pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.02508 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-02 · 🧮 math.OC

Observer-Based Performance-Barrier Event-Triggered Control of 2times2 Linear Hyperbolic PDEs

Eranda Somathilake , Mamadou Diagne This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 20:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.OC
keywords event-triggered controlhyperbolic PDEsobserver-based controlperformance barrierboundary controlexponential stabilitydwell timeoutput feedback
0
0 comments X

The pith

An observer-based performance-barrier event-triggered controller stabilizes 2x2 linear hyperbolic PDEs with a minimum dwell-time.

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

This paper extends performance-barrier event-triggered control to output feedback for 2x2 linear hyperbolic partial differential equations by adding an exponentially convergent observer that reconstructs the state from anti-collocated boundary measurements. The observer supplies the performance residual needed to decide when the Lyapunov function is allowed to increase temporarily, which enlarges the minimum time between control updates while still guaranteeing overall decay. The analysis establishes both a strictly positive lower bound on inter-event times and global exponential convergence of the spatial L2 norm of the state to zero. The result is useful because it removes the need for continuous full-state sensing in distributed-parameter systems where only boundary measurements are practical.

Core claim

The central claim is that a dynamic performance-barrier event-triggered boundary controller, driven by an exponentially convergent observer, guarantees the existence of a minimum dwell-time between events and global exponential stability of the L2 norm of the solution for the closed-loop 2x2 linear hyperbolic PDE with anti-collocated measurements.

What carries the argument

The dynamic performance-barrier event-triggered mechanism under output feedback, which evaluates the performance residual from the observer state to decide control updates while preserving the barrier property.

If this is right

  • The closed-loop system remains globally exponentially stable in the spatial L2 norm.
  • Control updates occur with a strictly positive minimum inter-event time, excluding Zeno behavior.
  • Prescribed performance is preserved under output feedback without full-state measurements.
  • The same barrier logic continues to enlarge dwell times compared with standard event-triggered designs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The observer-based construction could be adapted to other classes of hyperbolic or parabolic PDEs where boundary observers are already available.
  • Minimum-dwell-time guarantees may allow direct translation to embedded digital controllers with fixed clock rates.
  • Relaxing the linearity assumption on the plant would test whether the barrier still prevents Zeno behavior in nonlinear transport systems.

Load-bearing premise

An exponentially convergent observer exists for the PDE and the performance residual can be computed from its state estimate without destroying the barrier property.

What would settle it

A simulation or experiment in which events accumulate in finite time or the L2 norm fails to converge exponentially under the proposed observer-based controller would falsify the claims.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.02508 by Eranda Somathilake, Mamadou Diagne.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of the proposed P-ETC mechanism [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic of the dynamics of m(t) Let m(0) = 0, m(tj ) ≥ 0, j ∈ N>0, m((tj +τ) −) = m(tj + τ), j ∈ N, then from (42) we have m(t) = e−η(t−tj )m(tj ) + Z t tj e −η(t−ξ) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Variation of the spatial L2 norm of the states with time Time(s) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 U(t) -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 P-ETC ETC [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Variation of the control input with time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Variation of Vˆ (t) with time for different values of c uncertainties using backstepping,” in 2025 American Control Confer￾ence (ACC), 2025, pp. 996–1001. [18] E. Somathilake and M. Diagne, “Output feedback control of suspended sediment load entrainment in water canals and reservoirs,” IFAC￾PapersOnLine, vol. 58, no. 28, pp. 983–988, 2024, the 4th Modeling, Estimation, and Control Conference – 2024. [19] E… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Performance-barrier event-triggered control (P-ETC) is a methodology implemented to increase the dwell-times between events while still preserving a prescribed performance of the system under event-triggered control (ETC). This is achieved by considering the performance residual of the system, which is a measure of the system performance with respect to the prescribed performance. This allows the Lyapunov function candidate to deviate from decreasing monotonically. In order to determine the performance residual, it is required to know the full-state information, leading to all work related to P-ETC to be under full-state feedback. In this article, we propose a novel dynamic performance-barrier under output feedback with an exponentially convergent observer. We consider event-triggered boundary control of a class of $2\times2$ linear hyperbolic PDEs with anti-collocated measurements with the control input. Under the proposed P-ETC mechanism, we prove the existence of a minimum dwell-time, and show the global exponential stability of the spatial $L^2$ norm of the solution of the system. Simulation results are presented to validate the theoretical claims.

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 novel observer-based performance-barrier event-triggered control (P-ETC) design for 2×2 linear hyperbolic PDEs with anti-collocated boundary measurements. It replaces the full-state performance residual with an observer-based counterpart to relax monotonic Lyapunov decrease while enforcing a prescribed performance envelope, and claims to prove both the existence of a strictly positive minimum dwell-time between events and global exponential stability of the spatial L² norm of the closed-loop solution.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the contribution is significant because prior P-ETC literature for hyperbolic systems has been restricted to full-state feedback; extending the framework to output feedback via an exponentially convergent observer removes a major practical obstacle and enables boundary-measurement implementations. The combination of dwell-time guarantees with performance-barrier enforcement is a useful technical advance for event-triggered control of distributed-parameter systems.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4, Theorem 2] §4 (Stability Analysis) and the proof of Theorem 2: the argument that the observer-based residual preserves the performance barrier relies on exponential decay of the observer error, yet no explicit transient bound is supplied showing that ||x(·,t) - hat x(·,t)||_L2 cannot push the actual L² norm outside the prescribed envelope during the initial transient when the error is O(1). This is load-bearing for the global exponential stability claim.
  2. [Theorem 1] Theorem 1 (minimum dwell-time): the lower bound on inter-event times is derived from the event condition evaluated on the estimated residual; without a quantitative estimate of how the observer mismatch perturbs the triggering threshold, the proof does not yet guarantee a dwell-time that is uniform for arbitrary initial conditions.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] Notation for the performance residual r(t) and the barrier function should be introduced with an explicit equation number in §2 rather than only in the text.
  2. [§5] The simulation section would benefit from a table comparing dwell-times and L²-norm convergence rates between the proposed observer-based P-ETC and a full-state P-ETC baseline.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address the two major points below and will incorporate explicit bounds and clarifications into the revised manuscript to strengthen the proofs.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4, Theorem 2] §4 (Stability Analysis) and the proof of Theorem 2: the argument that the observer-based residual preserves the performance barrier relies on exponential decay of the observer error, yet no explicit transient bound is supplied showing that ||x(·,t) - hat x(·,t)||_L2 cannot push the actual L² norm outside the prescribed envelope during the initial transient when the error is O(1). This is load-bearing for the global exponential stability claim.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit transient bound on the observer error is needed to rigorously close the argument. In the revised version we will insert a new lemma (Lemma 3) that supplies a quantitative estimate ||x(·,t) - hat x(·,t)||_L2 ≤ C e^{-λ t} ||x_0 - hat x_0||_L2 + transient term, where the constants are derived from the observer gain and the hyperbolic system matrices. This bound is then substituted into the performance-residual inequality to show that the barrier function remains strictly positive for all t ≥ 0 provided the design parameters satisfy a simple algebraic condition on the initial mismatch. The proof of Theorem 2 will be updated accordingly, thereby confirming that the prescribed L² envelope is never violated. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Theorem 1] Theorem 1 (minimum dwell-time): the lower bound on inter-event times is derived from the event condition evaluated on the estimated residual; without a quantitative estimate of how the observer mismatch perturbs the triggering threshold, the proof does not yet guarantee a dwell-time that is uniform for arbitrary initial conditions.

    Authors: We will add an explicit perturbation estimate to the proof of Theorem 1. Specifically, we bound the difference between the true and estimated residuals by the observer error, which decays exponentially. The resulting lower bound on inter-event time is then shown to be positive and independent of the particular initial condition once the observer error has entered a sufficiently small ball (which occurs in finite time). For the global case we note that the dwell-time expression depends continuously on the initial L² norms; hence it remains uniformly positive on any compact set of initial data, which is the standard notion of uniformity compatible with global exponential stability for linear infinite-dimensional systems. The revised proof will contain the full quantitative estimate. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; stability and dwell-time follow from independent Lyapunov analysis

full rationale

The paper extends full-state P-ETC to an observer-based output-feedback version for 2x2 hyperbolic PDEs. The minimum dwell-time existence and global exponential L2 stability are claimed to follow from a performance-residual event condition constructed on the observer state, combined with standard comparison lemmas and Lyapunov functions for the closed-loop system. No quoted step reduces the target result to a redefinition or fitted input by construction; the observer convergence is invoked as a prior property of the anti-collocated measurement setup rather than derived tautologically inside the present argument. Self-citations, if present for the base P-ETC framework, are not load-bearing for the new observer-based dwell-time or stability claims.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides insufficient detail to enumerate specific free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; standard hyperbolic PDE well-posedness and observer convergence are implicitly assumed but not itemized.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5491 in / 1064 out tokens · 43677 ms · 2026-05-13T20:49:33.795765+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Anfinsen and O

    H. Anfinsen and O. M. Aamo, Adaptive control of hyperbolic PDEs . Springer, 2019

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    A strict L yapunov function for boundary control of hyperbolic systems of cons ervation laws,

    J.-M. Coron, B. d’Andrea Novel, and G. Bastin, “A strict L yapunov function for boundary control of hyperbolic systems of cons ervation laws,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 2–11, 2007

    work page 2007

  3. [3]

    Boundary stab ilization in finite time of one-dimensional linear hyperbolic balance laws with coefficients depending on time and space,

    J.-M. Coron, L. Hu, G. Olive, and P . Shang, “Boundary stab ilization in finite time of one-dimensional linear hyperbolic balance laws with coefficients depending on time and space,” Journal of Differential Equations, vol. 271, pp. 1109–1170, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Stabilization o f a system of n + 1 coupled first-order hyperbolic linear PDEs with a single boundary input,

    F. Di Meglio, R. V azquez, and M. Krstic, “Stabilization o f a system of n + 1 coupled first-order hyperbolic linear PDEs with a single boundary input,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 58, no. 12, pp. 3097–3111, 2013

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    Backsteppi ng sta- bilization of the linearized Saint-V enant-Exner model,

    A. Diagne, M. Diagne, S. Tang, and M. Krstic, “Backsteppi ng sta- bilization of the linearized Saint-V enant-Exner model,” Automatica, vol. 76, pp. 345–354, 2017. Time(s) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Dwell-time ( s) 0 1 2 3 4 P-ETC ETC Fig. 5. Dwell-times under the proposed triggering conditio n Time(s) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 ˆV (t) 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 e− γt̺(t) ˆV...

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Observer-based event-triggered boundary control of a linear 2 × 2 hyperbolic systems,

    N. Espitia, “Observer-based event-triggered boundary control of a linear 2 × 2 hyperbolic systems,” Systems & Control Letters , vol. 138, p. 104668, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Dynamic triggering mechanisms for event-tr iggered con- trol,

    A. Girard, “Dynamic triggering mechanisms for event-tr iggered con- trol,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 1992–1997, 2015

    work page 1992

  8. [8]

    An introd uction to event-triggered and self-triggered control,

    W. P . Heemels, K. H. Johansson, and P . Tabuada, “An introd uction to event-triggered and self-triggered control,” in 2012 IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) , 2012, pp. 3270–3285

    work page 2012

  9. [9]

    Control of ho- modirectional and general heterodirectional linear coupl ed hyperbolic PDEs,

    L. Hu, F. Di Meglio, R. V azquez, and M. Krstic, “Control of ho- modirectional and general heterodirectional linear coupl ed hyperbolic PDEs,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 61, no. 11, pp. 3301–3314, 2016

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    H. K. Khalil and J. W. Grizzle, Nonlinear systems . Prentice hall Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2002, vol. 3

    work page 2002

  11. [11]

    Backstepping boundary co ntrol for first-order hyperbolic PDEs and application to systems with actuator and sensor delays,

    M. Krstic and A. Smyshlyaev, “Backstepping boundary co ntrol for first-order hyperbolic PDEs and application to systems with actuator and sensor delays,” Systems & Control Letters , vol. 57, no. 9, pp. 750–758, 2008

    work page 2008

  12. [12]

    Boundary control of hyperbo lic conser- vation laws using a frequency domain approach,

    X. Litrico and V . Fromion, “Boundary control of hyperbo lic conser- vation laws using a frequency domain approach,” Automatica, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 647–656, 2009

    work page 2009

  13. [13]

    Performance-barrier-based eve nt-triggered control with applications to network systems,

    P . Ong and J. Cort´ es, “Performance-barrier-based eve nt-triggered control with applications to network systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 69, no. 7, pp. 4230–4244, 2024

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Global exponential stabi lization of 2 × 2 linear hyperbolic PDEs via dynamic event-triggered back stepping control,

    B. Rathnayake and M. Diagne, “Global exponential stabi lization of 2 × 2 linear hyperbolic PDEs via dynamic event-triggered back stepping control,” Automatica, vol. 183, p. 112617, 2026

    work page 2026

  15. [15]

    Pe rformance- barrier event-triggered control of a class of reaction–dif fusion PDEs,

    B. Rathnayake, M. Diagne, J. Cort´ es, and M. Krstic, “Pe rformance- barrier event-triggered control of a class of reaction–dif fusion PDEs,” Automatica, vol. 174, p. 112181, 2025

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Observer- based event-triggered boundary control of a class of reacti on-diffusion PDEs,

    B. Rathnayake, M. Diagne, N. Espitia, and I. Karafyllis , “Observer- based event-triggered boundary control of a class of reacti on-diffusion PDEs,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 2905–2917, 2022

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    Rathnayake, A

    B. Rathnayake, A. Zlotnik, S. Tokareva, and M. Diagne, “ Setpoint tracking and disturbance attenuation for gas pipeline flow s ubject to Time(s) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 ˆV (t) 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 ˆV (t) ( c = 0) ˆV (t) ( c = 0. 1) ˆV (t) ( c = 1) ˆV (t) ( c = 10) ˆV (t) ( c = 100) Fig. 7. V ariation of ˆV (t) with time for different values of c uncertainties...

    work page 2000

  18. [18]

    Output feedback control of suspended sediment load entrainment in water canals and reservoirs,

    E. Somathilake and M. Diagne, “Output feedback control of suspended sediment load entrainment in water canals and reservoirs,” IF AC- PapersOnLine, vol. 58, no. 28, pp. 983–988, 2024, the 4th Modeling, Estimation, and Control Conference – 2024

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Output f eedback periodic event-triggered and self-triggered boundary con trol of coupled 2 × 2 linear hyperbolic PDEs,

    E. Somathilake, B. Rathnayake, and M. Diagne, “Output f eedback periodic event-triggered and self-triggered boundary con trol of coupled 2 × 2 linear hyperbolic PDEs,” Automatica, vol. 179, p. 112433, 2025

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

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

    P . Tabuada, “Event-triggered real-time scheduling of stabilizing control tasks,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic control , vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 1680–1685, 2007

    work page 2007

  21. [21]

    Back- stepping for partial differential equations: A survey,

    R. V azquez, J. Auriol, F. Bribiesca-Argomedo, and M. Kr stic, “Back- stepping for partial differential equations: A survey,” Automatica, vol. 183, p. 112572, 2026

    work page 2026

  22. [22]

    Backstepping b oundary stabilization and state estimation of a 2 × 2 linear hyperbolic system,

    R. V azquez, M. Krstic, and J.-M. Coron, “Backstepping b oundary stabilization and state estimation of a 2 × 2 linear hyperbolic system,” in 2011 50th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and Europe an Control Conference, 2011, pp. 4937–4942

    work page 2011

  23. [23]

    Traffic congestion control for Aw–R ascle– Zhang model,

    H. Y u and M. Krstic, “Traffic congestion control for Aw–R ascle– Zhang model,” Automatica, vol. 100, pp. 38–51, 2019

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Perf ormance- barrier event-triggered PDE control of traffic flow,

    P . Zhang, B. Rathnayake, M. Diagne, and M. Krstic, “Perf ormance- barrier event-triggered PDE control of traffic flow,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , 2025

    work page 2025