pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.24316 · v1 · pith:AIVWKI3Vnew · submitted 2026-06-23 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Data-Driven Robust MPC for Unknown Nonlinear Systems via Set-Membership Learning

Yuzhou Wei , Wenjie Liu , Yifan Xie , Frank Allg\"ower , Jian Sun , Gang Wang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-25 23:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords data-driven MPCrobust controlnonlinear systemsset-membership learningmin-max optimizationLyapunov stabilitysemidefinite programmingclosed-loop stability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Unknown nonlinear systems can be robustly controlled with data-driven min-max MPC that learns set-membership uncertainty bounds from noisy input-state data.

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

The paper develops a min-max model predictive control scheme for nonlinear systems whose dynamics are unknown but can be rewritten in equivalent linear form using a dictionary of basis functions. Noisy measurements are used to construct a set-membership description of the unknown matrices, which then defines the uncertainty set inside a min-max optimization. A Lyapunov-based semidefinite program computes a stabilizing state-feedback gain for two cases: noise-free state measurements and measurements affected by process disturbance. The resulting controller is shown to keep the optimization feasible at every step while delivering exponential stability without disturbances or robust stability with them.

Core claim

By representing the unknown nonlinear dynamics in an equivalent linear form whose matrices are characterized by a set-membership set derived from noisy input-state data, a min-max MPC problem can be solved via a Lyapunov-based semidefinite program to obtain a state-feedback controller that guarantees recursive feasibility of the optimization and either exponential or robust closed-loop stability depending on the presence of process disturbances.

What carries the argument

The set-membership description of the unknown system matrices obtained from noisy data, which supplies the uncertainty set for the min-max MPC problem solved by a Lyapunov-based semidefinite program.

If this is right

  • The optimization remains recursively feasible at every time step.
  • Exponential stability of the closed loop is obtained when process disturbances are absent.
  • Robust stability of the closed loop is obtained when process disturbances are present.
  • The controller exhibits competitive performance relative to existing data-driven and model-based methods on benchmark examples.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same set-membership construction could be used to incorporate partial prior knowledge by fixing some matrix entries while learning the rest.
  • Online SDP solves may restrict the method to systems whose sampling period allows sufficient computation time unless warm-starting or faster solvers are added.
  • The approach suggests a route to adaptive control by periodically refreshing the set-membership description as new data arrive.

Load-bearing premise

The unknown nonlinear dynamics can be exactly represented in an equivalent linear form using vector fields built from a chosen dictionary of basis functions, allowing the unknown matrices to be fully characterized by a set-membership description derived from noisy input-state data.

What would settle it

A simulation or experiment in which the true dynamics lie outside the computed set-membership bounds, causing the closed-loop trajectory to violate recursive feasibility or lose stability despite the SDP conditions being satisfied.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.24316 by Frank Allg\"ower, Gang Wang, Jian Sun, Wenjie Liu, Yifan Xie, Yuzhou Wei.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Control diagram of the proposed data-driven min-max [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Closed-loop state trajectories under D-MPC and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Closed-loop state constraint under D-MPC. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Nonlinear constraint during the offline collection [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Closed-loop state trajectories under different methods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Closed-loop state constraint under different schemes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Nonlinear constraint during the offline collection [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Closed-loop cost and computation time under four [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Average and worst-case SDP computation time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Closed-loop state trajectories under four control schemes with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Closed-loop state trajectories under four control schemes with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Closed-loop state trajectories under D-RMPC with different values of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Closed-loop state trajectories under D-MPC with different values of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Closed-loop state trajectories under D-MPC with different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Data-driven model predictive control (MPC) has become an attractive approach for controlling unknown systems, especially when data are corrupted by noise. However, most existing data-driven MPC methods focus on linear systems, and little attention has been given to nonlinear dynamics under disturbances. To fill this gap, we propose a robust data-driven min-max MPC scheme for unknown nonlinear systems with process disturbances. We represent the unknown nonlinear dynamics using vector fields built from a dictionary of basis functions, yielding an equivalent linear form with unknown matrices. These unknown matrices are characterized by a set-membership representation derived from noisy input-state data. Using this uncertainty description, we formulate a min-max MPC problem. Two online scenarios are studied: i) when state measurements are noise-free, and, ii) when they are corrupted by process disturbance. For each case, we derive a Lyapunov-based semidefinite program (SDP) to compute a stabilizing state-feedback controller. The resulting schemes are shown to guarantee recursive feasibility and either exponential or robust stability of the closed-loop system depending on whether there is process disturbance. Simulation studies on benchmark examples illustrate the effectiveness and competitive performance of the proposed approach compared to existing data-driven and model-based controllers.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a data-driven robust min-max MPC scheme for unknown nonlinear systems with process disturbances. It represents the dynamics in an equivalent linear form via a chosen dictionary of basis functions, derives a set-membership uncertainty description of the unknown matrices from noisy input-state data, formulates an online min-max MPC problem, and supplies Lyapunov-based SDP solutions for a stabilizing state-feedback controller in two measurement scenarios. The schemes are claimed to ensure recursive feasibility together with exponential stability (noise-free case) or robust stability (disturbed case).

Significance. If the exact linear parametrization holds and the SDP certificates are valid, the approach would provide a tractable data-driven route to robust MPC for nonlinear systems under disturbances, extending existing linear data-driven methods while retaining stability guarantees via set-membership learning. The use of SDP-based controllers and explicit feasibility/stability proofs would be a concrete strength if the representation assumption can be certified.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / model representation] Abstract and model-representation section: the central claim that the unknown nonlinear dynamics admit an 'equivalent linear form' with matrices fully characterized by set-membership sets derived from data requires that the true vector field lies exactly in the span of the chosen basis functions. No verifiable conditions on the dictionary, no procedure to certify exactness from data, and no discussion of the consequences when the assumption fails are supplied; without these the robust MPC problem is not guaranteed to be a valid over-approximation and the Lyapunov SDP certificates do not apply to the real closed-loop system.
  2. [Abstract / stability analysis] Stability and recursive-feasibility claims (abstract): these rest on the min-max MPC formulation whose uncertainty set is obtained under the exact-representation assumption. When the dictionary is incomplete the true dynamics lie outside every matrix set consistent with the data, so the derived SDP certificates and feasibility arguments no longer bound the actual nonlinear closed-loop behavior; the paper provides no sensitivity analysis or fallback when this occurs.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the basis-function dictionary and the resulting matrix sets should be introduced with explicit dimensions and an example in the main text rather than only in the appendix.
  2. The two online scenarios (noise-free vs. disturbed measurements) are distinguished clearly in the abstract but the corresponding SDP formulations would benefit from a side-by-side comparison table of the decision variables and constraints.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and propose revisions where appropriate to clarify the scope and limitations of the approach.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / model representation] Abstract and model-representation section: the central claim that the unknown nonlinear dynamics admit an 'equivalent linear form' with matrices fully characterized by set-membership sets derived from data requires that the true vector field lies exactly in the span of the chosen basis functions. No verifiable conditions on the dictionary, no procedure to certify exactness from data, and no discussion of the consequences when the assumption fails are supplied; without these the robust MPC problem is not guaranteed to be a valid over-approximation and the Lyapunov SDP certificates do not apply to the real closed-loop system.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the proposed framework assumes the nonlinear dynamics admit an exact linear parametrization in the chosen dictionary of basis functions. This assumption is standard in approximation-based nonlinear control but is indeed central to the validity of the uncertainty sets and subsequent guarantees. In the revised manuscript, we will add explicit discussion in the model representation section stating the assumption, noting that no general finite-data certification procedure is provided (as verifying exact span membership from noisy data alone is generally intractable without additional system knowledge), and outlining the consequences of violation (the true dynamics may lie outside the computed sets, rendering the robust MPC and SDP certificates inapplicable to the actual system). revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract / stability analysis] Stability and recursive-feasibility claims (abstract): these rest on the min-max MPC formulation whose uncertainty set is obtained under the exact-representation assumption. When the dictionary is incomplete the true dynamics lie outside every matrix set consistent with the data, so the derived SDP certificates and feasibility arguments no longer bound the actual nonlinear closed-loop behavior; the paper provides no sensitivity analysis or fallback when this occurs.

    Authors: The stability and recursive feasibility results are derived under the exact-representation assumption, as stated in the problem formulation and analysis sections. We agree that no sensitivity analysis or fallback is provided for dictionary incompleteness. In revision, we will insert a remark in the stability analysis section explicitly conditioning the guarantees on the assumption and recommending dictionary selection via domain knowledge. Developing a general sensitivity analysis or fallback would require quantifying representation error, which lies outside the current set-membership framework focused on exact parametrization. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • A general, verifiable procedure to certify exact dictionary representation from finite noisy data without additional prior knowledge of the system dynamics.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained under stated assumptions

full rationale

The paper assumes the unknown nonlinear dynamics admit an exact equivalent linear parametrization via a chosen finite dictionary of basis functions, obtains a set-membership description of the unknown matrices from noisy input-state data, and then derives a min-max MPC formulation together with Lyapunov-based SDP certificates for recursive feasibility and exponential/robust stability. No equations or steps in the provided text reduce a claimed prediction or stability result to a fitted parameter or self-citation by construction. The load-bearing assumption is external to the derivation chain rather than tautological, and no self-citation load-bearing or ansatz smuggling is exhibited.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the ability to represent arbitrary nonlinear dynamics via a finite dictionary of basis functions and on the set-membership set being a faithful description of all matrices consistent with noisy data; both are domain assumptions not independently verified in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • Basis function dictionary
    Choice of which basis functions to include determines the linear representation; selection method and size not specified.
axioms (2)
  • standard math Lyapunov-based SDP yields a stabilizing controller for the uncertain linear system
    Invoked to obtain the state-feedback law and stability certificates.
  • domain assumption Set-membership representation from noisy data accurately bounds all possible system matrices
    Central premise enabling the min-max formulation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5753 in / 1397 out tokens · 25894 ms · 2026-06-25T23:07:34.026147+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

138 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    IEEE/CAA J

    Data-driven control of distributed event-triggered network systems , author=. IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sinica, , volume=

  2. [2]

    Li and X

    Y. Li and X. Wang and J. Sun and G. Wang and J. Chen , title =. Sci. China Inf. Sci. , volume=

  3. [3]

    Automatica , volume=

    Low-complexity learning of linear quadratic regulators from noisy data , author=. Automatica , volume=

  4. [4]

    arXiv:2311.09545 , year=

    Causality-informed data-driven predictive control , author=. arXiv:2311.09545 , year=

    work page arXiv

  5. [5]

    Automatica , volume=

    State estimation using a network of distributed observers with unknown inputs , author=. Automatica , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  6. [6]

    Automatica , volume=

    State estimation using a network of distributed observers with switching communication topology , author=. Automatica , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  7. [7]

    , publisher=

    Hou, Z., and Jin, S. , publisher=

  8. [8]

    , publisher=

    Scherer, C., and Weiland, S. , publisher=

  9. [9]

    Horn and C.R

    R.A. Horn and C.R. Johnson. Matrix Analysis. 1985

    1985

  10. [10]

    IEEE Trans

    Formulas for Data-Driven Control:. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  11. [11]

    A note on persistency of excitation , author=. Syst. Control Lett. , volume=. 2005 , publisher=

    2005

  12. [12]

    IEEE Trans

    Data-driven model predictive control with stability and robustness guarantees , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  13. [13]

    IEEE Trans

    Dead-Beat Control in the Behavioral Approach , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  14. [14]

    and Wang, G

    Zhou, Z. and Wang, G. and Sun, J. and Wang, J. and Chen, J. , journal=. Efficient and Robust Time-Optimal Trajectory Planning and Control for Agile Quadrotor Flight , year=

  15. [15]

    IEEE Trans

    Data-driven resilient predictive control under Denial-of-Service , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  16. [16]

    IEEE Trans

    Data-driven Self-triggered Control via Trajectory Prediction , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  17. [17]

    Control Theory Technol

    Distributed data-driven consensus control of multi-agent systems under switched uncertainties , author=. Control Theory Technol. , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  18. [18]

    and Wang, G

    Liu, W. and Wang, G. and Sun, J. and Bullo, F. and Chen, J. , journal=. Learning Robust Data-Based. 2024 , volume=

    2024

  19. [19]

    IEEE Control Syst

    Alpago, Daniele and D. IEEE Control Syst. Lett. , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  20. [20]

    Robust constraint satisfaction in data-driven

    Berberich, Julian and K\". Robust constraint satisfaction in data-driven. Proc. of IEEE Conf. on Decis. and Control , pages=. Dec. 14-18, 2020 , address=

    2020

  21. [21]

    Data-based moving horizon estimation for linear discrete-time systems , author=. Proc. Eur. Control Conf. , pages=. 2022 , address=

    2022

  22. [22]

    IEEE Trans

    Robust Data-Driven Moving Horizon Estimation for Linear Discrete-Time Systems , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  23. [23]

    and De Persis, Claudio and Camlibel, M

    van Waarde, Henk J. and De Persis, Claudio and Camlibel, M. Kanat and Tesi, Pietro , journal=. Willems’ Fundamental Lemma for State-Space Systems and Its Extension to Multiple Datasets , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  24. [24]

    Van Waarde, H. J. and Camlibel, M. K. and Mesbahi, M. , journal=. From Noisy Data to Feedback Controllers: Nonconservative Design via a Matrix S-Lemma , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  25. [25]

    IEEE Control Syst

    Data-driven unknown-input observers and state estimation , author=. IEEE Control Syst. Lett. , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  26. [26]

    IEEE Trans

    On the equivalence of model-based and data-driven approaches to the design of unknown-input observers , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  27. [27]

    and Lygeros, J

    Coulson, J. and Lygeros, J. and D. Eur. Control Conf. , title=. 2019 , volume=

    2019

  28. [28]

    IEEE Trans

    Input-to-State Stabilizing Control under Denial-of-Service , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2015 , month =

    2015

  29. [29]

    Lewis, Frank L and Zhang, Hongwei and Hengster-Movric, Kristian and Das, Abhijit , publisher=

  30. [30]

    Devore, J. L. and Berk, K. N. , publisher=

  31. [31]

    Khalil, H. K. Nonlinear Systems. 1996

    1996

  32. [32]

    Lofberg , booktitle=

    J. Lofberg , booktitle=. 2004 , volume=

    2004

  33. [33]

    J. B. Rawlings and D. Q. Mayne and M. M. Diehl , publisher=

  34. [34]

    Boyd and L.E

    S. Boyd and L.E. Ghaoui and E. Feron and V. Balakrishnan , publisher=

  35. [35]

    Security Metrics of Networked Control Systems under Sensor Attacks (extended preprint)

    Security Metrics of Networked Control Systems under Sensor Attacks , author=. arXiv:1809.01808 , month =. 2019 , publisher=

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  36. [36]

    Data-Driven Min-Max. Proc. of Amer. Control Conf. , pages=. 2024 , address=

    2024

  37. [37]

    arXiv:2401.04660 , month =

    Distributed Data-driven Unknown-input Observers for State Estimation , author=. arXiv:2401.04660 , month =. 2023 , publisher=

    work page arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    IEEE Trans

    Min-max control of constrained uncertain discrete-time linear systems , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 2003 , month =

    2003

  39. [39]

    Automatica , volume=

    Robust constrained model predictive control using linear matrix inequalities , author=. Automatica , volume=. 1996 , month =

    1996

  40. [40]

    Mayne, D. Q. and Rawlings, J. B. and Rao, C. V. and Scokaert, P. O. M. , journal =. Constrained model predictive control:. 2000 , month =

    2000

  41. [41]

    Model predictive control: past, present and future , author=. Comput. Chem. Eng. , volume=. 1999 , month =

    1999

  42. [42]

    Automatica , volume=

    Robust output feedback model predictive control of constrained linear systems , author=. Automatica , volume=. 2006 , month =

    2006

  43. [43]

    IEEE Trans

    Min-max feedback model predictive control for constrained linear systems , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=. 1998 , month =

    1998

  44. [44]

    Automatica , volume=

    Robust model predictive control of constrained linear systems with bounded disturbances , author=. Automatica , volume=. 2005 , month =

    2005

  45. [45]

    Automatica , volume=

    Homothetic tube model predictive control , author=. Automatica , volume=

  46. [46]

    IEEE Trans

    Parameterized tube model predictive control , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=

  47. [47]

    and Farrokhi, M

    Heydari, R. and Farrokhi, M. , journal=. Robust tube-based model predictive control of

  48. [48]

    Automatica , volume=

    An efficient off-line formulation of robust model predictive control using linear matrix inequalities , author=. Automatica , volume=

  49. [49]

    On input-to-state stability of min–max nonlinear model predictive control , author=. Syst. Control Lett. , volume=

  50. [50]

    Output-feedback predictive control of constrained linear systems via set-membership state estimation , author=

  51. [51]

    Robust output feedback model predictive control using off-line linear matrix inequalities , author=. J. Process Control , volume=

  52. [52]

    Automatica , volume=

    Incorporating state estimation into model predictive control and its application to network traffic control , author=. Automatica , volume=

  53. [53]

    Acta Anat

    Synthesizing output feedback predictive control for constrained uncertain time-varying discrete systems , author=. Acta Anat. Sin. , volume=

  54. [54]

    Synthesis of dynamic output feedback

    Li, Dewei and Xi, Yugeng and Gao, Furong , journal=. Synthesis of dynamic output feedback

  55. [55]

    Automatica , volume=

    A synthesis approach for output feedback robust constrained model predictive control , author=. Automatica , volume=

  56. [56]

    and Ding, B

    Hu, J. and Ding, B. , journal=. Output feedback robust

  57. [57]

    Output feedback robust

    Ping, Xubin , journal=. Output feedback robust

  58. [58]

    and Liu, T

    Hu, K. and Liu, T. , booktitle=. Data-driven. 2022 , address=

    2022

  59. [59]

    Robust data-driven predictive control for unknown linear time-invariant systems , author=. Syst. Control Lett. , volume=

  60. [60]

    Xie and J

    Y. Xie and J. Berberich and F. Allg\". Data-Driven Min-Max. Automatica , volume=. 2026 , month =

    2026

  61. [61]

    and Berberich, J

    Xie, Y. and Berberich, J. and Br\". Data-Driven Min-Max MPC for. arXiv:2411.05624 , year=

    work page arXiv

  62. [62]

    , publisher=

    Woodbury, M.A. , publisher=

  63. [63]

    IEEE Trans

    Robust Stability Analysis of a Simple Data-Driven Model Predictive Control Approach , author=. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control , volume=

  64. [64]

    IEEE Trans

    Path-following control of an AUV: A multiobjective model predictive control approach , author=. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. , volume=

  65. [65]

    Robust model predictive control: reflections and opportunities , author=. J. Control and Decis. , volume=

  66. [66]

    and Arkun, Y

    Lu, Y. and Arkun, Y. , journal=. Quasi-Min-Max

  67. [67]

    A scheduling quasi–min-max model predictive control algorithm for nonlinear systems , author=. J. Process Control , volume=

  68. [68]

    IEEE Trans

    Robust Min-Max Model Predictive Vehicle Platooning With Causal Disturbance Feedback , author=. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst , volume=

  69. [69]

    A data-driven approach to

    Giulio, Fattore and Maria, Elena Valcher , journal=. A data-driven approach to. 2024 , month =

    2024

  70. [70]

    Behavioral systems theory in data-driven analysis, signal processing, and control , author=. Annu. Rev. Control , volume=

  71. [71]

    Data-Enabled Predictive Control for Grid-Connected Power Converters , author=. Proc. of IEEE Conf. on Decis. and Control , pages=. 2019 , address=

    2019

  72. [72]

    Regularized and Distributionally Robust Data-Enabled Predictive Control , author=. Proc. of IEEE Conf. on Decis. and Control , pages=. 2019 , address=

    2019

  73. [73]

    A data-driven predictive controller design based on reduced

    Yang, Hua and Li, Shaoyuan , booktitle=. A data-driven predictive controller design based on reduced. 2015 , address=

    2015

  74. [74]

    Elkhatem, A. S. and Engin, S. N. , journal=. Robust

  75. [75]

    IEEE Trans

    Nonlinear Model Predictive Formation Flight , author=. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern.: Syst. , volume=

  76. [76]

    Data-enabled predictive control for quadcopters , author=. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control , volume=

  77. [77]

    A novel constraint-tightening approach for robust data-driven predictive control , author=. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control , volume=

  78. [78]

    and You, K

    Wang, Y. and You, K. and Huang, D. and Shang, C. , journal=. Data-driven output prediction and control of stochastic systems:

  79. [79]

    IEEE Control Syst

    Data-Driven Tracking Control for Uncertain Linear Systems Using a Dual-System Approach , author=. IEEE Control Syst. Lett. , volume=

  80. [80]

    and Van Delft, A

    Mastellone, S. and Van Delft, A. , journal=. The impact of control research on industrial innovation:

Showing first 80 references.