pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21439 · v1 · pith:CTX4BN7Cnew · submitted 2026-05-20 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.RO· cs.SY

Fully Actuated Manifold Constraint Based Output Feedback Control for Input-Constrained Uncertain Nonlinear Systems

Dianrui Mu , Changchun Hua , Yafeng Li , Jiannan Chen , Rao Wei This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 03:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.ROcs.SY
keywords output feedback controlnonlinear systemsinput saturationmanifold constraintfinite time controluncertain dynamicsmodel-free design
0
0 comments X

The pith

A manifold-constraint controller maintains preset accuracy for uncertain nonlinear systems even after actuator saturation.

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

The paper develops a model-free output-feedback controller for unknown time-varying nonlinear systems that face unknown input limits. It builds nonlinear manifolds to drive the system error toward a chosen accuracy level before saturation occurs and switches to an error-driven flexible constraint once saturation begins. This extends earlier linear-manifold methods to nonlinear surfaces and several constraint types while guaranteeing the target accuracy in finite or fixed time. The design stays low-complexity and is illustrated on second-order and higher-order examples.

Core claim

The controller constructs nonlinear manifolds and error-driven flexible constraints so that preset control accuracy is reached in finite or fixed time when the actuator is not saturated and flexible accuracy is preserved once saturation occurs, all without using the system model or velocity measurements.

What carries the argument

Nonlinear manifold constraint: a surface in the error space that the closed-loop trajectory is forced to follow, allowing the designer to encode accuracy bounds and to switch to a saturation-aware flexible version when the input limit is hit.

If this is right

  • Preset accuracy is reached in finite or fixed time whenever the actuator remains unsaturated.
  • Flexible accuracy continues after saturation through the error-driven constraint.
  • The same construction works for linear or nonlinear manifolds and for different constraint shapes.
  • Only output measurements are needed; no model or velocity information is required.
  • The method applies directly to second-order and higher-order uncertain nonlinear plants.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same manifold idea could be tested on mechanical systems with hard position or velocity limits to check whether saturation handling remains effective on hardware.
  • Because the design is model-free, it might combine with simple adaptive laws to handle even slower time variations without raising complexity.
  • If the finite-time bound can be made explicit in terms of the manifold parameters, the approach would give designers a direct tuning knob for settling speed.

Load-bearing premise

The systems must be fully actuated so that the designer can freely choose nonlinear manifolds and error-driven constraints that steer the error to the desired accuracy region.

What would settle it

Run the controller on a fully actuated second-order system whose input saturates; if the tracking error stays larger than the preset bound for an extended interval after saturation begins, the accuracy claim is falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21439 by Changchun Hua, Dianrui Mu, Jiannan Chen, Rao Wei, Yafeng Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Skewed manifold design diagram. change singularity, while NSMD can eliminate this singularity since T2i and its arbitrary order deriva￾tives are 0 at si = 0. This guarantees that, when employing a nonlinear negative feedback function in conjunction with the iterative method (11) to con￾struct nonlinear manifolds of order higher than two, singularities will not occur for all derivatives of U(z) at z = 0 van… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: LaMC based finite-time manifold con￾straint diagram after Ts. (ii) When the actuator output capability is insuffi￾cient, the system achieves a flexible control ac￾curacy |z1| < xeU within the same finite time Tfn, and after the controller exits saturation, it recovers to the preset accuracy ϵz within a finite time  max{Te, Ts} + T ′ fn where Te is the time when the system exits saturation. Proof: Accordi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: LoMC and SSMD based variable expo￾nent coefficients fixed-time manifold constraint dia￾gram after Ts. as v = −ku ln 1 + ξe 1 − ξe ! = −ku ln 1 + (2 s−yeL yeU −yeL − 1) 1 − (2 s−yeL yeU −yL − 1)! = −ku ln  s − yeL yeU − s  (50) while yeL and yeU can be simplified as yeU = −yeL =(1 − Ty)yU + Ty(|hm(n−1)(sn−1) − s˙n−1| + ρe) =(1 − Ty)yU + Ty(|s| + ρe) (51) where Ty = S  |s|−(yU −ρe) ρe  . Corollary 2 For … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A schematic diagram of equivalent longi￾tudinal flexible expansion achieved through lateral flexible expansion. The thick black curve repre￾sents z2 = hp1(z1), the black dashed line represents z1 = ±ϵz1, and the thick blue solid line represents z2 = hm1(z1) with SSMD (14). The orange area is formed by the lateral expansion of z1 = ±ϵz1, while the blue area is the result of the longitudinal elastic expansio… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Simulation results of the fixed-time PPC with (45), LoMC, SSMD, and saturated actuator. (a) The variables z1, z2, zˆ1, and zˆ2 versus time. (b) The variables s, yeU , and yeL versus time. (c) Phase trajec￾tory (z1, z2). (d) The evolution of − F G and u. which has an exponential coefficient of 0 when z = 0, resulting in the value of hp(0) is −1 and the left limit is limz→0− hp(z) = 1. Therefore, the sliding… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Simulation results of the RFC with satu￾rated actuator. (a) The variables z1, z2, z3, zˆ1, zˆ2 and zˆ3 versus time. (b) The variables s, s˙1 versus time (c) The variables s, yeU , and yeL versus time. (d) Phase trajectory (z1, z2). (e) Phase trajectory (s1, s˙1). (f) The evolution of − F G and u. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Fully actuated iterative manifold diagram. differential explosion may occur due to the it￾erative generation of the manifold. This may require finding a non-linear fast manifold con￾struction method that does not rely on itera￾tion. A Proof of Lemma 1 The fully actuated iterative manifold can be rewritten as: s = nY−1 i=1  ∂ ∂t − hmi si  s1 (69) According the definition of hmi in (11) and Assump￾tion 6,… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Manifold constraint diagram under situa￾tion B. D = 2 ·    − −A1 Pn−2 i=1 h (n−i) mi (si) + B1 xU − xL + C1, OMC − Pn−1 i=1 h (n−i) mi (si) yU − yL + C2, LoMC h ′ v Pn−2 i=1 h (n−i) mi (si) xU − xL + C3, LaMC (82) Since ∂hm(n−1)(•) ∂• < 0 and ∂hm(n−1)(•) ∂• ∈ L∞, the value −h ′ v is bounded with a positive lower bound. There exit positive constants A, A¯, D¯, and F¯ such that 0 < A ≤ A … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper presents a low-complexity, model-free, output-feedback controller for a class of unknown time-varying nonlinear systems with unknown input constraints. The controller achieves the preset control accuracy when the actuator is not saturated and maintains flexible control accuracy after actuator saturation. This result extends existing constraint control methods for linear manifolds to a more general form, including the construction of nonlinear manifolds and various types of constraints, thereby achieving preset control accuracy within finite or fixed time. Additionally, flexible control under unknown saturation is achieved through the construction of an error-driven flexible constraint. Finally, second-order and higher-order control examples and simulations are provided.

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 low-complexity, model-free, output-feedback controller for unknown time-varying nonlinear systems subject to input constraints. It employs fully actuated manifold constraints to achieve preset control accuracy in finite or fixed time when the actuator is not saturated, and maintains flexible accuracy after saturation through an error-driven flexible constraint. The work extends prior linear-manifold constraint methods to nonlinear manifolds and various constraint types, with supporting second-order and higher-order examples plus simulations.

Significance. If the central stability and accuracy claims hold under the fully-actuated assumption and arbitrary unknown time-varying dynamics, the result would advance practical nonlinear control by providing a simple mechanism to enforce performance specifications despite actuator saturation. The generalization beyond linear manifolds and the explicit handling of post-saturation flexibility address a recognized limitation in existing barrier and prescribed-performance methods. Simulations are a positive element, though stronger quantitative validation would increase impact.

major comments (2)
  1. [Main result theorem (likely §3)] Main result theorem (likely §3): The finite/fixed-time preset accuracy guarantee after saturation relies on the error-driven flexible constraint compensating for input clipping. For completely unknown time-varying dynamics, the Lyapunov or barrier analysis must remain valid when the input is saturated; without explicit uniform ultimate bounds or robustness margins that close the gap when dynamics grow faster than the constraint can compensate, the central claim is not yet load-bearing.
  2. [Simulation section] Simulation section: Results are presented without quantitative error metrics, settling-time data, or direct comparisons against baseline methods (e.g., standard prescribed-performance or saturation-compensation controllers), which weakens support for the cross-scenario accuracy claims.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Notation and definitions] Notation for the nonlinear manifold construction and the error-driven flexible constraint would benefit from an explicit step-by-step example or diagram to improve clarity.
  2. [Introduction] The introduction could more sharply delineate novelty relative to existing manifold-based and finite-time constraint control literature.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and for recognizing the potential of our approach in extending manifold-constraint methods to nonlinear cases with flexible saturation handling. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the theoretical presentation and empirical validation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Main result theorem (likely §3)] Main result theorem (likely §3): The finite/fixed-time preset accuracy guarantee after saturation relies on the error-driven flexible constraint compensating for input clipping. For completely unknown time-varying dynamics, the Lyapunov or barrier analysis must remain valid when the input is saturated; without explicit uniform ultimate bounds or robustness margins that close the gap when dynamics grow faster than the constraint can compensate, the central claim is not yet load-bearing.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation on the post-saturation analysis. The proof of the main result (Theorem 1) shows that the error-driven flexible constraint is constructed so the chosen barrier function decreases along the saturated trajectories, preserving the preset accuracy when unsaturated and a flexible bound thereafter. However, to make the robustness explicit for arbitrary unknown time-varying dynamics, we will add a supporting lemma providing uniform ultimate bounds on the residual error and explicit margins that quantify how the flexible constraint compensates for growth rates exceeding the nominal control authority. These additions will be placed in the revised Section 3. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Simulation section] Simulation section: Results are presented without quantitative error metrics, settling-time data, or direct comparisons against baseline methods (e.g., standard prescribed-performance or saturation-compensation controllers), which weakens support for the cross-scenario accuracy claims.

    Authors: We agree that the current simulations would benefit from quantitative support. In the revised manuscript we will augment the simulation section with tables reporting maximum steady-state error, settling times under finite- and fixed-time modes, and direct numerical comparisons against standard prescribed-performance controllers and saturation-compensation schemes. These additions will strengthen the evidence for the accuracy claims across the considered scenarios. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Derivation self-contained; no load-bearing circular steps identified

full rationale

The paper constructs nonlinear manifolds and error-driven flexible constraints for output-feedback control of fully actuated uncertain systems, then invokes standard Lyapunov or barrier analysis to obtain finite/fixed-time accuracy claims when saturation is absent and flexible accuracy when saturation occurs. No equation is shown reducing to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, no self-citation is load-bearing for the uniqueness or convergence result, and the manifold/constraint definitions are presented as design choices rather than self-definitional. The provided abstract and description supply independent design steps that do not collapse by construction to the target accuracy statements.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The approach rests on domain assumptions about system actuation and manifold constructibility; no explicit free parameters or invented entities are detailed in the abstract, but the flexible constraint is introduced as a new mechanism.

free parameters (1)
  • controller gains and time parameters
    Likely tuned to achieve finite or fixed time convergence and preset accuracy levels, though specific values not provided in abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The nonlinear system is fully actuated and admits construction of nonlinear manifolds for the given constraints.
    Invoked in the title and abstract to enable the manifold-based design for output feedback control.
invented entities (1)
  • error-driven flexible constraint no independent evidence
    purpose: To maintain flexible control accuracy after actuator saturation occurs.
    Introduced in the abstract as the mechanism for handling unknown saturation without losing all performance guarantees.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5646 in / 1362 out tokens · 37572 ms · 2026-05-21T03:02:13.538633+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

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Dynamic surface control for a class of nonlinear systems,

    D. Swaroop, J. K. Hedrick, P. P. Yip, and J. C. Gerdes, “Dynamic surface control for a class of nonlinear systems,” IEEE transactions on au- tomatic control , vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 1893–1899, 2000

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    Fuzzy adaptive output feedback control of uncertain nonlinear systems with prescribed performance,

    J.-X. Zhang and G.-H. Yang, “Fuzzy adaptive output feedback control of uncertain nonlinear systems with prescribed performance,” IEEE transactions on cybernetics , vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 1342–1354, 2017. 19

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Event-triggered practical prescribed time output feedback neu- roadaptive tracking control under saturated ac- tuation,

    S. Zhou, Y. Song, and C. Wen, “Event-triggered practical prescribed time output feedback neu- roadaptive tracking control under saturated ac- tuation,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Net- works and Learning Systems , vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 4717–4727, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Reduced-order observer-based output-feedback tracking control for nonlinear time-delay sys- tems with global prescribed performance,

    G. Liu, J. H. Park, H. Xu, and C. Hua, “Reduced-order observer-based output-feedback tracking control for nonlinear time-delay sys- tems with global prescribed performance,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics , vol. 53, no. 9, pp. 5560–5571, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Adaptive fuzzy output feedback fault-tolerant control for active suspension systems,

    Y. Li, S. Ma, K. Li, and S. Tong, “Adaptive fuzzy output feedback fault-tolerant control for active suspension systems,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles , vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 2469– 2478, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    A k-filter-based adap- tive control for nonlinear systems with unknown parameters in state and output equations,

    X. Zhang and W. Lin, “A k-filter-based adap- tive control for nonlinear systems with unknown parameters in state and output equations,” Au- tomatica, vol. 105, pp. 186–197, 2019

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Global practical track- ing via adaptive output feedback for uncer- tain nonlinear systems without polynomial con- straint,

    Y. Wang and Y. Liu, “Global practical track- ing via adaptive output feedback for uncer- tain nonlinear systems without polynomial con- straint,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Con- trol, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 1848–1855, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Systematic design of adaptive con- trollers for feedback linearizable systems,

    I. Kanellakopoulos, P. V. Kokotovic, and A. S. Morse, “Systematic design of adaptive con- trollers for feedback linearizable systems,” in 1991 American control conference. IEEE, 1991, pp. 649–654

    work page 1991

  9. [9]

    High-order fully actuated system ap- proaches: Part ii. generalized strict-feedback systems,

    G. Duan, “High-order fully actuated system ap- proaches: Part ii. generalized strict-feedback systems,” International Journal of Systems Sci- ence, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 437–454, 2021

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    An active fault tol- erance framework for uncertain nonlinear high- order fully-actuated systems,

    M. Cai, X. He, and D. Zhou, “An active fault tol- erance framework for uncertain nonlinear high- order fully-actuated systems,” Automatica, vol. 152, p. 110969, 2023

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Output feedback approximation- free prescribed performance tracking control for uncertain mimo nonlinear systems,

    I. S. Dimanidis, C. P. Bechlioulis, and G. A. Rovithakis, “Output feedback approximation- free prescribed performance tracking control for uncertain mimo nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 5058–5069, 2020

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    Variable structure systems with slid- ing modes,

    V. Utkin, “Variable structure systems with slid- ing modes,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic control, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 212–222, 1977

    work page 1977

  13. [13]

    On the adaptive con- trol of robot manipulators,

    J.-J. E. Slotine and W. Li, “On the adaptive con- trol of robot manipulators,” The international journal of robotics research , vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 49–59, 1987

    work page 1987

  14. [14]

    From pid to active disturbance rejec- tion control,

    J. Han, “From pid to active disturbance rejec- tion control,” IEEE transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 900–906, 2009

    work page 2009

  15. [15]

    A low-complexity global approximation-free con- trol scheme with prescribed performance for unknown pure feedback systems,

    C. P. Bechlioulis and G. A. Rovithakis, “A low-complexity global approximation-free con- trol scheme with prescribed performance for unknown pure feedback systems,” Automatica, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 1217–1226, 2014

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    Prescribed time recovery from state constraint violation via approximation-free control ap- proach,

    Y. Cao, Z. Shen, J. Cao, D. Li, and Y. Song, “Prescribed time recovery from state constraint violation via approximation-free control ap- proach,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers , 2023

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    Asymp- totic and finite-time semistability for nonlinear discrete-time systems with application to net- work consensus,

    W. M. Haddad, J. Lee, and S. P. Bhat, “Asymp- totic and finite-time semistability for nonlinear discrete-time systems with application to net- work consensus,” IEEE Transactions on Auto- matic Control, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 766–781, 2022

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    Event-based finite-time control for high-order interconnected nonlinear systems with asymmetric output con- straints,

    C.-C. Hua, Q.-D. Li, and K. Li, “Event-based finite-time control for high-order interconnected nonlinear systems with asymmetric output con- straints,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 67, no. 11, pp. 6135–6142, 2021

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    Prac- tically finite-time control for nonlinear systems with mismatching conditions and application to a robot system,

    H. Min, S. Xu, B. Zhang, and N. Duan, “Prac- tically finite-time control for nonlinear systems with mismatching conditions and application to a robot system,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems , vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 480–489, 2017

    work page 2017

  20. [20]

    Fixed-time con- sensus tracking for multi-agent systems with a nonholomonic dynamics,

    W. Mi, L. Luo, and S. Zhong, “Fixed-time con- sensus tracking for multi-agent systems with a nonholomonic dynamics,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 1161–1168, 2022

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    Finite/fixed-time stabilization for nonlinear interconnected sys- tems with dead-zone input,

    C. Hua, Y. Li, and X. Guan, “Finite/fixed-time stabilization for nonlinear interconnected sys- tems with dead-zone input,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 2554– 2560, 2016

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Prac- tical fixed-time attitude consensus tracking for multi-quadrotor systems: A composite learning backstepping approach,

    Y. Zhou, J. Zhou, S. Wang, and G. Wen, “Prac- tical fixed-time attitude consensus tracking for multi-quadrotor systems: A composite learning backstepping approach,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs , 2024. 20

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Predefined-time robust stabilization of robotic manipulators,

    A. J. Munoz-Vazquez, J. D. Sánchez-Torres, E. Jimenez-Rodriguez, and A. G. Loukianov, “Predefined-time robust stabilization of robotic manipulators,” IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 1033–1040, 2019

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Tracking with prescribed transient behaviour,

    A. Ilchmann, E. P. Ryan, and C. J. Sangwin, “Tracking with prescribed transient behaviour,” ESAIM: Control, Optimisation and Calculus of Variations, vol. 7, pp. 471–493, 2002

    work page 2002

  25. [25]

    Ro- bust adaptive control of feedback linearizable mimo nonlinear systems with prescribed perfor- mance,

    C. P. Bechlioulis and G. A. Rovithakis, “Ro- bust adaptive control of feedback linearizable mimo nonlinear systems with prescribed perfor- mance,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Con- trol, vol. 53, no. 9, pp. 2090–2099, 2008

    work page 2090

  26. [26]

    Prescribed-time control for perturbed euler-lagrange systems with obstacle avoidance,

    A. Shakouri and N. Assadian, “Prescribed-time control for perturbed euler-lagrange systems with obstacle avoidance,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 67, no. 7, pp. 3754–3761, 2021

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Adaptive prescribed-time control for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems,

    C. Hua, P. Ning, and K. Li, “Adaptive prescribed-time control for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Au- tomatic Control , vol. 67, no. 11, pp. 6159–6166, 2021

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    Practical pre- scribed time tracking control over infinite time interval involving mismatched uncertainties and non-vanishing disturbances,

    Y. Cao, J. Cao, and Y. Song, “Practical pre- scribed time tracking control over infinite time interval involving mismatched uncertainties and non-vanishing disturbances,” Automatica, vol. 136, p. 110050, 2022

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    Fixed-time leader-following consensus for second-order mul- tiagent systems with input delay,

    J. Ni, L. Liu, C. Liu, and J. Liu, “Fixed-time leader-following consensus for second-order mul- tiagent systems with input delay,” IEEE Trans- actions on Industrial Electronics , vol. 64, no. 11, pp. 8635–8646, 2017

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    The pre- scribed time sliding mode control for attitude tracking of spacecraft,

    Z. Chen, X. Ju, Z. Wang, and Q. Li, “The pre- scribed time sliding mode control for attitude tracking of spacecraft,” Asian Journal of Con- trol, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 1650–1662, 2022

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    Practical pre- scribed time control based on high-order fully actuated system approach for strong intercon- nected nonlinear systems,

    L. Zhang, L. Zhu, and C. Hua, “Practical pre- scribed time control based on high-order fully actuated system approach for strong intercon- nected nonlinear systems,” Nonlinear Dynamics, vol. 110, no. 4, pp. 3535–3545, 2022

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    Output feedback stabiliza- tion with prescribed performance for uncertain nonlinear systems in canonical form,

    C. P. Bechlioulis, A. Theodorakopoulos, and G. A. Rovithakis, “Output feedback stabiliza- tion with prescribed performance for uncertain nonlinear systems in canonical form,” in 52nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control . IEEE, 2013, pp. 5084–5089

    work page 2013

  33. [33]

    Robust estimation-free decentralized prescribed performance control of nonaffine nonlinear large- scale systems,

    C. Wei, J. Luo, Z. Yin, X. Wei, and J. Yuan, “Robust estimation-free decentralized prescribed performance control of nonaffine nonlinear large- scale systems,” International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control , vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 174– 196, 2018

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Distributed control for uncertain multi-agent systems with the powers of positive-odd numbers: A low-complexity de- sign approach,

    M. Lv and N. Wang, “Distributed control for uncertain multi-agent systems with the powers of positive-odd numbers: A low-complexity de- sign approach,” IEEE Transactions on Auto- matic Control , 2023

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Adaptive fault-tolerant pi tracking control with guaran- teed transient and steady-state performance,

    Y. Song, Y. Wang, and C. Wen, “Adaptive fault-tolerant pi tracking control with guaran- teed transient and steady-state performance,” IEEE Transactions on automatic control, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 481–487, 2016

    work page 2016

  36. [36]

    Adaptive pid-like fault- tolerant control for robot manipulators with given performance specifications,

    Y. Cao and Y.-D. Song, “Adaptive pid-like fault- tolerant control for robot manipulators with given performance specifications,” International Journal of Control , vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 377–386, 2020

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    Adaptive performance control for input constrained mimo nonlinear systems,

    P. S. Trakas and C. P. Bechlioulis, “Adaptive performance control for input constrained mimo nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Sys- tems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems , 2024

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Input-constrained funnel control of nonlinear systems,

    T. Berger, “Input-constrained funnel control of nonlinear systems,” IEEE Transactions on Au- tomatic Control , 2024

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    Comments on “fixed-time sliding mode control with mismatched distur- bances

    Y. Su, “Comments on “fixed-time sliding mode control with mismatched distur- bances”[automatica 136 (2022) 110009],” Automatica, vol. 151, p. 110916, 2023

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Robust fixed-time stability: Appli- cation to sliding-mode control,

    E. Moulay, V. Léchappé, E. Bernuau, and F. Plestan, “Robust fixed-time stability: Appli- cation to sliding-mode control,” IEEE Transac- tions on Automatic Control , vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 1061–1066, 2021

    work page 2021

  41. [41]

    Fixed-time sliding mode control with mismatched disturbances,

    E. Moulay, V. Léchappé, E. Bernuau, M. De- foort, and F. Plestan, “Fixed-time sliding mode control with mismatched disturbances,” Auto- matica, vol. 136, p. 110009, 2022

    work page 2022

  42. [42]

    Input- constrained prescribed performance control for high-order mimo uncertain nonlinear systems via reference modification,

    F. Fotiadis and G. A. Rovithakis, “Input- constrained prescribed performance control for high-order mimo uncertain nonlinear systems via reference modification,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 3301–3308, 2023. 21

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    Terminal sliding mode control design for uncertain dynamic sys- tems,

    Y. Wu, X. Yu, and Z. Man, “Terminal sliding mode control design for uncertain dynamic sys- tems,” Systems & Control Letters , vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 281–287, 1998

    work page 1998

  44. [44]

    A lyapunov-based approach for recursive contin- uous higher order nonsingular terminal sliding- mode control,

    J. Yang, X. Yu, L. Zhang, and S. Li, “A lyapunov-based approach for recursive contin- uous higher order nonsingular terminal sliding- mode control,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 4424–4431, 2020

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    Nonsingular recursive-structure sliding mode control for high-order nonlinear systems and an application in a wheeled mobile robot,

    H. Zhang, B. Li, B. Xiao, Y. Yang, and J. Ling, “Nonsingular recursive-structure sliding mode control for high-order nonlinear systems and an application in a wheeled mobile robot,” ISA transactions, vol. 130, pp. 553–564, 2022. 22

    work page 2022