publishing, 2020

work page 2020

[16] [16]

A Characterization of Convex Problems in Decentralized Control.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 51(2):274–286, 2006

Michael Rotkowitz and Sanjay Lall. A Characterization of Convex Problems in Decentralized Control.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 51(2):274–286, 2006

work page 2006

[17] [17]

Optimal Distributed Control for Platooning via Sparse Coprime Factorizations.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 62(1):305–320, 2017

Şerban Sabău, Cristian Oară, Sean Warnick, and Ali Jadbabaie. Optimal Distributed Control for Platooning via Sparse Coprime Factorizations.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 62(1):305–320, 2017

work page 2017

[18] [18]

Network Realization Functions for Optimal Distributed Control.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 68(12):8059–8066, 2023

Şerban Sabău, Andrei Sperilă, Cristian Oară, and Ali Jadbabaie. Network Realization Functions for Optimal Distributed Control.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 68(12):8059–8066, 2023

work page 2023

[19] [19]

Architectures for distributed and hierarchical Model Predictive Control – A review.Journal of Process Control, 19(5):723–731, 2009

Riccardo Scattolini. Architectures for distributed and hierarchical Model Predictive Control – A review.Journal of Process Control, 19(5):723–731, 2009

work page 2009

[20] [20]

Grid Phase Synchronization via Distributed Control.To appear in Proc

Andrei Sperilă, Alessio Iovine, Sorin Olaru, and Patrick Panciatici. Grid Phase Synchronization via Distributed Control.To appear in Proc. of the16 th IEEE PowerTech Conference, pages 1–6, 2025. Available Online: https://hal.science/hal-05056697

work page 2025

[21] [21]

Network-Realised Model Predictive Control Part II: Distributed Constraint Management

Andrei Sperilă, Alessio Iovine, Sorin Olaru, and Patrick Panciatici. Network-Realized Model Predictive Control – Part II: Distributed Constraint Management, 2025. Available Online: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.13073

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[22] [22]

Distributed Control of Descriptor Networks: A Convex Procedure for Augmented Sparsity.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 68(12):8067–8074, 2023

Andrei Sperilă, Cristian Oară, Bogdan Ciubotaru, and Şerban Sabău. Distributed Control of Descriptor Networks: A Convex Procedure for Augmented Sparsity.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 68(12):8067–8074, 2023

work page 2023

[23] [23]

Trodden and J.M

Paul A. Trodden and J.M. Maestre. Distributed predictive control with minimization of mutual disturbances. Automatica, 77:31–43, 2017

work page 2017

[24] [24]

Deployment Architectures for Cyber-Physical Control Systems.In Proc

Shih-Hao Tseng and James Anderson. Deployment Architectures for Cyber-Physical Control Systems.In Proc. of the 2020 American Control Conf., pages 5287–5294, 2020

work page 2020

[25] [25]

String Stable Model Predictive Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control for Heterogeneous Platoons.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 4(2):186–196, 2019

Ellen van Nunen, Joey Reinders, Elham Semsar-Kazerooni, and Nathan van de Wouw. String Stable Model Predictive Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control for Heterogeneous Platoons.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 4(2):186–196, 2019

work page 2019

[26] [26]

A. Varga. Computation of least order solutions of linear rational equations.In Proc. of the International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems, 2004

work page 2004

[27] [27]

A. Varga. Reliable algorithms for computing minimal dynamic covers for descriptor systems.In Proc. of the International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems, 2004

work page 2004

[28] [28]

A. Varga. On Computing Nullspace Bases - a Fault Detection Perspective.In Proc. of the17 th IFAC World Congress, pages 6295–6300, 2008

work page 2008

[29] [29]

Park, and Ge Guo

Jiange Wang, Xiaolei Li, Ju H. Park, and Ge Guo. Distributed MPC-Based String Stable Platoon Control of Networked Vehicle Systems.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 24(3):3078–3090, 2023

work page 2023

[30] [30]

A System-Level Approach to Controller Synthesis.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 64(10):4079–4093, 2019

Yuh-Shyang Wang, Nikolai Matni, and John Doyle. A System-Level Approach to Controller Synthesis.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 64(10):4079–4093, 2019

work page 2019

[31] [31]

Yuh-Shyang Wang, Nikolai Matni, and John C. Doyle. Separable and Localized System-Level Synthesis for Large- Scale Systems.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 63(12):4234–4249, 2018

work page 2018

[32] [32]

System-level, input–output and new parameterizations of stabilizing controllers, and their numerical computation

Yang Zheng, Luca Furieri, Maryam Kamgarpour, and Na Li. System-level, input–output and new parameterizations of stabilizing controllers, and their numerical computation. Automatica, 140:110211, 2022

work page 2022

[33] [33]

On the Equivalence of Youla, System-Level, and Input–Output Parameterizations.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 66(1):413–420, 2021

YangZheng,LucaFurieri,AntonisPapachristodoulou,NaLi, and Maryam Kamgarpour. On the Equivalence of Youla, System-Level, and Input–Output Parameterizations.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 66(1):413–420, 2021

work page 2021

[34] [34]

Karl Hedrick

Yang Zheng, Shengbo Eben Li, Keqiang Li, Francesco Borrelli, and J. Karl Hedrick. Distributed Model Predictive Control for Heterogeneous Vehicle Platoons Under Unidirectional Topologies.IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 25(3):899–910, 2017

work page 2017

[35] [35]

eY(z)− eX(z) −eN(z) fM(z) #

Kemin Zhou, John Doyle, and Keith Glover.Robust and Optimal Control. Prentice-Hall, 1996. 15 A System-Theoretical Notions A.1 Matrix Pencils A matrix pencilA−zEwhich is square and which sat- isfiesdet(A−zE)̸≡0is calledregular. Note that when- everEequals the identity matrix, said pencil is guar- anteed to be regular. With respect to a setCg ⊆C, we say tha...

work page 1996

[36] [36]

A22 −zI n2 Bu2CM Bu2DM O A M −zI nM BM C2 O O # =

and [22]. For a network described by (1a)-(1c) and partitionedasin(4)-(5),theNRFpairstowhichwerefer inthispaperareproducedbyfirstobtainingaDCFover Cg ofG u(z), as previously described, and then forming    eYQ(z) := eY(z) +Q(z) eN(z), eXQ(z) := eX(z) +Q(z)fM(z), eYdiag Q (z) := diag elm11 eYQ(z) , . . . ,elm nunu eYQ(z) , (A.2) for aQ∈ R(z) nu×nx that...

work page