arXiv reader

Consensus Problems in Networks of Agents under Nonlinear Protocols with Directed Interaction Topology

Xiwei Liu and Tianping Chen

arXiv
0804.3628v1 · PDF · 23 April 2008
Categories
math.DS, math.OC
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

The purpose of this short paper is to provide a theoretical analysis for the consensus problem under nonlinear protocols. A main contribution of this work is to generalize the previous consensus problems under nonlinear protocols for networks with undirected graphs to directed graphs (information flow). Our theoretical result is that if the directed graph is strongly connected and the nonlinear protocol is strictly increasing, then consensus can be realized. Some simple examples are also provided to demonstrate the validity of our theoretical result.

Items 12

Definition

Definition 1

FNB3

(Weighted Directed Graph) Let \mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E},\mathcal{A}) be a weighted digraph (or directed graph) with the set of nodes \mathcal{V}=\{v_1,\cdots,v_n\}, set of edges \mathcal{E}\subseteq \mathcal{V}\times \mathcal{V}, and a weighted adjacency matrix \mathcal{A}=(a_{ij}) with nonnegative adjacency elements a_{ij}. An edge of \mathcal{G} is denoted by e_{ij}=(v_i,v_j)\in \mathcal{E}, which means that node v_i receives information from node v_j, and we assume that v_i\not=v_j for all e_{ij}, so the graph has no self-loops. The adjacency elements associated with the edges of the graph are positive, i.e., e_{ij}\in \mathcal{E}\Longleftrightarrow a_{ij}>0. Moreover, we assume a_{ii}=0 for all i\in 1,\cdots,n. The set of neighbors of node v_i is denoted by \mathcal{N}_i=\{v_j\in \mathcal{V}:(v_i,v_j\in\mathcal{E})\}. The corresponding graph Laplacian L=(l_{ij}) can be defined as

\begin{aligned} l_{ij}= \left\{\begin{array}{cc} \sum_{k=1,k\not=i}^na_{ik}, &i=j\\ -a_{ij}, &i\not=j \end{array}\right. \end{aligned}
Definition

Definition 2

JL3L

(Strongly Connected Graph) A path on a graph \mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E},\mathcal{A}) of length n^{\star} \leq n from v_{i_0} to v_{i_{n^{\star}}} is an ordered set of distinct vertices \{v_{i_0},\cdots,v_{i_{n^{\star}}}\} such that (v_{i_{j-1}},v_{i_{{j}}})\in \mathcal{E}, for all j=1,\cdots, n^{\star}. A graph in which a path exists from every vertex to every vertex is said to be strongly connected (SC). Obviously, irreducibility of the graph Laplacian for a graph can imply its strong connectivity.

Definition

Definition 3

MJVU

(Consensus) Consider a network of dynamic agents with \dot{x}_i=u_i interested in reaching a consensus via local communication with their neighbors on a graph \mathcal{G}_x. By reaching a consensus, we mean converging to a one-dimensional agreement space characterized by the following equations:

\begin{aligned} x_1=x_2=\cdots=x_n \end{aligned}

This agreement space can be expressed as x=\beta {\bf 1} where {\bf 1}=(1,\cdots,1)^T and \beta\in R is the collective decision of the group of agents.

Lemma

Lemma 1

5U1X

(See [SFM07]) Suppose L=(l_{ij}) is a graph Laplacian of a bi-graph \mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E},\mathcal{A}) of n nodes, i.e., l_{ij}=l_{ji}, for any i,j\in 1,\cdots,n. The following sum-of-squares (SOS) property holds, for any x=(x_1,\cdots,x_n)^T,

\begin{aligned} x^TLx=-\sum\limits_{j>i}l_{ij}(x_j-x_i)^2 \end{aligned}
Uses Definition 1 · Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 2

RCCK

(Spectral localization. See [SM04]) Let \mathcal{G} be a strongly connected digraph of n nodes. Then rank(L)=n-1, and all nontrivial eigenvalues of L have positive real part.

Remark

Remark 1

RM0N

Lemma 2 holds under a weaker condition of existence of a directed spanning tree for \mathcal{G}. \mathcal{G} has a directed spanning tree if there exists a node r (root) such that all other nodes can be linked to r via a directed path (see relating papers [RB05, W05]). In fact, in digraphs with spanning tree (leader-follower model), the root node is commonly known as a leader, which does not receive any information from other nodes.

Lemma

Lemma 3

T6LR

Assume \mathcal{G} is a strongly connected digraph with graph Laplacian L, then ([H87])

1. {\bf 1}=(1, 1, \cdots, 1)^T is the right eigenvector of L corresponding to eigenvalue 0 with multiplicity 1;

2. Let {\xi}=(\xi_{1}, \xi_2, \cdots, \xi_n)^T be the left eigenvector of L corresponding to the eigenvalue 0. Then, \xi_{i}> 0, i= 1, 2, \cdots,n; and its multiplicity is 1. In the following, we always assume \sum_{i=1}^{n}\xi_{i}=1.

Theorem

Theorem 1

C11W

Suppose the digraph \mathcal{G}_x is a strongly connected. L is the corresponding graph Laplacian in Definition 1. Then consensus can be realized globally for all initial states by the nonlinear protocol (?) and the group decision is x_{\xi}=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\xi_ix_i(0), where \xi=(\xi_1,\cdots,\xi_n)^T is defined in Lemma 3.

Proof of Theorem 1

Denote x_{\xi}=\sum_{i=1}^n\xi_ix_i(0), x(t)=(x_1(t),\cdots,x_n(t))^T, and H(x(t))=(h(x_1(t)), \cdots,h(x_n(t)))^T. Then equations (?) can be rewritten in the compact form as

\begin{aligned} \dot{x}(t)=-LH(x(t)) \end{aligned}

Define a function as:

\begin{aligned} V(x(t))=\sum\limits_{i=1}^n\xi_i\int_{0}^{x_i(t)}h(s)ds \end{aligned}

Obviously, V(x(t))\geq 0 is radially unbounded, and V(x(t))=0 if and only if x(t)=0.

Denote B=(b_{ij})=(\Xi L+L^T\Xi)/2, where \Xi=\mathrm{diag}(\xi). It is easy to check that B is a symmetric matrix with zero row-sum, i.e., B can be regarded as a graph Laplacian of a bi-graph. Differentiating V(x(t)) and using Lemma 1, we have

\begin{aligned} \dot{V}(x(t))&=-\sum\limits_{i=1}^n\xi_ih(x_i(t))\sum\limits_{j\in \mathcal{N}_i}{l}_{ij}h(x_j(t))\\ &=-H(x(t))^T{\Xi L}H(x(t))=-H(x(t))^TBH(x(t))\\ &=\sum\limits_{i>j}b_{ij}(h(x_i(t))-h(x_j(t)))^2\leq 0,~~~~ (\mathrm{since}~~b_{ij}\le 0) \end{aligned}

Thus, 0\le V(x(t))\leq V(x(0)), which implies x(t) is bounded for any t\geq 0. And the largest invariant subset (\Omega-limit set) for the equations (?) is

\begin{aligned} \Omega=\{x:x_i(t)=x_j(t); i,j=1,\cdots,n\} \end{aligned}

Now, we claim that for all i=1,\cdots,n, \lim\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}x_{i}(t)=x_{\xi}.

In fact, if t_{m}\rightarrow\infty and for all i,j=1,\cdots,n, x_{i}(t_{m})\rightarrow\beta, then,

\begin{aligned} x_{\xi}= \lim\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n}\xi_ix_i(t_{m}) =\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n}\xi_i\beta=\beta \end{aligned}

which means that x_{\xi} is the group decision of the consensus problem. Theorem 1 is proved completely.

Myrem.

Let h(x_i(t))=\alpha x_i(t) with \alpha>0, The nonlinear function h(\cdot) becomes a linear function. therefore, Theorem 1 can be regarded as a generalization of the consensus problem under linear protocols. It also give a simple proof for the consensus problem under linear protocols, too.

Myrem.

Assume (h(w_1)-h(w_2))/(w_1-w_2)\geq \alpha holds for \alpha>0 and any w_1\not=w_2\in R. In this case, we have

\begin{aligned} \dot{V}(x(t))=\sum\limits_{i>j}b_{ij}(h(x_i(t))-h(x_j(t)))^2 \leq\alpha^2\sum\limits_{i>j}b_{ij}(x_i(t)-x_j(t))^2 \end{aligned}

and the consensus problem will be realized exponentially. Moreover, it seems that the nonlinear protocol can be realized faster than that under the linear protocol h(w)=\alpha w. Therefore, nonlinear protocols can be applied to calculate the average value of large-scale networks more effectively.

Proposition

Proposition 1

5JR7

x_{\xi}(t) is time-invariant for the network (?), i.e., x_{\xi}=\sum_{i=1}^n\xi_ix_i(0)=x_{\xi}(t) for all t\geq 0.

Example

Example 1

YU86

In this simulation, the nonlinear protocol is assumed as h(x_i(t))=\alpha x_i(t)+\sin(x_i(t)),~ i=1,2,3. The initial value is taken as: (x_1(0),x_2(0),x_3(0))=(1,2,3).

Example

Example 2

EHE5

In this simulation, we choose two protocols. One is the nonlinear protocol

\begin{aligned} h^{\star}(x_i)=\left\{\begin{array}{ccl} x_i^2 & ;&\mathrm{if}\quad x_i>1\\ \sqrt{x_i} & ;&\mathrm{if}\quad 0<x_i\leq 1\\ -\sqrt{-x_i} & ;&\mathrm{if}\quad -1<x_i\leq 0\\ -x_i^2 & ;&\mathrm{if}\quad x_i\leq-1 \end{array}\right. \end{aligned}

The other is the linear protocol

\begin{aligned} h(x_i)=x_i/2\qquad i=1,2,3 \end{aligned}

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:0804.3628v1 by Xiwei Liu and Tianping Chen, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/0804/0804.3628.jsonl.