1962
Jury: A Simplified Stability Criterion
in a compact and shockproof form. It requires no heatup time and the oscillationi can be started instantaneously under given initial conditions.
In principle any electronic device based upon Hall
effect can be replaced by a similar device based upon
magnetoresistance effect. Theoretically, magnetoresistance effect devices should have much higher efficiency
aind sensitivity than those of the Hall effect devices,
when the operating magnetic field is well over 3000
gauss. In another method of making use of the magnetoresistance effect, oscillators as well as other kinds
of devices can be constructed with two magnetoresist
ance elements connected in a pushpull circuit. This will
greatly improve the performance of the device. Some
of these experiments have been carried out and the
results are to be published elsewhere.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author acknowledges with thankis the support of
this work by Prof. J. Dosse, director of the Institute of
HighFrequency Engineering, Technische Hochschule
Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany, He also wishes to thank
the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) for its financial support.
A Simplified Stability Criterion
Discrete Systems*
E.
I.
JURYt, SENIOR MEMBER,
SummaryIn this study a simplified analytic test of stability of
linear discrete systems is obtained. This test also yields the necessary and sufficient conditions for a real polynomial in the variable z
to have all its roots inside the unit circle in the z plane. The new
stability constraints require the evaluation of only half the number
of SchurCohn determinants [11, [2]. It is shown that for the test of
a fourthorder system only a thirdorder determinant is required
and for the fifthorder, one secondorder and one fourthorder
determinant are required. The test is applied directly in the z
plane and yields the minimum number of constraint terms. Stability
constraints up to the sixthorder case are obtained and for the
nthorder case are formulated. The simplicity of this criterion is
similar to that of the LienardChipard criterion [31 for the continuous
case which has a decisive advantage over the RouthHurwitz criterion [41, [51. Finally, general conditions on the number of roots
inside the unit circle for n even and odd are also presented in this
paper.
I. INTRODUCTION
T IS KNOWN THAT linear timeinvariant discrete
systems can be described by constant coefficient
linear difference equations. These equations can be
easily transformed into the function of the complex variable z by the ztransform method. One of the problems
in the analysis of such systems is the test for stability,
i.e., to determine the necessary and sufficient conditions
for the roots of the system characteristic equation to lie
*
Received AuguLst 31, 1961; revised manuscript received, February 23, 1962. This research was supported by the USAF Office of
Scientific Research of the Air Research and Development Command
under Contract No. AF 18(600)1521.
t Department of Electrical Engineering, University of California,
Berkeley, Calif.
1493
for
Linear
IRE
inside the unit circle in the z plane. These stability tests
involve both graphical procedures such as Nyquist
locus, Bode diagrams, and the rootlocus, and analytical
methods such as SchurCohn or RouthHurwitz criteria. Because of the higher order determinants to be
evaluated using the presented form of the SchurCohn
criterion, many authors in the past have used either a
unit shifting transformation [6]1 or bilinear transformation [7]. The latter transformation maps the inside of
the unit circle in the z = eTs plane into the left half of
the w plane2 and then applies the RouthHurwitz criterion. This transformation involves two difficulties:
1) algebraic manipulation for higherorder systems becomes complicated, and 2) the final constraints on the
coefficients in the z plane become unwieldy and require
algebraic reductions to yield the minimum number of
terms. Because of these limitations this criterion is not
usually used for systems higher than secondorder.
A recent investigation by this author has shown that
the evaluation of the SchurCohn determinants can be
simplified considerably by making use of the real coefficients of the polynomial in z, so that the manipulation
involved in testing for the zeros of a polynomial are
comparable to those using the "transformed (or modified) RouthHurwitz criterion," thus avoiding the bilinear transformation [8], [9].
1
2
This transformation uses p = z 1.
This transformation uses
w+1
=
w
1
w1
1494
PROCEEDINGS OF THE IRE
The study in this paper represents a major simplification of the earlier work [8], [9] where it is shown that
only half the number of determinants are required for
obtaining the stability constraints. This simplification
has a decisive advantage over the modified RouthHurwitz criterion and, indeed, higherorder systems
can easily be tackled using the proposed stability test.
the conjugate sign in (2) is superfluous. It is the utilization of this fact that leads to the simplification
of (2).
As noticed from (2), the highestorder determinant
is of order 2n, while the characteristic equation is
of order n. Hitherto this contituted one of the discouraging facts in widely using the criterion for higherorder sampleddata systems. A recourse to transformation to other planes was therefore attempted to yield
easier stability tests.
A,,,l
II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
In this sectioni we review the simplificationis which
had been obtained in an earlier publication [8], [9] and
explain in detail the manipulations involved.
SchurCohn criterion [1], [2]:
If for the polynomials
F(z)
ao +
alz
+ a2z2 +
* * *
a,z"
June
III. SIMPLIFICATION OF THE STABILITY
CONSTRAINT EQUATION [8], [10]
Since all ak in (2) are real, the mnatrix can be written as
(1)
Ak
o
o
a,
ao
ak1
ak2
ak3
ank+2
a,,_k+3
0
O
0*.
...
...
1, 2, 3, * * n, dk = complex conjugate of ak
are different from zero, then F(z) has no zeros on the
circle z = 1 and ,u zeros in this circle, ,u being the number of variations in sign in the sequence 1, Al
A,,.XThe proof of the above theorem is
A2 * *
quite involved and is available in the literature [1],
[2]. This criterion was first introduced by Cohn in 1922,
and since that time neither engineers nlor mnathemuaticians have simplified it to a usable form.
For a system of order n to be stable, all the n zeros of
its characteristic nth order equation must lie within the
unit circle, i.e., the sequences 1,
* * , tst
must have n variations in sign. The stability criterion
can, therefore, be expressed by the constraints [4]:
All, IA21,
AkI
< 0, kodd
Ak > 0, k evenf
1)
2)
...
47n 1.
a,,
0
dl
do
..
an
a,
...
(4)
ank+ 1 ]
ank+l
(2)
kI
pTJ
ank+l
Ak
ao
_~
anl
QP
[Pk
all the determiniants of the matrices
do
where the superscript T denotes transpose anid
ao
a0
al
Pl..P= a,
a
ao
Lak
Qk=
=
ak2 ak3
[a,,
a,
a,,
01
..
(5)
ao
a,,k
a,k+2
(6)
kj
Ill.
(3)
For a discrete or a sampleddata system, all the coefficients of the characteristic equation are real. Hence,
Lo0 O
* *
a,
It is noticed that all the diagonal termiis of each of Pk and
Qk are equal; each is symmetric with its cross diagonal.
It is this characteristic of the SchurCohn matrix that
leads to the following simplification [1], using a unitary
transformation.
Ak
Xk + Yk
Xk  Yk
(7)
Jury: A Simplified Stability Criterion
1962
where Xk and Yk. are given as follows:
[ao
Xk =I
3) After collecting the terms of Ak and Bk., replace all
the bi's by the ai's. Hence,
a, a2 * * * akIl
aO a, *.* ak2
o
_O
(8)
0 ** a1 J
0.** .ao _
0
O
AkI
Yk
[a,,k,2
n7+
Ak
a1
anl* *0
* *0
La,
01
0
Thus the SchurCohn determinant Ak I is reduced to
the product of two korder determinants [1], [2] which
.
is considerably easier to evaluate than the 2korder de. If ak is complex, then this simplificaterminant
tion is no longer possible [1], [2].
IAk
IV. THE SYMMETRICAL PROPERTIES OF
XXk+ Ykl Xkykl [8]
IXk+ Yk I is a homogeneous polynomial
of diNow
* , a,,. The polynomial
mension k in the variables ao,
Xk Yk is identical to the polynomial Xk+ YkIj except for a change of sign of those monomial terms which
have an odd number of elements from Yk,, i.e.,
(10)3
I Xk + YkI = Ak+ Bk
(At + Bk^)(Ak Bk)
IBkI, k even
I Ak,
0 1(9
(9)
a,,n
A,.2
B,A2 (12)3
and for stability from (3) this reduces to
and
ank+1 *.** an,
1495
<
I Bke,
k = 1, 2, *, n.
k oddJ
(13)
Therefore, the application of the SchurCohn criterion
now reduces to the evaluation of determinants up to
order n only for the nth order polynomial.
It should be noted that the last simplification is useful only for design procedures where the coefficients of
F(z) are given in other thani numerical values. However, if ak's are given in numerical values, the use of
(10) and (11) is preferred for computer calculations.
VI. EQUIVALENCE OF THE LAST CONSTRAINT
B,, TO A SIMPLE AUXILIARY
A,,
CONSTRAINT [9 ]
This equivalence constitutes the second major simplification of the original SchurCohn criterion. It reduces
the stability test considerably. In this equivalence it has
been shown that when the first (n  1) constraints of the
A's and B's are satisfied, then for a,,>0, the following
auxiliary constraints
> 0, n even
F(1) > 0, F(1)
(14)
<0, n odd
I,
Xk  Yk I = Ak  Bk
(11) are equivalent to A, t B, depending on n. For any
a, the auxiliary constraint can be written as
where A,(Bk) is the sumn of all monomial terms which
do not chanige (do chanige) sign wheii YkI is replaced by
> O, n even
F(1) * F( 1)
Y,,in I Xk+Yk.
< O, n odd
V. IDENTIFICATION OF Ak AND Bk
(which we designate as the stability constants) [8].
1) Let all the as's in the matrix Yk, in (9) be denoted
in
by b,'s; then expand the determinant Xk+
terms of ai and bi.
2) After expanisioni, examine every term which is a
product of ai's and bi's; if it containis an even number (including zero) of bi's, then it is assigned to
Ak,; otherwise assigni the term to Bk.
YkI
From (8) and (9), by replacing all the a's of Y,C by b's, we obtaiin
A k anid Bk by first expanding the following determinant:
IXk+ YkI.
ao+b.k+ ai+b,,k+2 a2+b.,k+3
b1,+2
ao+bnk+3 ai+bii,k+4
bnkA+3
b??b+4
bn_2
bn_l
b,b,
ao+bnk[
,
0N7 0
0O
0
0 0=
102,0
*ak2+b.i akl+b.
a,ak3 + bn ak2
*ak4
* *
ak3
a,
Ak'S AND Bk'S
In this section we will show that for the stability test
only about half the number of determinants for obtainiing the Ak's and B,k's are required. This importanit reduction is based on certain properties that exist between
the Ak's and Bk's. We will indicate these properties first
and then show how they can be used for this major
1) Ak2 Z Bk24* A k_,Ak+l
k
a2
ao
a,
aO
n 
VII. REDUC'TION IN THE NUMBER OF DETERMINANTS
FOR OBTAINING THE STABILITY CONSTANTS
simplification.
(13a)

In the Section VII the exact mathematical relatioiiship betweeni A,,  Bn2 and the auxiliary constraint will
be introduced.
1,
A12
BkBk+l
2, 3, 4, *
*,
n.(5)4
The above first property is also equivalent to
_ B&2=A,, A,,l BkBk+l, k = 2, 3, 4, * *, n  1.
(15a)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE IRE
1496
The above equivalence is established by expansion
for the first few values of k = 2, 3, 4, 5 and can be generalized similarly for any other values of k.f XVhen
k = n 1, the above equivalence is reduced to
A,'
1 >
Juane
A,,l + Bni1 = (aO + a2 + a4 +
(a,l+ a.3+ a,5 + )B,,2
(23)
(ao+ a2 + a4+
(24)
(al+ a3B+
).
(25)
Bt
)A.2
(16)
B,Il .* An2An> B,2Bn
This limiting case has been rigorously proven by determinant manipulations using properties 2) and 3). Eq.
(15) is the key identity for reducing the determinant of
Ak and Bk, for it is noticed that by forcing certain restrictions on the A's and B's before and after a certain
k we can dispense with A e2 < Bk,2. This will be best illustrated by the few examples to be discussed.
An1
la
Bn1
a5 +
If we multiply (23) by A,,, Bn_ and use (24) and
(25), we readily obtain the limiting case of (1Sa):
A',l B 21 = A,,B2 BBB 2.
(26)
The above three properties in combination with
the
preceding discussion will nlow be used in obtaining
2) An= (ao + a2+ a4 + * )(An_l B_ 1).
(17)
the new stability constraints for low order systems
and then, by generalization, to obtain the constraint
Bn = (a, + a3 + as +
)(An,  B,0),
for an norder system.
n > 2. (18)
Examples of Low Order Systems: We will apply the
The above identity can be easily verified for the first reduction properties wherever they are applicable to
few values of n and can be generalized for any n.6 The n =3, 4, 5, 6, and then obtain the stability constraint
importance of this property lies in the mathematical for any n. We will assume an > 0. This can be easily done
proof of the previous section as follows:
by multiplying F(z) by minus one, if necessary.
+ * * )2
a) n = 3, F(z) = ao + alz + a2Z2 + a3Z3I a3 > 0. (27)
An' >< B.2,~ (ao + a2+ a4+
. (a,+ a3 + a5
(19)
.)l
or
An2
0 = F(1) F(1) < 0
Bn2
which verifies the equivalence An
auxiliary constraint.
3) (AnI + Bn1)
I
(20)
BJ to the
The stability constraints from the modified stability
equations (11) and (12) are given by the following inequalities:
aoI
< a3,
All
<
aa3I
I Bil
(28)
l ao2 a32 > aOa2 ,I A21 > B2j (29)7
. (30)
F(z) Iz=l > 0, F(z)
< 0, or A31 <
Iz=l
B31
A,2(ao + a2 + a4 + * * )
Reduction of the Constraint Conditions: From the first
Bn2(al+a3+as+ * * ), n>3. (21) property of the Ak and Bk, we may write in this case
=
The above relationship can also be written as
A,22> B22 A iA3>
A nI + B5_1 = 2 [F(1) (An2 B2)
+ F(1) (An_2 + Bn_2)J .
(22)
Eq. (22) has been verified for anyn > 3 by using certain determinant manipulations [IIJ. The use of the
third property lies in the fact that one can obtain
An_l+Bn_1 from An2 and Bn_2, and most important,
to verify the first property for the limiting case, i.e.,
k = n1, as follows.
The third and second properties can be rewritten
as follows:
For values of k up to 15, and for certain n, this equivalence has
also been checked numerically. Although a rigorous proof (other than
determinant expansion) for (15) has been obtained, by using a heuristic argument however, it can easily be shown [111 that this identity
is not violated for all values of k between 5 and n 1.
6 To establish the identity for the general case, [11] it is easier to
show the following equivalent conditions for (17) and (18):
=
F(l)(A.1
B,,,);
A.
B.
F(1)(AnI
B_A.
(31)
Since B, is positive (i.e., a3>0), we may write for the
right side
Al
 A3> B3.
(29a)
B,
7To show how to obtain A2 and B2 for this case:
1) Expand the determinant of (13a) for k = 2 and n = 3, as follows:
II
ao + b2 a, + b3
121b3
a02+aob2a,b2b2
2) To identify A2 and B2, follow procedure 2 in Section
A. + B.
BlB3.
A2
B2
to obtain
b32
aob2 ab3.
a2
3) Replace all the b's of A2 and B2 by the a's to get
A2
B2
a02 a32
aoa2 a,a3.
A similar procedure is used for obtaining the Ak's and Bk's for any k
and n.
1962
Jury: A Simplified Stability Criterion
Using conditions (28) and (30) in combination with
(29a) the new stability constraints are:
1)
(32)
ao < a3, or ao a3 < 0, ao + a3 > 0,
2)
A3
< B3)
, or
F(1) > 0, F(1)
<0.
From the second property in (18)
B3 =
(a, + a3)(A2 B2) .
Since a,+a3 is positive (from (34)) because it is equal to
F(1)  F(  1) >0, therefore B3 is negative only when
A2 B2 <0. It is of interest to note that from the third
property of the stability constants it is readily seen
that A2+B2<0 is identically satisfied from the first and
third conditions. Thus the simplified form of the stability constraint for n =3 reduces to
I aol
It is noticed that for the fourthorder9 case only one determinant of thirdorder for obtaining A3 and B3 is required. All other conditions are very simple.
c) n = 5, F(z)
ao + alz + a2z2 + a3z3 + a4z4 + a5z5,
(33)
as > 0. (49)
(34) The stability constraints in symbolic form
(50)
A1) < B1, B1= a > 0
(35)
(51)
>
B3 < 0,
3) 1
1497
A2
B2
lA3l
< B3
(52)
B4l
(53)
A4 >
F(t) >
F(1) <0,
0,
or
A5 <
B6I.
(54)
Reduction of the Constraint Relationship: We may
keep in this case condition (51) but we eliminate (52)
by using the first property, i.e.,
(36)
A32 < B32' A2A4 < B2B4.
(52a)
ao2 a32 < aoa2  aia3
(37)
ao + a, + a2 + a3 > 0, ao  a, + a2 a3 < 0. (38) With A2 negative because of (53),10 the stability constraint for (50), (52), (52a) and (53) becomes (50),
b) n = 4, F(z) = aO + a1Z + a2Z2 + a3z3 + 4Z4,
(51), A4>0, and A42>B42. Using A4>0 in (56), i.e.,
a4 > 0. (39) (A4B4)(A4+B4)>0, we obtain A4B4>0 and
< a3
The stability constraint
I aol < a4, I
Al
<
jao2  a42l > aoa3  aia4,
Bil
(40)
A21
B21
>
(41)
A4+B4>0. Furthermore, since A2=A12B12 is to be
negative from (50), it is readily satisfied if the second
constraint 0+(51) is equivalent to A2B2<0, A2+B2
<0. Finally, we obtain for the reduced form the follow
ing:
ao3 + aoa2a4 + aia3a4 aoa42 a2a42 aoa32 I
< aO2a4 +
ao2a2 + a12a4 aoa2a4a43 aoala3 
(42)
A2 B2 < 0,
A2+ B2 < 0
(55)
A4 B4 > 0,
A4 + B4 > 0
(56)
0,
F(1) < 0.
(57)
F(1) >
or
A3)
<
F(z) jZ= >
B3I
0,
(43)
F(z),=.1
>
or
>
A4j
B4
(44)
Reduction of the Constraint Equations: Using property
1), we may write, as in the previous case,
A22 > B22 X A1A3 > B1B3, or
A1
B1
A3> B3.
(45)
Eqs. (40)(42) are now equivalent to (40), B3<0 and
(42). Using B3<0 with (43), we finally obtain the reduced constraints
aol
<a4, or
A3B3 > 0,
F(1) >
0,
Al <B1
(46)
A3+ B3 < 0
(47)8
F(1) >
(48)
0.
8 Constraints in (47) can also be written as B3<0, A31 < JB31.
The latter has an advantage in numerical testing if B3 <0 is violated.
Then the test could be discontinued without having to calculate A3.
It is noticed that in this case only the second and
fourthorder determinants are required. One may also
use a different form of reduction by eliminating (56).
However, this will not yield much simplification over
the previous form because a fourthorder determinant
with a thirdorder determinant is then required.
g An alternate form which is more advantageous for design can
be obtained for the fourthorder case. This form can be easily obtained by using properties 1) and 2). It is given as follows:
1)
2)
3)
4)
A2 <0
A2< B2
A3  B3 > 0
F(1) > 0, F(1) > 0.
In this case only one thirdorder equation in 3) and two secondorder equations in 2) are to be solved, while in the former case two
thirdorder equations are to be solved. It should be noted that when
2) is satisfied, relationship 1), i.e., A2 <0, becomes redundant. Therefore, the final constraints for n=4 can be summarized as [121:
1) A2 <
2) A3
I B21
or A2B2 < 0, A2 + B2 < 0
B3 >
0, F(1) > 0.
0
3) F(1) >
10
Note A2=A12B12.
PROCEELDINGS OF
1498}
[HE JRE
The stability constrainits in symbolic form are
1 A2
(58)
B =a6 > 0
< BI,
> B1 21
(60)
(61)
(62)
F(1) > 0, F(1) > 0, or A6, > B361. (63)
Reduction of the Constraint Relationship: In this case
we mav conveniently eliminate the determninanits of (59)
and (61) as follows: usinig first 4 22 >1322XA 1 il > B1iB:,'
we obtain the equivalent constrainit for (58)(60), notinig (45), as follows:
All
< Bi,
 A3
<
B31
and B
n even'
F(1) > 07 F(1) > 0
A1I < B,, B1 = a,, > 0, or
A1B, < 0, A1 + Bs >0
1' Note that
(10) and (11).
Ak+B, and
A. Bk
cani be obtained directly from
any other n
n  4k
any other nI,
odd1I
> 0,
<0
A44+ 4 > ()
B4 <0
.16+
A"'I4B4 > O,
A1636<0,
A,,_  1, "1
Notinig that B3<0, and (60) and (62), the above is
satisfied if B5 is positive, and (60) anid (62) are also satisfied. Therefore the stability constraints for n =6 tnow
reduce to
31 < B3 I, B1 < 0, or (A3+ B3) < (,
(A3 B3) > 0
 A,I < I Bsl , Bs > 0, or (A5+ B5) > 0,
(A5  B5) <0
(66)
F(1) > 0,
F(1) > 0.
Following the above reduction we can similarly obtaini the stability constraints for higherorder systems
for the general case, i.e., for anv n, by using the first
property.
The stability constraints cani be presenited in either
one of the following two formiis.
The New Stability Criterion: A necessary and sufficieint
conditioni for the polynomiiial F(z) =ao+alz+a2z2+
+akzk + * +a,,z"l with a,, > 0 to have all its roots
iniside the uniit circle is represenited by the followinig conistrainits for n even anid n odd, respectively:
n = 4k
F(t) < 0
A,2B2 < 0, A2+ B
F(1)
<0. (64)
< B,
A+ 7K< ()
n.
To eliiniricate the determuinant of (61), we use the following proveni identity:
142 > B424'> A 3A5 > B3B5.
(65)
I All
A+B.,>()
> 0 for
A,,,  B,_1 < 0 for
< 0 for
An,,1 + Bz,,l > 0 for
k= 1, 2, 3
(59)
A,, < B31
A4I > B41
A51 < B51
A1,; + B3; < (0
A:,  Ba > 0,
A,,B5,< 0
> 0,
,' 7
d) n = 6, F(s) = aO + alz + a2z2 + az3 + a4z4
+ a5z5 + a6z6, a6 > 0.
All
Jitne
A,11 + B 1
k
> 0 for n 1 = 4k
< 0 for any other(n
> 0 for ,i1 4k
1)
< () foranv other (n  1)
= 1, 2, 3
Alternate Form: Atn alternate equLivalenit miiethod
which is of advantage if the stability conlstatits evaluation is carried out by imiethods othier thani a computer is
hereby presented.
F(1) > 0,
!Al < Bi,
it even
F(1) > (0
BI
a,, > (
1A3 < B3, B:; <
1A51 < BsI, B> 0
1A71 < B71, 13 < (
,l,_l
<
B,_1,
Br,
ni
F(1) > 0,
A,2
0, for
4k
> B0 for any other n1
k 1,2,3
<
it
odd
F(1) < 0
> B2 , A., < 0
1 A41 > 1 B41, A4 > (0
A6I > 1B6!, A6< 0
> 0, for n
4k
1962
Jury: A Simplified Stability Criterion
An_l 
>  B_
,
A
< 0, for any other n  1
k= 1,2,3
1499
where bk is a linear combination of the ak's in F(z). The
following relationships exist:
...
In the above case the identification of AkI and BkI
from the determinant Xk + Yk could be used. This
criterion can be applied for design purposes when the
ak's of F(z) are given other than numerically.
Summary of Stability Constraints for LowOrder Systems: In this section the constraints in terms of the coefficients of the loworder polynomials are presented.
n= 2
F(z) = ao + alz + a2z2 a2 > 0
1) aol < a2, or aoa2 <O0
2) ao+ al+ a2 > 0, aoal+ a2 >O
n = 3
F(z) = ao + alz + a2z2 + a3z3, a3 > O
1) aol
< a3
2) ao2  a32 < aoa2 a1a3
3) ao+ a,+ a2+ a3 > O, aoa,+ a2a3 < 0
n = 4
F(z) = ao + alz + a2z2 + a3z3 + a4z4, a4 > 0
1) ao2  a42  aoa3 + a1a4 < 0
2) ao2  a42 + aoa3 aja4 < 0
3) ao3 + 2aoa2a4 + a1a3a4 aoa4 2 a2a42  aoa32
a) F(z) z=lbn,
F (z)
z== I
"'Z
(
J)nbo
b) n odd
n=
2(n12)(')(A.,  B.,), for n = 4k, k = 1, 2,3
2(n'2)(n1)(An1 Bn1), for any other n,
n even
In1 = 2( B2)(n)(An_1B._1), for n 1 = 4k,
k = 1, 2, 3
=  2(n/2)(n)(An1 Bn.1), for any y other n,
where I\AH1 is the next to last Hurwitz determinant.
The above relationships have been verified by expansion for loworder systems and can be generalized for
any order.
It should be noted that if the constraints of the new
stability criterion for n even are written in even form
(i.e., in terms of Ak and Bk where k is even), then the
last constraint could be terminated by
An Bn1
>
a02a4 a02a2 a12a4 + a43 + aoala3 > 0 This can be easily obtained by using properties 1) and 2).
4) F(1) > 0, F(1) > 0
A similar form can be obtained of n odd if its stability
constraints
are written in terms of odd forms of Ak and
Evaluation of the Stability Determinants [17]: To evalone
Bk.
Thus,
can show that next to the last Hurwitz
uate the Ak's and Bk's from (13), we need to expand this
determinant only for k = n 1. All other values of k can constraint for the transformed polynomial is identical to
be obtained from this expansion by a limiting process as the last constraint of the new stability criterion. This
simplification could be used to advantage in design in
follows:
order
solve two higherorder equations. It is apTo obtain Xn.3+
from X
X,. + Y., we let plied tonotn to
=4
as shown above. Furthermore, if the sys(in the latter) ao = 0, a1 = 0 and ai>ai2, and then divide
tem
is
initially
stable and some of its parameters change
by 1/b2. Similarly, we can obtain all the other
so
as
to
approach
instability, the constraint A, Bn_
Xk+ Yk by a similar limiting process.
is
the
most
critical
one. Hence, to obtain the maximum
For the case when the coefficients of F(z) are given in
parameter
variations
for stability limit only the equanumbers, one can use (13a) only for k = n1, and only
tion
of
need
be solved.
(AnlBn1)
by letting the bi's as +aj's obtain for A,1 +Bn_1, and as
Number
Roots
a
Real
of
of
Polynomial Inside the Unit
ai's obtain for An1Bn_. This is evident if the deterCircle:
The
criterion
preceding
yields the necessary and
minant is written in detail; one can notice that it insufficient
condition
for
all
the
roots
of F(z) to lie inside
cludes inside all other determinants for other values
the
unit
circle.
To
obtain
information
on the number of
of k.
roots
that
lie
inside
the
unit
circle
if
the
system is unRelationship Between the New Criterion and Hurwitz
stable,
we
can
the
usefully
above
modify
discussions
to
Determinants: In this paper some relationships between
cover
this
case.
the
work
of
Following
original
Schurthe new stability constraints and the Hurwitz constraints are established. To show this relationship, we Cohn [1], [2] and its modified form [9], and using the
use the bilinear transformation z = (w+ 1)/(w1) in first property of the stability constants Ak's and Bk's,
can state the following.
F(z), (1), with an>O, to obtain the following Hurwitz oneThe
number of roots of F(z) that lie inside the unit
polynomial:
circle is equal to the number of variations of sign of the
Fi(w) = bo + biw + b2w2 + * * + b4wn7
following constraints:

Y.31
I,
PROCEEDINGS OF THE IRE
1500
it even
A 11
IA2i Z
1 >0
><IB
A 121 > B B:
B2
.,1
A3
A4Z B4I AzA5
A 5 <1B53s'
An B,t2
>0

<0
IA
Q BjB5
Bn I ,_
_ 
A4,,
BJ1
>0
zF(1)F(1)<0
The author gratefull'y acknowledges the helpful discussions and aid of M. A. Pai in the preparation of this
1 > 0
A31
1A51
B2I
tA2A4 B2B4
B3I
A41
B5
>0
An2 Br2 0
<
A,n1
A,t
maniuscript.
REFERENCES
B4
A4A6 Z
A 6
linear discrete systems for the stability studs of lilmlit,
cycles, in somiie applicationis of dligital coml1puLters, in the
stability test of liniear svstemiis with randonmi\vfary1ing
parameters, andcl in niany other applications, such las
economiiic andl inivenitory systems. Trhuls it is lhoped thlat
this criterioni will find minany applicationis ini arious
fields in additioni to the above, anid its use by eniginieers,
physicists anid mathematicians will be greatl y enlia nce(ld.
The evaluationi of the higher order determinants could
also be reduced to evaluationi of only seconid orcler (letertiiinants by usinlg altertnate but equivalenit formiis of the
criterioni. Ihe discussioni of these alterniate forinis has
been recently presenited [13 15] and in future publicatioIns the conniiectioni betweeni the various formls of these
stabilityT criteria will be discussed [16.
AC KNOWLEDGNMENT
ni odd
A2
J1lnlie
B4B6
B61
Bo_l
tB,
F(1)F(1
<0
It is noticed from the above that for n eveni one nieed
not have to evaluate the even determinants but canl use
the relationship Ak2 t Bk2'1A1_,.+1 t Bk_ Bk+1 whicl
are obtained from the calculated odd determinianits.
Similarly, the odd determiniants are to be avoided froml
n odd. It is assumed that in this counting nieither onie of
the constants Ak is equivalent to Bk. For such a case
special procedure should be used and this will be (liscussed in a somewhat differently related criterioni [161.
VI II. CONCLIUSI()N
From the preceding discussioni, it is shown first that
in the original SchurCohn or the modified RouthHurwitz criteria, the number of determinants required
for the stability is almost halved. The use of the criteria
for both design of discrete systemls as well as for testing
roots of a polynomial inside the tllit circle is evidenit.
This criterion will nlow be useful in maniy applications
such as the stability test of difference equations with
constant and periodically varyinig coefficients, in nloni
ill A. Cohni, "Uberdie Anzahl der WuLrzelnl einier algebraicheni
Gleichtung in einein Kreise," Aath. Zeit., vol. 14, pp. 110148:
August, 1922.
121 M. Mardeni, "Geometry of the Zeros," American Mathemiatical
Society, New York, N. Y.; 1949.
[31 F. R. Gantnmacher, "Theory of Matrices," Chelsea Publishinig
Co., New York, N. Y., vol. 2, pp. 221227; 1959.
[41 E. I. Jury, "SampledData Control Systems," John Wiley anid
Sonis, Inc., New York, N. Y.; 1958.
[51 Y. Tsypkin, "Theory of Pulse Systems,'" State Press for Physics
and Mathematical Literature, Moscow, U.S.S.R.; 1959.
[6] Van J. Tschaunier, "Die Stabilitat von Impulssysteleni
Regelungtechnik," vol. 8, pp. 4246; February, 1960.
[7] R. C. Oldenbourg and H. Sartoriotis, "The Dynamics of Auitomatic Conitrols,' Americani Society of Mechanical Enigineers,
New York, N. Y., ch. 5; 1948.
[81 E. 1. Jury and B. H. Bharuchai, "Notes on the stability criterioll
for linlear discrete systems," IRE ThIRANS. ON AUTOMAtric CONTROL, vol. AC6, pp. 8890; February, 1961.
[91 E. I. Jury, "Additionis to stability criterioni for liniear discretle
systems," IRE TItANS. ON AUTOMATIC CoNx rlIo ,ol. AC6, pp.
342343; September, 1961.
[101 B. H. Bhartucha, "Anialysis of InitegralSiquare Error in SaipledData Control Systems," tUniiversity of Californa 13
Berkeley.
ERL Ser. 60, Issue No. 206; Jutne 30, 1958.
[111 E. I. J ury, "A Simplified Stability Criterioni for linear l)iscrete
Systems," University of Californ;ia, Berkeley, FRI. Rept. No.
373; J unle, 1961.
[121 E. I. J urv, " DiscLussioll of a paper by l TIschalunier eii titled "Tl he
stability of sampleddata systems," Regelungstlchnnik, vol. 9, pp.
340342; August, 1961.
1131 E. I. Jury anid J. Blanchard, "A stability test for liniear (liscrete
systems in table formii," IRoc. IRE, xol. 49, pp. 19471948;
December, 1961.
[141 E. 1. Jury, "A stability test for linaear discrete systenms usilng
simple divisioni," PROC. IRE, vol. 49. pp. 19481949; December,
1961.
[15] E. I. Jury anid S. C. Gupta, "Oni the Stability of linear dliscrete
svstems," to be published in the Regelungstechnik.
[16] E. I. Jury and J. Blanchard, "OTT the Roots of a Real Polvnomiiial
Iniside the Uiiit Circle anid a Stability Criterioni for Liniear Discrete Systems," Universit' of California, Berkeley, FRI. Rept.
No. 60, Issue No. 425; Decemiiber 26, 1961.
[17] E. 1. Jury', "Oni the evaluation of the stability determiiinaubts ONin
linear discrete systelms," to be published by IRE 'TRIANS.
A U"TOMATIC CoNTROl.; JUIV, 1962.
Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.
Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.
Отменить можно в любой момент.