Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 45 references

Voltage control of DC networks: robustness for unknown ZIP-loads

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-24 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read DC networks with unknown ZIP loads admit a passivity property for any positive voltage reference, enabling robust decentralized voltage control.

desk verdict The paper claims a passivity property for DC networks with arbitrary ZIP loads via a mixed-potential storage function, but the definiteness of that function for all load parameters looks questionable. read the letter →

arxiv 1907.09973 v1 pith:KND5N5BF submitted 2019-07-23 eess.SY cs.SY

Michele Cucuzzella , Krishna Chaitanya Kosaraju , Jacquelien M. A. Scherpen This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SYcs.SY
keywords DCnetworksZIPloadspassivity-basedcontrolvoltagedecentralizedmixedpotentialfunctionrobustnessnonlinear
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 develops a passivity-based control method for DC power networks containing ZIP loads, which are nonlinear loads formed by unknown constant impedance, current and power components in parallel. A storage function is constructed from the mixed potential function of Brayton and Moser to produce a passivity property whose output port variable is the time derivative of voltage. This property is shown to hold for every positive voltage reference and every possible ZIP-load combination, removing the restrictive conditions on load parameters or references required by earlier results. A decentralized controller is then derived from the passivity property that regulates voltage without needing to know the specific load values. The result matters for power networks where load composition is uncertain or time-varying.

What carries the argument

Mixed potential function of Brayton and Moser, used to construct a storage function that yields passivity with the time derivative of voltage as the output port variable.

What would settle it

A concrete counter-example consisting of one positive voltage reference together with specific positive Z, I and P values for which the proposed storage function fails to satisfy the passivity dissipation inequality.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

We propose a novel passifying input and a storage function based on the mixed potential function introduced by Brayton and Moser, leading to a novel passivity property with output port-variable equal to the first time derivative of the voltage. Differently from the existing results in the literature, where restrictive (sufficient) conditions on Z, P and the voltage reference are assumed to be satisfied, we establish a passivity property for every positive voltage reference and every type of load. Consequently, we develop a new decentralized passivity-based control scheme that is robust with respect to the uncertainty affecting the ZIP-loads.

Load-bearing premise

The mixed potential function of Brayton and Moser can be used to construct a storage function yielding the desired passivity property with the time derivative of voltage as the output port variable, for arbitrary positive voltage references and any ZIP-load combination.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The passivity property holds without any restrictive conditions on the values of Z, I or P or on the voltage reference beyond positivity.
  • A decentralized controller can be implemented that regulates voltage without knowledge of the load parameters.
  • The same storage function and input apply uniformly to networks containing any mixture of constant-impedance, constant-current and constant-power loads.
  • Voltage regulation remains guaranteed under load uncertainty because the passivity property does not depend on the specific load coefficients.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The uniform passivity property may allow the same controller gains to be used across networks whose loads change type over time without retuning.
  • The construction could be tested on laboratory-scale DC microgrids with programmable loads to check whether voltage regulation occurs within predicted bounds when load parameters vary.
  • Similar storage-function arguments might be examined for networks that combine DC and AC sections, though that extension lies outside the present scope.
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, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a novel passivity-based control scheme for DC networks with unknown ZIP-loads. It constructs a storage function from the Brayton-Moser mixed potential to establish a passivity property (with output port variable equal to the time derivative of voltage) that holds for every positive voltage reference and every combination of Z, I, and P loads, without the restrictive conditions required in prior work. This passivity property is then used to derive a decentralized controller that is robust to load uncertainties.

Significance. If the central claim is established rigorously, the result would be significant: it removes sufficient conditions on load parameters and voltage references that limit applicability in existing passivity-based DC network control literature, offering a more general robustness guarantee for practical systems with uncertain nonlinear loads. The explicit use of the mixed-potential function to obtain the desired port variable is a technical contribution worth noting if the construction is shown to be valid without hidden restrictions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III] The storage function construction (Section III, around the definition following Eq. (8) and the subsequent dissipation inequality): the claim that the mixed-potential-based storage function yields a valid passivity property for arbitrary ZIP parameters (including large P) and any v* > 0 rests on positive (semi)definiteness and radial unboundedness. However, the 1/v dependence from constant-power terms can violate these properties near v = 0 for sufficiently large P, even when the reference is positive. An explicit proof or counter-example check for the full range of admissible (Z, I, P) is required to support the 'every type of load' assertion; without it the robustness claim for the subsequent decentralized controller is not yet load-bearing.
  2. [Section III] Proposition 1 (or the main passivity theorem in Section III): the derivation of the dissipation inequality with output equal to dv/dt appears to rely on the specific form of the mixed potential; it is unclear whether the resulting storage function remains independent of the target controller or reduces to a choice that implicitly restricts the load set. A parameter-free verification or explicit bounds on P that preserve definiteness should be supplied.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Section II] Notation for the ZIP parameters (Z, I, P) and the network incidence matrix should be introduced with explicit dimensions and sign conventions in Section II to avoid ambiguity when reading the storage function.
  2. [Section II] Figure 1 (network diagram) would benefit from labeling the port variables explicitly to match the passivity definition used later.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and insightful comments, which help strengthen the presentation of our results. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to provide the requested explicit verifications.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section III] The storage function construction (Section III, around the definition following Eq. (8) and the subsequent dissipation inequality): the claim that the mixed-potential-based storage function yields a valid passivity property for arbitrary ZIP parameters (including large P) and any v* > 0 rests on positive (semi)definiteness and radial unboundedness. However, the 1/v dependence from constant-power terms can violate these properties near v = 0 for sufficiently large P, even when the reference is positive. An explicit proof or counter-example check for the full range of admissible (Z, I, P) is required to support the 'every type of load' assertion; without it the robustness claim for the subsequent decentralized controller is not yet load-bearing.

    Authors: The Brayton-Moser mixed potential yields a storage function whose positive-definiteness and radial unboundedness on the positive orthant (v > 0) hold independently of the magnitudes of Z, I, and P. The contribution of constant-power loads appears as a term of the form P(v/v* - 1 - log(v/v*)), whose Hessian is positive definite for all v > 0 and any real P; the 1/v terms are exactly canceled in the time derivative when forming the dissipation inequality, leaving a non-positive remainder that does not depend on P. Direct verification of these properties (provided in the proof of the main theorem) therefore covers the entire admissible load set without additional restrictions. We will add an explicit lemma stating the definiteness conditions and confirming they are parameter-free. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Section III] Proposition 1 (or the main passivity theorem in Section III): the derivation of the dissipation inequality with output equal to dv/dt appears to rely on the specific form of the mixed potential; it is unclear whether the resulting storage function remains independent of the target controller or reduces to a choice that implicitly restricts the load set. A parameter-free verification or explicit bounds on P that preserve definiteness should be supplied.

    Authors: The storage function is obtained solely from the open-loop network and ZIP-load dynamics via the mixed potential and is therefore independent of any subsequent controller. The dissipation inequality is derived by direct differentiation along the system trajectories; after cancellation of the power-balance terms, the resulting expression is non-positive for arbitrary Z, I, P and any v* > 0. No implicit restriction on the load set occurs. We will supply a parameter-free verification by rewriting the key steps without reference to specific controller gains and by stating the definiteness bounds explicitly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: storage function constructed from established mixed-potential function to prove passivity property

full rationale

The derivation applies the known Brayton-Moser mixed potential (an external, pre-existing concept) to build a storage function whose time derivative yields the desired dissipation inequality with output equal to voltage derivative. This is a standard constructive technique in passivity-based control and does not reduce the target passivity statement to a definition, a fitted parameter, or a self-citation chain. No equations in the provided text exhibit a self-definitional loop or a prediction that is forced by construction; the claim of validity for arbitrary positive references and all ZIP combinations is presented as an independent mathematical assertion that can be checked against the network dynamics.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The approach rests on standard passivity theory and the Brayton-Moser mixed potential function from prior literature, with no free parameters, new entities, or ad-hoc axioms stated in the abstract.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption The system is a DC power network comprising ZIP-loads.
    Explicitly stated as the setting for the control problem.
  • domain assumption A storage function can be constructed from the mixed potential function to establish the claimed passivity property.
    Central technical step invoked to obtain the new passivity property.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Voltage control of DC networks: robustness for unknown ZIP-loads." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KND5N5BF

@misc{pith2026190709973,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Voltage control of DC networks: robustness for unknown ZIP-loads},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KND5N5BF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1907.09973}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper we propose a new passivity-based control technique for DC power networks comprising the so-called ZIP-loads, i.e., nonlinear loads with the parallel combination of unknown constant impedance (Z), current (I) and power (P) components. More precisely, we propose a novel passifying input and a storage function based on the so-called mixed potential function introduced by Brayton and Moser, leading to a novel passivity property with output port-variable equal to the first time derivative of the voltage. Differently from the existing results in the literature, where restrictive (sufficient) conditions on Z, P and the voltage reference are assumed to be satisfied, we establish a passivity property for every positive voltage reference and every type of load. Consequently, we develop a new decentralized passivity-based control scheme that is robust with respect to the uncertainty affecting the ZIP-loads.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.09973 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Electrical scheme of DGU i and transmission line k. Remark 1 (Novelty of (5)). Note that the particular struc￾ture of υ that we propose in (6d) generates a family of BM descriptions (5) different from the ones presented for in￾stance in [32, 33]. The proposed structure plays indeed a major role in establishing the (novel) passivity property for DC networks including unknown ZIP-loads (see Theorem 2 in Subsection 4.2… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. ZIP-load i. Accordingly, in the presence of a ZIP-load, Ili(Vi) in (7) is given by Ili(Vi) := Z ∗−1 li Vi + I ∗ li + V −1 i P ∗ li. (9) The symbols used in (7)–(9) are described in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison between GB(V ), GK(V ) and GΠ(V ). For the sake of exposition, consider as illustrative example a ZP-load with Z ∗−1 l = 0.04 S, P ∗ l = 5 × 103 W and nom￾inal voltage V ∗ = 380 V [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Vector field and state-space trajectories of an RLC circuit including a ZIP-load, controlled by (39). The areas above the dashed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Scheme of the considered DC power network with four [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Scenario 1. From the top: time evolution of the gener [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Scenario 2. From the top: time evolution of the gener [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Constant Power Loads (CPL) with Microgrids: Problem Definition, Stability Analysis and Compensation Techniques,

    M. K. AL-Nussairi, R. Bayindir, S. Padmanaban, L. Mihet-Popa, and P. Siano, “Constant Power Loads (CPL) with Microgrids: Problem Definition, Stability Analysis and Compensation Techniques,” Energies, vol. 10, no. 10, Oct. 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Constant power loads and their effects in DC distributed power systems: A review,

    S. Singh, A. R. Gautam, and D. Fulwani, “Constant power loads and their effects in DC distributed power systems: A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , vol. 72, pp. 407–421, 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    The instability effect of constant power loads,

    A. B. Jusoh, “The instability effect of constant power loads,” in PECon 2004. Proceedings. National Power and Energy Conference, 2004., Nov. 2004, pp. 175–179

    work page 2004

  4. [4]

    DC Microgrids–Part I: A Review of Control Strategies and Stabilization Techniques,

    T. Dragicevic, X. Lu, J. C. Vasquez, and J. M. Guerrero, “DC Microgrids–Part I: A Review of Control Strategies and Stabilization Techniques,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 4876–4891, July 2016

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Review on Control of DC Microgrids and Multiple Microgrid Clusters,

    L. Meng, Q. Shafiee, G. Ferrari Trecate, H. Karimi, D. Fulwani, X. Lu, and J. M. Guerrero, “Review on Control of DC Microgrids and Multiple Microgrid Clusters,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics , vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 928–948, Sept. 2017

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    A power consensus algorithm for DC microgrids,

    C. De Persis, E. R. Weitenberg, and F. Dörfler, “A power consensus algorithm for DC microgrids,” Automatica, vol. 89, pp. 364–375, Mar. 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Distributed Averaging Control for V oltage Regulation and Current Sharing in DC Microgrids,

    S. Trip, M. Cucuzzella, X. Cheng, and J. M. A. Scherpen, “Distributed Averaging Control for V oltage Regulation and Current Sharing in DC Microgrids,” IEEE Control Systems Letters , vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 174–179, Jan. 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Microgrid: a conceptual solution,

    R. Lasseter and P. Paigi, “Microgrid: a conceptual solution,” in Proc. 35th IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conf., vol. 6, Aachen, Germany, June 2004, pp. 4285–4290

    work page 2004

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    AC-microgrids versus DC-microgrids with distributed energy resources: A review,

    J. J. Justo, F. Mwasilu, J. Lee, and J.-W. Jung, “AC-microgrids versus DC-microgrids with distributed energy resources: A review,” Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. , vol. 24, pp. 387–405, Aug. 2013

    2013

  2. [10]

    Distributed control and optimization in DC microgrids,

    J. Zhao and F. Dörfler, “Distributed control and optimization in DC microgrids,” Automatica, vol. 61, pp. 18–26, Nov. 2015

    2015

  3. [11]

    Line-Independent Plug- and-Play Controllers for V oltage Stabilization in DC Microgrids,

    M. Tucci, S. Riverso, and G. Ferrari Trecate, “Line-Independent Plug- and-Play Controllers for V oltage Stabilization in DC Microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology , vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1115–1123, May 2018

    2018

  4. [12]

    Plug-and-Play Robust V oltage Control of DC Microgrids,

    M. S. Sadabadi, Q. Shafiee, and A. Karimi, “Plug-and-Play Robust V oltage Control of DC Microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 6886–6896, Nov. 2018

    2018

  5. [13]

    A Scalable Port- Hamiltonian Approach to Plug-and-Play V oltage Stabilization in DC Microgrids,

    F. Strehle, M. Pfeifer, S. Krebs, and S. Hohmann, “A Scalable Port- Hamiltonian Approach to Plug-and-Play V oltage Stabilization in DC Microgrids,” in IFAC-PapersOnLine (submitted), 2019

    2019

  6. [14]

    A Robust Consensus Algorithm for Current Sharing and V oltage Regulation in DC Microgrids,

    M. Cucuzzella, S. Trip, C. De Persis, X. Cheng, A. Ferrara, and A. J. van der Schaft, “A Robust Consensus Algorithm for Current Sharing and V oltage Regulation in DC Microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology , vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 1583–1595, July 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Sliding mode control of power converters: DC/DC converters,

    Y . M. Alsmadi, V . Utkin, M. A. Haj-ahmed, and L. Xu, “Sliding mode control of power converters: DC/DC converters,” International Journal of Control , vol. 91, no. 11, pp. 2472–2493, 2018

    2018

  8. [16]

    Adaptive passivity-based control of average dc-to-dc power converter models,

    H. Sira-Ramírez, R. Ortega, and M. García-Esteban, “Adaptive passivity-based control of average dc-to-dc power converter models,” International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing , vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 63–80, Dec. 1998

    1998

  9. [17]

    Tuning of passivity-preserving controllers for switched-mode power converters,

    D. Jeltsema and J. M. A. Scherpen, “Tuning of passivity-preserving controllers for switched-mode power converters,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 1333–1344, Aug. 2004

    2004

  10. [18]

    Constant-Power Load System Stabilization by Passive Damping,

    M. Cespedes, L. Xing, and J. Sun, “Constant-Power Load System Stabilization by Passive Damping,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1832–1836, July 2011

    2011

  11. [19]

    A systematic approach to constant power load stabilization by passive damping,

    J. C. Mayo-Maldonado and P. Rapisarda, “A systematic approach to constant power load stabilization by passive damping,” in 2015 54th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) , Osaka, Japan, Dec. 2015, pp. 1346–1351. 12

    2015

  12. [20]

    Active Damping in DC/DC Power Electronic Converters: A Novel Method to Overcome the Problems of Constant Power Loads,

    A. M. Rahimi and A. Emadi, “Active Damping in DC/DC Power Electronic Converters: A Novel Method to Overcome the Problems of Constant Power Loads,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 1428–1439, May 2009

    2009

  13. [21]

    Stabilization of DC microgrids with constant-power loads by an active damping method,

    M. Ashourloo, A. Khorsandi, and H. Mokhtari, “Stabilization of DC microgrids with constant-power loads by an active damping method,” in 4th Annual International Power Electronics, Drive Systems and Technologies Conference, Tehran, Iran, Feb. 2013, pp. 471–475

    2013

  14. [22]

    Active stabilization methods of electric power systems with constant power loads: a review,

    M. WU and D. D.-C. LU, “Active stabilization methods of electric power systems with constant power loads: a review,” Journal of Modern Power Systems and Clean Energy , vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 233– 243, Sept. 2014

    2014

  15. [23]

    Large-Signal Stability Analysis of DC Power System With Shunt Active Damper,

    H. Kim, S. Kang, G. Seo, P. Jang, and B. Cho, “Large-Signal Stability Analysis of DC Power System With Shunt Active Damper,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics , vol. 63, no. 10, pp. 6270– 6280, Oct. 2016

    2016

  16. [24]

    Power-controlled hamiltonian systems: Application to electrical systems with constant power loads,

    P. Monshizadeh, J. E. Machado, R. Ortega, and A. J. van der Schaft, “Power-controlled hamiltonian systems: Application to electrical systems with constant power loads,” arXiv preprint: 1802.02483 , 2018

    2018 arXiv

  17. [25]

    A Passivity-Based Approach to V oltage Stabilization in DC Microgrids with ZIP loads,

    P. Nahata, R. Soloperto, M. Tucci, A. Martinelli, and G. Ferrari Trecate, “A Passivity-Based Approach to V oltage Stabilization in DC Microgrids with ZIP loads,” Infoscience EPFL scientific publications, 2018

    2018

  18. [26]

    Active Damping of a DC Network with a Constant Power Load: An Adaptive Passivity-based Control Approach,

    J. E. Machado, J. Arocas-Pérez, W. He, R. Ortega, and R. Griñó, “Active Damping of a DC Network with a Constant Power Load: An Adaptive Passivity-based Control Approach,” arXiv preprint: 1809.04920, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Dissipative dynamical systems: Basic input-output and state properties,

    D. J. Hill and P. J. Moylan, “Dissipative dynamical systems: Basic input-output and state properties,” Journal of the Franklin Institute , vol. 309, no. 5, pp. 327–357, May 1980

    1980

  20. [28]

    Putting energy back in control,

    R. Ortega, A. J. van der Schaft, I. Mareels, and B. Maschke, “Putting energy back in control,” IEEE Control Systems Magazine , vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 18–33, Apr. 2001

    2001

  21. [29]

    A. J. van der Schaft, L2-gain and passivity techniques in nonlinear control. Springer, 2000

    2000

  22. [30]

    A theory of nonlinear networks. I,

    R. Brayton and J. Moser, “A theory of nonlinear networks. I,” Quarterly of Applied Mathematics , vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 1–33, 1964

    1964

  23. [31]

    A theory of nonlinear networks. II,

    ——, “A theory of nonlinear networks. II,” Quarterly of applied mathematics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 81–104, 1964

    1964

  24. [32]

    On passivity and power-balance inequalities of nonlinear RLC circuits,

    D. Jeltsema, R. Ortega, and J. M. A. Scherpen, “On passivity and power-balance inequalities of nonlinear RLC circuits,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Fundamental Theory and Applications, vol. 50, no. 9, pp. 1174–1179, Sept. 2003

    2003

  25. [33]

    Power shaping: a new paradigm for stabilization of nonlinear RLC circuits,

    R. Ortega, D. Jeltsema, and J. M. A. Scherpen, “Power shaping: a new paradigm for stabilization of nonlinear RLC circuits,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 1762–1767, Oct. 2003

    2003

  26. [34]

    Differentiation and Passivity for Control of Brayton- Moser Systems,

    K. C. Kosaraju, M. Cucuzzella, J. M. A. Scherpen, and R. Pasumarthy, “Differentiation and Passivity for Control of Brayton- Moser Systems,” arXiv preprint: 1811.02838 , Nov. 2018

    2018

  27. [35]

    Multidomain modeling of nonlinear networks and systems,

    D. Jeltsema and J. M. A. Scherpen, “Multidomain modeling of nonlinear networks and systems,” IEEE Control Systems Magazine , vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 28–59, Aug. 2009

    2009

  28. [36]

    Stability and control of ad hoc DC microgrids,

    J. A. Belk, W. Inam, D. J. Perreault, and K. Turitsyn, “Stability and control of ad hoc DC microgrids,” in 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) , Las Vegas, NV , USA, Dec. 2016, pp. 3271–3278

    2016

  29. [37]

    Stabilization of a class of cyclo- passive systems using alternate storage functions,

    P. Borja and J. M. A. Scherpen, “Stabilization of a class of cyclo- passive systems using alternate storage functions,” in 2018 IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) , Miami Beach, FL, USA, Dec. 2018, pp. 5634–5639

    2018

  30. [38]

    Geometric modeling of nonlinear RLC circuits,

    G. Blankenstein, “Geometric modeling of nonlinear RLC circuits,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers , vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 396–404, Feb. 2005

    2005

  31. [39]

    Large signal stability criteria for distributed systems with constant power loads,

    M. Belkhayat, R. Cooley, and A. Witulski, “Large signal stability criteria for distributed systems with constant power loads,” in Proceedings of PESC’95-Power Electronics Specialist Conference , vol. 2. Atlanta, GA, USA: IEEE, June 1995, pp. 1333–1338

    1995

  32. [40]

    Energy- conserving formulation of RLC-circuits with linear resistors,

    D. Eberard, B. M. Maschke, and A. J. Van Der Schaft, “Energy- conserving formulation of RLC-circuits with linear resistors,” in Proc. 17th International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and systems, 2006

    2006

  33. [41]

    Passivity of nonlinear incremental systems: Application to PI stabilization of nonlinear RLC circuits,

    B. Jayawardhana, R. Ortega, E. García-Canseco, and F. Castaños, “Passivity of nonlinear incremental systems: Application to PI stabilization of nonlinear RLC circuits,” Systems & Control Letters , vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 618–622, Sept.–Oct. 2007

    2007

  34. [42]

    Conditions on shifted passivity of port-Hamiltonian systems,

    N. Monshizadeh, P. Monshizadeh, R. Ortega, and A. J. van der Schaft, “Conditions on shifted passivity of port-Hamiltonian systems,” Systems & Control Letters , vol. 123, pp. 55–61, Jan. 2019

    2019

  35. [43]

    Robust passivity-based control of boost converters in DC microgrids,

    M. Cucuzzella, R. Lazzari, Y . Kawano, K. C. Kosaraju, and J. M. A. Scherpen, “Robust passivity-based control of boost converters in DC microgrids,” arXiv preprint: 1902.10273 , 2019

    1902 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Krasovskii’s passivity,

    K. C. Kosaraju, Y . Kawano, and J. M. A. Scherpen, “Krasovskii’s passivity,” arXiv preprint: 1903.05182 , Mar. 2019

    1903 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Higher-order sliding modes, differentiation and output- feedback control,

    A. Levant, “Higher-order sliding modes, differentiation and output- feedback control,” International Journal of Control, vol. 76, no. 9-10, pp. 924–941, Jan. 2003. 13

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed May 24, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.