Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 90 references

Distributed Event-Triggered Nash Equilibrium Seeking for Noncooperative Games

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read N players with unknown quadratic payoffs can be driven to the unique Nash equilibrium by distributed event-triggered pseudo-gradient feedback, up to a residual of order $\mathcal{O}(a + 1/\omega)$, with a guaranteed minimum time between…

desk verdict First model-free event-triggered Nash seeking for N-player games, but the averaging bridge to the original system is not actually shown. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.06691 v1 pith:UYHWOVFO submitted 2025-05-10 math.OC cs.SYeess.SY

Victor Hugo Pereira Rodrigues , Tiago Roux Oliveira , Miroslav Krstic , Tamer Basar This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.OCcs.SYeess.SY MSC 91A1093C5793D05
keywords Nashequilibriumseekingevent-triggeredcontrolextremumnoncooperativegamespseudo-gradientestimationaveragingfordiscontinuoussystemsZenobehavioravoidancemodel-freeoptimization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes the first model-free, distributed event-triggered scheme for Nash equilibrium seeking in $N$-player noncooperative games whose payoff functions are unknown quadratics. Each player injects a small sinusoidal perturbation into its own action, demodulates its own payoff to form a pseudo-gradient estimate, and broadcasts that estimate only when the error between the current estimate and the last broadcast crosses a state-dependent threshold. The authors claim that for sufficiently large probing frequency $\omega$ the average closed-loop system is locally exponentially stable at the unique Nash equilibrium, while the true system converges to a residual ball of radius $\mathcal{O}(a + 1/\omega)$ and never exhibits Zeno behavior. If true, this closes the gap between extremum-seeking Nash equilibrium seeking, which needs continuous communication, and event-triggered control, which makes communication aperiodic to save bandwidth.

What carries the argument

The machinery has three parts. The pseudo-gradient estimate $\hat{G}_i(t) = (2/a_i)\sin(\omega_i t)\,J_i(\theta(t))$ uses sinusoidal demodulation to expose the average gradient $H\tilde{\theta}(t)$ while all other terms have zero mean; this is what lets players work without knowing their payoff functions. The static event-triggering rule $\sigma_i|\hat{G}_i(t)| - |e_i(t)| < 0$ decides when the zero-order hold refreshes the broadcast $\hat{G}_i(t_i^\kappa)$, generating the piecewise-constant tuning law. The proof runs the closed loop in the scaled time $\bar{t} = \omega t$ and invokes the averaging theorem for differential inclusions with discontinuous right-hand sides, together with a Lyapunov function for the average system and a comparison argument for the dwell time, to obtain exponential convergence and the positive bound $\tau^*$ on inter-event intervals.

What would settle it

Simulate a two-player version with rational probing frequencies and a nonzero initial error, and record the event times modulo the common period $T$ over several periods. If the pattern of event times differs from one period to the next, the vector field in (37) is not $T$-periodic, and the averaging theorem cannot supply the $\mathcal{O}(1/\omega)$ closeness estimate on which the residual bound (50) rests; one could also check directly whether the measured inter-event intervals stay above the claimed lower bound $\tau^*$ as the state approaches equilibrium.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under strict diagonal dominance of the game matrix $H$ and a frequency-separation condition on the probing signals, the event-triggered tuning law $u_i(t) = K_i \hat{G}_i(t_i^\kappa)$ with trigger times set by $\sigma_i|\hat{G}_i(t)| - |e_i(t)| < 0$ drives the action estimate $\hat{\theta}(t)$ to the Nash equilibrium $\theta^*$ within the error bound $\|\theta(t)-\theta^*\| \le M_\theta e^{-mt}\|\theta(0)-\theta^*\| + \mathcal{O}(a + 1/\omega)$. The average system obtained from the averaging theorem for discontinuous right-hand sides has $\hat{G}_{\mathrm{av}} = 0$ locally exponentially stable, and a lower bound $\tau^*$ on inter-execution times rules out infinitely many updates in any finite interval. The residual term reflects the persistent sinusoidal dither and the finite probing frequency, so the convergence guarantee is practical rather than asymptotic.

Load-bearing premise

The proof's load-bearing premise is that the event-triggered closed-loop system is $T$-periodic in time, with the same period $T$ as the probing signals, so that the averaging theorem for discontinuous right-hand sides applies; the event times themselves are state-dependent and are never proved to be periodic.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any $N$-player game with strictly diagonally dominant quadratic payoffs can be solved online using only each player's own payoff measurement and its own trigger logic; no payoff models and no inter-player communication of actions are needed.
  • Raising the probing frequency $\omega$ and lowering the dither amplitudes $a$ shrinks the guaranteed residual ball $\mathcal{O}(a + 1/\omega)$, at the cost of a slower effective convergence rate and more demanding probing signals.
  • The positive dwell time $\tau^*$ means the event-triggered law can be implemented on digital hardware that samples faster than $\tau^*$, so the scheme does not rely on infinitely fast switching.
  • The local stability of the average system plus the input-to-state stability bound with respect to the measurement error $e$ suggests the same static-triggering structure tolerates small measurement noise without losing convergence to a slightly larger residual set.
  • The paper claims this is the first combination of extremum seeking and event-triggered communication for noncooperative games, opening the design to networked settings where communication bandwidth is the scarce resource.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • As an extension not analyzed in the paper, time-varying dither amplitudes $a_i(t)$ decaying to zero near equilibrium could in principle remove the $\mathcal{O}(a)$ part of the residual and yield asymptotic instead of practical convergence; the proof as written treats constant amplitudes only.
  • The analysis assumes a strictly diagonally dominant, hence unique, Nash equilibrium. For games with merely local diagonal dominance or multiple equilibria, a modified triggering condition or a projection mechanism would be needed; the paper does not address those cases.
  • Because each player's trigger threshold $\sigma_i$ is chosen independently, heterogeneous players can trade bandwidth against accuracy: a larger $\sigma_i$ reduces broadcasts but enlarges that player's contribution to the residual set.
  • The $\mathcal{O}(1/\omega)$ closeness between true and average trajectories rests on the periodicity premise of the averaging theorem; a direct numerical check of whether event-time patterns repeat with period $T$ would show whether that premise holds in the original system.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a distributed event-triggered extremum-seeking scheme for N-player noncooperative games with unknown quadratic payoff functions. Each player injects sinusoidal dither, demodulates its own payoff to estimate its pseudo-gradient, and updates/broadcasts the pseudo-gradient estimate only when a local static triggering condition is violated. The main result (Theorem 1) claims local exponential stability of an averaged event-triggered system and, for the original system, convergence to a neighborhood of the Nash equilibrium of radius O(a + 1/ω), together with a uniform positive lower bound on inter-event times that excludes Zeno behavior. The proof combines time scaling, a Lyapunov function for the average system, Plotnikov's averaging theorem for discontinuous right-hand sides, and a comparison-based dwell-time estimate. A four-player oligopoly simulation illustrates the proposed scheme.

Significance. If the averaging step were rigorously justified, the paper would make a useful contribution: it addresses a genuinely open combination of model-free Nash equilibrium seeking with event-triggered communication, provides quantitative residual bounds, and gives an explicit Zeno-avoidance guarantee. The decentralized, per-player triggering design and the independent pseudo-gradient estimates are attractive features. The Lyapunov analysis of the average system is internally coherent, and the simulation supports the qualitative claims. However, the central transfer from the average system to the original closed loop currently rests on an application of Plotnikov's averaging theorem whose hypotheses are not verified; this gap is load-bearing for both the convergence bound (50) and the dwell-time bound (90).

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.1 and Appendix A, Eqs. (34)–(37), (73)] Plotnikov's averaging theorem (Appendix A, Theorems 2 and 3) is applied to a closed-loop system that does not satisfy the theorem's hypotheses. The theorem requires the multivalued map X(tbar, x) to be T-periodic in tbar and Lipschitz in x. In the closed loop (34)–(35), the error e(tbar) defined in (27) contains Ghat_i(t_i_kappa), the value at the player's last event time, and t_i_kappa is generated by the state-dependent rule (31). Hence the right-hand side is a functional of the past trajectory rather than a function of the instantaneous state, and there is no reason for the event schedule to be T-periodic. Appendix A explicitly concedes that "the discontinuities induced by the increasing sequence of event times are not periodic," but then asserts that the theorems nevertheless apply. No argument or construction of a T-periodic, Lipschitz map X(tbar,x) is given. Consequently, the O(1/ω) closeness estimate (73), the residual bound (50), and the Zeno lower bound (90) are not established as they stand.
  2. [Section 4.2, Eqs. (38)–(46)] The average system (44)–(46) is not obtained from the averaging operation (38)–(39). The averaging integral freezes the state and averages the explicitly time-periodic terms H(tbar), dH(tbar)/dtbar, Delta(tbar), and dDelta(tbar)/dtbar, but the event-triggered error e(tbar) is not a T-periodic function of tbar and is not averaged by the computation in (40)–(43). Replacing e(tbar) with e_av(tbar) defined through the "average" event-triggering rule (48) constructs a different switched system. No theorem is presented that connects this constructed average system to the original switched system (34)–(35); the stability of (44)–(45) therefore does not, by itself, imply the claimed behavior of the original system.
  3. [Section 5.B, Eqs. (87)–(90)] The Zeno-avoidance proof for the original system inherits the averaging gap. Equation (87) asserts |phi(t) - phi_av(t)| <= O(1/ω) by invoking the same Theorem 2 of [64], but phi(t) is built from the original event-triggered error and pseudo-gradient signals, whose relation to the average variables is precisely what is not established. Even if trajectory closeness (73) were available, the closeness of the ratios |e(t)|/|Ghat(t)| would require a separate argument near points where Ghat(t) vanishes. Thus the lower bound tau* in (90) is unsupported, and with it the claim that Zeno behavior is avoided for the original system.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (44)] The matrix order in (44) appears inconsistent: from (34) and the relation G_av = H theta_av, the average dynamics should read dG_av/dtbar = (1/ω) H K G_av + (1/ω) H K e_av, not (1/ω) K H G_av + (1/ω) K H e_av. Since H K and K H are similar, the stability conclusion is unaffected, but the text, the Lyapunov equation in (52), and the norm bound in (56) mix the two orderings and should be made consistent.
  2. [Eq. (54)] In the bound for ||e_av(tbar)||, the summation index is written as j while the terms are |e_av_i(tbar)|; the index should be i.
  3. [Section 6, simulation parameters] The parameter list sets sigma1 = 0.65 and then repeatedly lists sigma1 = 0.75; the second occurrence should presumably be sigma3 = 0.75.
  4. [Eqs. (91)–(94)] The third payoff function is labeled J2(t) in (93); it should be J3(t).
  5. [Appendix A] The text refers to "Fig. 7.1" when describing the closed-loop block diagram; the correct reference appears to be Fig. A.1.
  6. [Eq. (82)] The bound in (82) should be (1 + ||e_av||/||G_av||)^2 rather than 1 + (||e_av||/||G_av||)^2; the subsequent inequality (83) implicitly uses the squared sum, so this appears to be a typo rather than a substantive error.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main theorem rests on an algebraic expansion, an independent averaging theorem, and a standard Lyapunov/triggering argument.

full rationale

The paper's derivation is self-contained in the relevant sense. The pseudo-gradient estimate (14) is expanded algebraically against the unknown but fixed payoff data H and h, giving (20); the averaging constants (40)-(43) are computed directly from those periodic terms. The exponential-stability statement for the average system follows from the Lyapunov equation for the Hurwitz matrix KH and from the defining triggering inequality (31)/(48), which by construction yields ||e_av|| ≤ \barσ ||Ghat_av|| in (54); this is the standard event-triggered argument, not a fitted prediction. The residual bound (50) is a triangle-inequality consequence of (72)-(76) plus the dither bound ||S||=O(a). The load-bearing averaging comparison (73) is imported from Plotnikov's independent theorem [64], not from the authors' own prior work; self-citations such as [24], [68], [69], and [71] are motivational or design-context citations and are not used to prove the theorem. The only substantive concern is whether the closed-loop right-hand side satisfies Plotnikov's T-periodicity hypothesis despite the state-dependent event schedule; Appendix A itself states that 'the discontinuities induced by the increasing sequence of event times are not periodic' and then asserts applicability. That is a missing-support or correctness risk, not a circular reduction, because the claimed O(1/ω) closeness does not presuppose the theorem's conclusion. I therefore find no circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No constants are fitted to data. The design parameters (dither amplitudes, frequencies, gains, triggering thresholds) are user-chosen with constraints stated in Assumptions 1-2 and Theorem 1, and they enter the residual and dwell-time bounds explicitly. The analysis relies on standard ES assumptions: quadratic payoffs, strictly diagonally dominant H, frequency separation. The most consequential assumption is the applicability of Plotnikov's averaging theorem to a closed loop with state-dependent, non-periodic switching; this is asserted in Section 4.1 and Appendix A and is the load-bearing step connecting original and average systems. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • Dither amplitudes a_i = a_i = 0.05 for all i in the simulation
    User-chosen ES parameters; set the residual-set size O(a) in (50); chosen by hand, not fitted to data.
  • Dither frequencies omega_i = omega = (30, 24, 44, 36) in the simulation
    User-chosen; must satisfy Assumption 1 and be large enough to make the O(1/omega) residual small; enter the averaging analysis.
  • Tuning gains K_i = K = (6, 18, 10, 24) in the simulation
    User-chosen so that KH is Hurwitz, which Assumption 2 makes possible; affect convergence rate m and the dwell-time bound tau*.
  • Triggering thresholds sigma_i = sigma = (0.65, 0.55, 0.75, 0.45) in the simulation (text duplicates sigma1 and omits sigma3)
    User-chosen; the proof requires sigma_bar < lambda_min(Q)/(2 ||P H K||); trade-off between communication rate and convergence speed.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Assumption 2: the unknown matrix H is strictly diagonally dominant (|H_i_ii| > sum_{j != i} |H_i_ij| for all i).
    Guarantees H is invertible, the Nash equilibrium is unique, and KH with K > 0 diagonal is Hurwitz, which the Lyapunov analysis in Theorem 1 requires. Restricts the class of games.
  • domain assumption Assumption 1: probing frequencies avoid the integer combinations listed in (12).
    Standard ES frequency-selection condition that makes the averaged quantities in (40)-(43) reduce to the desired terms; restricts admissible dither frequencies.
  • domain assumption Payoff functions are exactly quadratic as in (1) with each J_i strictly concave in theta_i.
    The expansion of the pseudo-gradient estimate (14) and its averaging use the quadratic structure; extension to non-quadratic payoffs would need additional local assumptions not stated.
  • domain assumption The quadratic term in the estimation error (the red term in Eq. 14) is neglected as locally second-order.
    Standard local extremum seeking approximation (Ariyur and Krstic); valid only for initial conditions sufficiently close to the Nash equilibrium, so the theorem is local.
  • ad hoc to paper Plotnikov's averaging theorem (Appendix A, Theorems 2 and 3) applies to the closed-loop system (34)-(35) whose right-hand side is discontinuous at state-dependent, non-periodic event times.
    The theorem requires T-periodicity of the multivalued map X(t,x) in t; the paper asserts this is inherited from the periodic dither signals (Section 4.1) but does not prove it for the event-triggering law. This is the load-bearing step behind (73), (87), and the bounds (50), (90).
  • standard math Standard Lyapunov, comparison lemma, and averaging background as invoked from Khalil and Plotnikov.
    Used as background tools; the paper does not re-derive them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Distributed Event-Triggered Nash Equilibrium Seeking for Noncooperative Games." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UYHWOVFO

@misc{pith2026250506691,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Distributed Event-Triggered Nash Equilibrium Seeking for Noncooperative Games},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UYHWOVFO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.06691}
}
abstract

We propose locally convergent Nash equilibrium seeking algorithms for $N$-player noncooperative games, which use distributed event-triggered pseudo-gradient estimates. The proposed approach employs sinusoidal perturbations to estimate the pseudo-gradients of unknown quadratic payoff functions. This is the first instance of noncooperative games being tackled in a model-free fashion with event-triggered extremum seeking. Each player evaluates independently the deviation between the corresponding current pseudo-gradient estimate and its last broadcasted value from the event-triggering mechanism to tune individually the player action, while they preserve collectively the closed-loop stability/convergence. We guarantee Zeno behavior avoidance by establishing a minimum dwell-time to avoid infinitely fast switching. In particular, the stability analysis is carried out using Lyapunov's method and averaging for systems with discontinuous right-hand sides. We quantify the size of the ultimate small residual sets around the Nash equilibrium and illustrate the theoretical results numerically on an oligopoly setting.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.06691 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Block diagram of the NES strategy through distributed event-triggered tuning policies of Definition 1 performed for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Event-triggered Nash equilibrium seeking system. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [64]

    V. A. Plotnikov, Averaging of differential inclusions. Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, 31:454–457, 1980

    work page 1980

  2. [1]

    K. B. Ariyur and M. Krstić. Real-Time Optimization by Extremum-Seeking Control. Wiley, Canada, 2003

    2003

  3. [2]

    K. E. Åarzén, A simple event-based PID controller. IFAC World Congress, 32:423–428, 1999

    1999

  4. [3]

    Abdelgalil and J

    M. Abdelgalil and J. I. Poveda, Initialization-free Lie-bracket extremum seeking. Systems & Control Letters, 191: paper 105881, 2024

    2024

  5. [4]

    Abdelrahim, R

    M. Abdelrahim, R. Postoyan, J. Daafouz, and D. Ne˘ sić, Stabilization of nonlinear systems using event-triggered output feedback controllers.IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 61:2682–2687, 2016

    2016

  6. [5]

    Alasseur, I

    C. Alasseur, I. B. Taher, and A. Matoussi, An Extended Mean Field Game for Storage in Smart Grids. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 184:644–670, 2020

    2020

  7. [6]

    Alpcan and T

    T. Alpcan and T. Başar, Network Security: A Decision and Game Theoretic Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2011

    2011

  8. [7]

    Amina, G

    S. Amina, G. A. Schwartz, and S. S. Sastry, Security of interdependent and identical networked control systems. Automatica, 49:186–192, 2013

    2013

Show all 90 references
  1. [8]

    Apostol, Mathematical Analisys - A Modern Approach to Advanced Calculus

    T. Apostol, Mathematical Analisys - A Modern Approach to Advanced Calculus. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1957

    1957

  2. [9]

    IFAC World Congress, 32:5006–5011, 1999

    K.J.ÅströmandB.P.Bernhardsson, Comparisonofperiodic and event based sampling for first-order stochastic systems. IFAC World Congress, 32:5006–5011, 1999

    1999

  3. [10]

    Aussel and A

    D. Aussel and A. Svensson, Towards Tractable Constraint Qualifications for Parametric Optimisation Problems and Applications to Generalised Nash Games. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 182:404–416, 2019

    2019

  4. [11]

    T.Başar,Relaxationtechniquesandtheon-lineasynchronous algorithms for computation of noncooperative equilibria. J. Economic Dynamics and Control, 11:531–549, 1987

    1987

  5. [12]

    Başar and G

    T. Başar and G. J. Olsder, Dynamic Noncooperative Game Theory, SIAM Series in Classics in Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 1999

    1999

  6. [13]

    Başar and G

    T. Başar and G. Zaccour (editors), Handbook of Dynamic Game Theory, Volume I (Theory of Dynamic Games), Springer International Publishing, 2018

    2018

  7. [14]

    Başar and G

    T. Başar and G. Zaccour (editors), Handbook of Dynamic Game Theory, Volume II (Applications of Dynamic Games), Springer International Publishing, 2018

    2018

  8. [15]

    D. P. Borgers and W. P. M. H. Heemels, On minimum inter- event times in event-triggered control. InIEEE 52nd IEEE Conf. Decis. Control., pages 7370–7375, Firenze, Italy, 2013

    2013

  9. [16]

    D. P. Borgers and W. P. M. H. Heemels, Event-separation properties of event-triggered control systems.IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 59:2644–2656, 2014

    2014

  10. [17]

    Z. Chen, X. Nian, and Q. Meng, Nash equilibrium seeking of general linear multi-agent systems in the cooperation- competition network.Systems & Control Letters, 175: paper 105510, 2023

    2023

  11. [18]

    Cheng and Z

    B. Cheng and Z. Li, Fully distributed event-triggered protocols for linear multiagent networks. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 64:1655–1662, 2019

    2019

  12. [19]

    J.-Y. Choi, M. Krstić, K. B. Ariyur, and J. S. Lee, Extremum seeking control for discrete-time systems. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 47:318–323, 2002

    2002

  13. [20]

    Cotrina and J

    J. Cotrina and J. Zúñiga, Time-dependent generalized Nash equilibrium problem. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 179:1054–1064, 2018

    2018

  14. [21]

    P. H. S. Coutinho, I. Bessa, M. L.C. Peixoto, and R. M. Palhares, A co-design condition for dynamic event-triggered feedback linearization control. Systems & Control Letters, 183: paper 105678, 2024

    2024

  15. [22]

    Didinsky, T

    G. Didinsky, T. Başar, and P. Bernhard, Structural Properties of minimax controllers for a class of differential games arising in nonlinear control. Systems & Control Letters, 21:433–441, 1993

    1993

  16. [23]

    D. C. Ferreira, T. R. Oliveira, and M. Krstic, Inverse optimal extremum seeking under delays.Systems & Control Letters, 177: paper 105534, 2023

    2023

  17. [24]

    IEEE Trans

    P.Frihauf,M.Krstić,andT.Başar, Nashequilibriumseeking in non-cooperative games. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 57:1192–1207, 2012

    2012

  18. [25]

    Fudenberg and J

    D. Fudenberg and J. Tirole, Game Theory, The MIT Press, Cambridge–Massachusetts, 1991

    1991

  19. [26]

    Ghaffari, M

    A. Ghaffari, M. Krstić, and D. Ne˘ sic, Multivariable Newton- based extremum seeking.Automatica, 48:1759–1767, 2012

    2012

  20. [27]

    IEEE Trans

    A.Girard, Dynamictriggeringmechanismforevent-triggered control. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 60:1992–1997, 2014

    1992

  21. [28]

    Z. Han, D. Niyato, W. Saad, and T. Başar, Game Theory for Next Generation Wireless and Communication Networks: Modeling,Analysis,andDesign,CambridgeUniversityPress, 2019

    2019

  22. [29]

    Hazeleger, D

    L. Hazeleger, D. Nesić, and N. van de Wouw, Sampled-data extremum-seeking framework for constrained optimization of nonlinear dynamical systems.Automatica, 142(8):110415 (14 pages), 2022

    2022

  23. [30]

    W. P. M. H. Heemels, M. C. F. Donkers, and A. R. Teel, Periodic event-triggered control for linear systems. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 58:847–861, 2012

    2012

  24. [31]

    W. P. M. H. Heemels, K. H. Johansson, and P. Tabuada, An introduction to event-triggered and self-triggered control. In IEEE 51st IEEE Conf. Decis. Control., pages 3270–3285, 2012

    2012

  25. [32]

    J. P. Hespanha, P. Naghshtabrizi, and Y. Xu, A survey of recent results in networked control systems.Proceedings of the IEEE, 95(1):138–162

  26. [33]

    Hetel, C

    L. Hetel, C. Fiter, H. Omran, A. Seuret, E. Fridman, J- .P.Richard,andS.L.Niculescu, Recentdevelopmentsonthe stability of systems with aperiodic sampling: An overview. Automatica, 76:309–335, 2017

    2017

  27. [34]

    R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Matrix Analysis.Cambridge University Press, 1985

    1985

  28. [35]

    W. Huo, K. F. E. Tsang, Y. Yan, K. H. Johansson, and L. Shi, Distributed Nash equilibrium seeking with stochastic event- triggered mechanism. Automatica 162(4), 111486, 2024. 14

    2024

  29. [36]

    O. C. Imer and Başar, Optimal estimation with limited measurements, In Proc. Joint 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference, pp. 1029–1034, Seville, Spain, 2005

    2005

  30. [37]

    O. C. Imer and Başar, Optimal control with limited controls, In Proc. 2006 American Control Conference, pp. 298–3032, Minnesota, USA, 2010

    2006

  31. [38]

    O. C. Imer and T. Başar, Optimal estimation with limited measurements, International J. Systems, Control and Communications, vol. 2, pp. 5–29, 2010

    2010

  32. [39]

    PrenticeHall,UpperSaddle River, New Jersey, 2002

    H.K.Khalil, NonlinearSystems. PrenticeHall,UpperSaddle River, New Jersey, 2002

    2002

  33. [40]

    S. Z. Khong, D. Nesić, Y. Tan, and C. Manzie, Unified frameworks for sampled-data extremum seeking control: Global optimisation and multi-unit systems. Automatica, 49(9):2720–2733, 2013

    2013

  34. [41]

    Koudohode, N

    F. Koudohode, N. Espitia, and M. Krstic, Event-triggered boundary control of an unstable reaction-diffusion PDE with input delay.Systems & Control Letters, 186: paper 105775, 2024

    2024

  35. [42]

    Krstic, Performance improvement and limitations in extremum seeking control

    M. Krstic, Performance improvement and limitations in extremum seeking control. Systems & Control Letters, 39: 313–326, 2000

    2000

  36. [43]

    Krstić and H.-H

    M. Krstić and H.-H. Wang, Stability of extremum seeking feedback for general nonlinear dynamic systems.Automatica, 36:595–601, 2000

    2000

  37. [44]

    Li and T

    S. Li and T. Başar, Distributed learning algorithms for the computation of noncooperative equilibria. Automatica 23:523–533, 1987

    1987

  38. [45]

    Liu and M

    S.-J. Liu and M. Krstić, Stochastic averaging in continuous time and its applications to extremum seeking.IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 55:2235–2250, 2010

    2010

  39. [46]

    Manzie and M

    C. Manzie and M. Krstić, Extremum seeking with stochastic perturbations. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 54:580–585, 2009

    2009

  40. [47]

    Martirosyan and M

    E. Martirosyan and M. Cao, An event-triggered quantization communication strategy for distributed optimal resource allocation. Systems & Control Letters, 180: paper 105619, 2023

    2023

  41. [48]

    Martirosyan and M

    E. Martirosyan and M. Cao, Reinforcement learning for inverse linear-quadratic dynamic non-cooperative games. Systems & Control Letters, 191: paper 105883, 2024

    2024

  42. [49]

    Mazo and P

    M. Mazo and P. Tabuada, Decentralized event-triggered control over wireless sensor/actuator networks. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 56(10):2456–2461, 2011

    2011

  43. [50]

    Monaco and D

    S. Monaco and D. Normand-Cyrot, Discrete time models for robot arm control. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 18:525–529, 1985

    1985

  44. [51]

    Monderer and L

    D. Monderer and L. S. Shapley, Potential games. Games and Economic Behavior, 14(1):124–143, 1996

    1996

  45. [52]

    J. F. Nash, Noncooperative games. Annals of Mathematics, 54:286–295, 1951

    1951

  46. [53]

    H.NoorighanavatiZadehandA.Afshar,Anovelcooperative- competitive differential graphical game with distributed global Nash solution.Systems & Control Letters, 181: paper 105642, 2023

    2023

  47. [54]

    T. R. Oliveira, L. R. Costa, J. M. Y. Catunda, A. V. Pino, W. Barbosa, and M. N. de Souza, Time-scaling based sliding mode control for neuromuscular electrical stimulation under uncertain relative degrees. Medical Engineering & Physics, 44:53–62, 2017

    2017

  48. [55]

    T. R. Oliveira, J. P. V. S. Cunha, and L. Hsu, Adaptive slidingmodecontrolbasedontheextendedequivalentcontrol concept for disturbances with unknown bounds. Advances in Variable Structure Systems and Sliding Mode Control— Theory and Applications, vol 115. Springer, Cham., pp. 1...

    2017

  49. [56]

    T. R. Oliveira and M. Krstic, Extremum seeking boundary control for PDE-PDE cascades.Systems & Control Letters, 155: paper 105004, 2021

    2021

  50. [57]

    T. R. Oliveira and M. Krstic, Extremum Seeking through Delays and PDEs. SIAM, Philadelphia, 2022

    2022

  51. [58]

    T. R. Oliveira, M. Krstić, and T. Başar, Extremum and Nash Equilibrium Seeking with Delays and PDEs: Designs & Applications. Available at:https://arxiv.org/abs/2312. 08512, 2024

    2024

  52. [59]

    T. R. Oliveira, M. Krstić, and D. Tsubakino, Extremum seeking for static maps with delays.IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 62:1911–1926, 2017

    1911

  53. [60]

    T. R. Oliveira, A. J. Peixoto, and L. Hsu, Global tracking for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems with unknown sign- switching control direction by output feedback.International Journal of Control, 88:1895–1910, 2015

    1910

  54. [61]

    T. R. Oliveira, V. H. P. Rodrigues, M. Krstić, and T. Başar, Nash equilibrium seeking in quadratic noncooperative games under two delayed information-sharing schemes. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 191:700–735, 2021

    2021

  55. [62]

    Petrovic and Z

    B. Petrovic and Z. Gajic, Recursive solution of linear- quadratic Nash games for weakly interconnected systems. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 56:463– 477, 1988

    1988

  56. [63]

    H. L. C. P. Pinto, T. R. Oliveira, and L. Hsu, Sliding mode observer for fault reconstruction of time-delay and sampled-outputsystems—atimeshiftapproach. Automatica, 106:390–400, 2019

    2019

  57. [65]

    J. I. Poveda, M. Krstić, and T. Başar, Fixed-time Nash equilibrium seeking in time-varying networks.IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 68(4):1954–1969, 2023

    1954

  58. [66]

    V. H. P. Rodrigues, L. Hsu, T. R. Oliveira, and M. Diagne (2022). Event-triggered extremum seeking control. IFAC- PapersOnLine, 55(12), 555–560

    2022

  59. [67]

    V. H. P. Rodrigues, L. Hsu, T. R. Oliveira and M. Diagne (2023b). Dynamic event-triggered extremum seeking feedback. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 56(2), 10307–10314

    2023

  60. [68]

    V. H. P. Rodrigues, T. R. Oliveira, L. Hsu, M. Diagne and M. Krstić (2023a). Event-triggered extremum seeking control systems. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.08512, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  61. [69]

    V. H. P. Rodrigues, T. R. Oliveira, L. Hsu, M. Diagne, and M. Krstic, Event-Triggered and Periodic Event-Triggered ExtremumSeekingControl. Automatica,Volume174,112161 (1–16), 2025

    2025

  62. [70]

    V. H. P. Rodrigues, T. R. Oliveira, M. Krstić and T. Başar, Sliding-mode Nash equilibrium seeking for a quadratic duopoly game,Proc. of the 17th International Workshop on Variable Structure Systems (VSS), pp. 99–106, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2024

    2024

  63. [71]

    V. H. P. Rodrigues, T. R. Oliveira, M. Krstić and T. Başar, Nash equilibrium seeking for noncooperative duopoly games viaevent-triggeredcontrol, Proc.ofthe63rdIEEEConference on Decision and Control (CDC), pp. 5248–5255 (preprint in:https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2404.07287),Mi...

    doi arXiv

  64. [72]

    J. B. Rosen (1965). Existence and uniqueness of equilibrium points for concave N-person games. Econometrica, 33(3), 520–534

    1965

  65. [73]

    Scheinker and M

    A. Scheinker and M. Krstic, Extremum seeking with bounded update rates.Systems & Control Letters, 63:25–31, 2014

    2014

  66. [74]

    Srikant and T

    R. Srikant and T. Başar, Iterative computation of noncooperative equilibria in nonzero-sum differential games with weakly coupled players. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 71:137–168, 1991. 15

    1991

  67. [75]

    A. W. Starr and Y. C. Ho, Nonzero-sum differential games. JournalofOptimizationTheoryandApplications,3:184–206, 1969

    1969

  68. [76]

    Suttner and M

    R. Suttner and M. Krstic, Nonholonomic source seeking in three dimensions using pitch and yaw torque inputs.Systems & Control Letters, 178: paper 105584, 2023

    2023

  69. [77]

    Tabuada, Event-triggered real-time scheduling of stabilizing control tasks

    P. Tabuada, Event-triggered real-time scheduling of stabilizing control tasks. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 52:1680–1685, 2007

    2007

  70. [78]

    P.TallapragaandN.Chopra, DecentralizedEvent-Triggering for Control of Nonlinear Systems,Automatica, vol. 59, pp. 3312–3324, 2014

    2014

  71. [79]

    Taussky, A recurring theorem on determinants

    O. Taussky, A recurring theorem on determinants. The American Mathematical Monthly, 56(10):672–676, 1949

    1949

  72. [80]

    Wang and M

    X. Wang and M. D. Lemmon, Event-triggering in distributed networked control systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 56(3):586–601, 2011

    2011

  73. [81]

    W. Wang, H. Sun, R. Van den Brink, and G. Xu, The family ofidealvaluesforcooperativegames.JournalofOptimization Theory and Applications, 180:1065–1086, 2018

    2018

  74. [82]

    Warner,Foundations of Differentiate Manifolds and Lie Group

    F. Warner,Foundations of Differentiate Manifolds and Lie Group. ScottForesmanandCompany,Chicago,Illinois,1971

    1971

  75. [83]

    L. Xing, C. Wen, Z. Liu, H. Su, and J. Cai, Event-triggered adaptive control for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 62:2071–2076, 2017

    2017

  76. [84]

    J. K. Yook, D. M. Tilbury, and N. R. Soparkar, Trading computation for bandwidth: Reducing communication in distributed control systems using state estimators. IEEE transactions on Control Systems Technology, 10:503–518, 2002

    2002

  77. [85]

    C.Zhang,D.Arnold,N.Ghods,A.Siranosian,andM.Krstic, Source seeking with nonholonomic unicycle without position measurement and with tuning of forward velocity.Systems & Control Letters, 56: 245–252, 2007

    2007

  78. [86]

    Zhang, X

    K. Zhang, X. Fang, D. Wang, Y. Lv, and X. Yu, Distributed Nash equilibrium seeking under event-triggered mechanism. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs, 68(11):3441–3445, 2021

    2021

  79. [87]

    Zhang, Q.-L

    X.-M. Zhang, Q.-L. Han, X. Ge, D. Ding, L. Ding, D. Yue, and C. Peng, Networked control systems: A survey of trends and techniques.IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sin., 7(1):1–17, 2020

    2020

  80. [88]

    Zhang, T

    P. Zhang, T. Liu, and Z.-P. Jiang, Event-triggered stabilization of a class of nonlinear time-delay systems.IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 66:421–428, 2021

    2021

  81. [89]

    Y. Zhu, E. Fridman, and T. R. Oliveira, Sampled- data extremum seeking with constant delay: a time-delay approach. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 68:432–439, 2023

    2023

  82. [90]

    Q. Zhu, H. Tembine, and T. Başar, Hybrid learning in stochastic games and its applications in network security. In F. L. Lewis, D. Liu (editors) Reinforcement Learning and Approximate Dynamic Programming for Feedback Control, Series on Computational Intelligence, IEEE Press/Wi...

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.