Output feedback control applied to car pursuit
problem with lossy network
Leonardo de P. Carvalho∗ , Jonathan M. Palma O.∗ , Alim P. C. Gonçalves∗
∗ University of Campinas (UNICAMP), School of Electrical and Computing Engineering
Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil
Email: {lcarvalho,jmpalma,alimped}@dca.fee.unicamp.br
Abstract—In the last two decades the car pursuit problem has
been heavily studied, mainly because it is a viable solution to
minimize the occurrence of accidents on the road. The controller
design usually considers that all measured signals are transmitted
by a perfect network and that sensors and actuators do not fail.
In a real implementation, these equipments may present failure
and the network quality of transmission may not be fully reliable.
Using Network Control System theory, it is possible to design
a controller that takes into account the probabilities of failure
in sensors, actuators or interruptions in signal communications.
In this paper we compare the classical H∞ output feedback
controller with two different types of Markov Jump Linear
Systems (MJLS) controllers. We show that, on a network with
25% packet loss rate, the proposed MJLS controllers outperform
the classical H∞ controllers by a factor of 10.
Keywords: Markov Jump Linear System, H∞ norm, Net-
worked Control System, Vehicle-Following problem
I. I NTRODUCTION
According to [16] and [17], there are many causes of car
accidents. Among the causes, it can be pointed out distracted
drivers, speeding, drunk drivers, tailgating and unsafe lane
changes. Nearly 1.3 million people die in car accidents every
year. The occurrence of accidents caused by those specific
issues can be decreased using numerous approaches like traffic
educational advertising, surveillance and others, but those
solutions are still subjective and too dependent of the driver
behavior.
A more reliable solution for this problem is to decrease
human participation on the process of controlling the vehicle.
In order to increase the vehicle security, many types of
equipment were conceived like Antilock Brake System (ABS),
Electronic Stability Program (ESP) and etc. These kinds of
equipment improve security by automating tasks that otherwise
would request driver’s expertise. Nevertheless, the driver’s
attention to the road is still a critical security factor.
In the literature, there are many works that study the prob-
lem of controlling an autonomous vehicle but they are mainly
focused on modeling the dynamics and controllers without
giving much importance on networked related problems [1],
[2], [3], [12]. Those approaches are usually efficient because
the environment is controlled and there is just a pair of cars
being controlled. Unfortunately, if we increase the number
of cars the problems inherent to the network become more
relevant. The classical control theory does not contemplate the
problems that normally take place when measurement signals
are transmitted over a network and therefore it may not provide
suitable solutions depending on how much delay, congestion
and packet loss is induced by the network.
This paper presents a solution for autonomous steering
control using the networked control system (NCS) theory as
framework [5]. The NCS theory is an attractive solution for
this problem because it allows many issues to be modeled such
as actuator and sensor malfunction, packet loss or a combina-
tion of those problems. We will concentrate our efforts in the
analysis of packet loss issues in a Car Pursuit problem. The
packet loss was chosen because controlling a plant using a non
reliable network (a network with high delay and congestion
for example) is a complicated task. Using NCS theory it is
possible to design an optimized controller to guarantee an
optimum performance using a non-reliable network [7].
II. N OTATION
The notation used in this work is standard. Capital letters
denote matrices and small letters represent scalars and vectors.
The symbol (0 ) denotes the transpose in matrices and vectors,
the symbol (•) denotes the terms induced by symmetry for a
block-structured matrices. The set of natural numbers is indi-
cated by N while K = 1, 2, · · · , N . Given N 2 non-negative
real numbers pij satisfying pi1 + · · · piN = 1, ∀i ∈ K, and
matrices X1 , . . . , XN , the convex combination of those matri-
PN
ces with weights pij is given by Xpi = j=1 pij Xj , ∀ i ∈ K.
The mathematical expectation is denoted by E{·}. For any
stochastic signal φ(k) ∈ Rn , defined in the discrete-time
domain
P∞ k ∈ N, the squared norm is given by kφk22 =
0 2
k=0 E{φ(k) φ(k)}. The class of signals such that kφk2 is
finite, is known as L2 .
III. T HEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Before starting the discussion about the approach proposed
by the authors to solve the car pursuit problems, it is necessary
to introduce and explain some useful theoretical concepts
like Markov Linear Jump Systems, H∞ norm in the MJLS
framework, MJLS Dynamic output-feedback design and how
to model network transmission failures using those concepts.
A. Markov Jump Linear System
A Markov Jump Linear System can be defined as a class
of switched systems in which the switching rule responsible
for selecting among different linear dynamics is given by a
random variable θk governed by a finite-state Markov Chain. on the random variable θk ∈ K. Given the random nature
The representation of a discrete-time MJLS in state-space form of the Markov Chain, the assumption that this information
is given by, is always available to the controller may not be practical. In
 our case, however, we assume such availability because the
x(k + 1) = A(θk )x(k) + B(θk )u(k) + J(θk )w(k)

Markov mode represents the failure or success of measurement
G: y(k) = Cy (θk )x(k) + Ey (θk )w(k) , transmissions, which is something the controller has full

z(k) = Cz (θk )x(k) + D(θk )u(k) + Ez (θk )w(k) knowledge of. A complete description about this controller

(1) is presented in [8].
where x(k) ∈ Rn is the state vector, w(k) ∈ Rm is the The closed-loop system given by the interconnection of the
exogenous input, i.e., the signal that represents the disturbance plant (1) and (3) is given by,
or noise, and u(k) ∈ Rp is the control input. The vector (
˜ k )y(k)
x̃(k + 1) = Ã(θk )x̃(k) + J(θ
y(k) ∈ Rq represents the measured outputs and z(k) ∈ Rr Gc : , (4)
denotes the controlled output. The parameter θk assumes z(k) = C̃(θk )x̃(k) + Ẽ(θk )y(k)
its values on the finite set K = {1, 2, · · · , N }, each value
where the augmented state vector is given by x̃ =
represents a specific mode and in every instant k the mode
[x(k)0 xc (k)0 ]0 ∈ R2n .
may or may not change. The transition between modes occurs
The controller matrices are those such that kGc k2∞ is
according to a Markov chain, whose transition probabilities
minimal. They can be obtained through the solution of a
are given by pij = P rob(θk+1 = j|θk = i), pij > 0 and
convex problem with constraints in the form of Linear Matrix
pi1 + pi2 + · · · + piN = 1, ∀ i ∈ K. The transition matrix is
Inequalities (LMIs).
represented by P = [pij ]. To simplify the notation, whenever
θk = i we write A(θk ) = Ai and so on. More information Theorem 1: There is a mode dependent controller that
about discrete-time Markov Linear Jump Systems can be found satisfies the condition kGc k2∞ < γ if and only if there are sym-
in [24], [5], [8]. metric matrices Xi , Yi , Zij , and matrices Mi , Li , Fi , Ki , Hi
with compatible dimensions satisfying the LMIs,
B. H∞ Norm for Markov systems    
Yi • • 0
The H∞ norm is an important design objective due to its   I Xi •  Π i (X i , Yi , Mi , 
relation with the robustness of a system. It can be understood
 Fi , Ki , Li ) 
 0 0 γI 
 > 0,
as an upperbound for disturbance influence on the output z(k), 0
  

 Πi (Xi , Yi , Mi , Hi + Hi − Zpi • • 
among all disturbances w(k) belonging to the class L2 . It is

  I Xpi • 
possible to design a controller with a guaranteed performance Fi , Ki , Li )
0 0 I
any disturbance belonging to such class, which indicates its (5)
robustness. The H∞ norm for MJLS is defined as,  
Zij •
kzk22 > 0, (6)
kGk2∞ = sup Hi Yj
2. (2)
06=w∈L2 , θ0 ∈K kwk2
where Πi is defined as:
It is interesting to point out that the classical norm can be
seen as a special case of the above definition. If there is Πi Xi , Yi , Mi , Fi , Ki , Li ) =
 
no transition, that means θk is always the same, the MJLS Ai Yi + Bi Li Ai + Bi Ki Cyi Ji + Bi Ki Eyi
H∞ norm will be equivalent as the classical H∞ norm.  Mi Xpi Ai + Fi Cyi Xpi Ji + Fi Eyi  ,
The conditions to calculate the H∞ norm and more detailed Czi Yi + Dzi Li Czi + Dzi Ki Cyi Ezi + Dzi Ki Eyi
informations and properties can be found at [18], [24], [5], (7)
[8], [6]. P P
Xpi = j∈K pij Xj and Zpi = j∈K pij Zij , ∀i ∈ K.
C. Full-Order Mode Dependent Output Dynamic Feedback Proof:See [8].
Controller If the constraints (5) and (6) are satisfied, the controller
Given the system in Equation (1), it may be possible to matrices can be obtained by,
determine the control input u(k) ∈ Rp for every instant of
−1  −1
Vi0
   
Aci Bci U Xpi Bi Mi − Xpi Ai Yi Fi 0
= pi , (8)
time k ∈ N by means of a mode-dependent Output Dynamic Cci Dci 0 I Li Ki Cyi Yi I
Feedback Controller. This controller can be described as
with Ui = Y −1 − Xi and Vi = Yi ∀ i ∈ K.
follows,
( D. Modeling Packet Loss with MLJS
xc (k + 1) = Ac (θk )xc (k) + Bc (θk )y(k)
C: , (3) Using the system (1), it is possible to model the occurrence
u(k) = Cc (θk )xc (k) + Dc (θk )y(k)
of random failures in sensors or actuators. Specifically, the
where xc (k) ∈ Rn represents the controller’s state vector. The MJLS stochastic transitions between modes can be used to
controller is said to be mode-dependent because its state-space model a faulty network behavior, see [6], [8], [5]. In our
matrices Ac (θk , Bc (θk ), Cc (θk ) and Dc (θk ) depend explicitly case, we define two modes, the first one represents the case
 Follower n-1 States Leader States
where the communication works properly and the second Signals Signals
mode represents the occurrence of a transmission failure.
We may think of two different ways to determine the inputs
to the controller in the event of a failure: the first one is
called Zero, and the second one is named Hold. The Zero
approach consists of assigning zeros to the controller input Follower n Follower 1 Leader
whenever there is a faulty detection. The Hold approach is
Fig. 1: Network topology.
slightly different: instead of a vector full of zeros, the input to
the controller will be repeat the values of the last successful
transmission. In [4], it is proved that both approaches have
Another relevant network model aspect is the type of failure
equal performance for the H2 and H∞ filtering problems.
model used. Although some works consider the distribution of
For the LQR state feedback control problem, [15] presents
the transmission failure as a Bernoulli process [4], [15], such
a comparison of both schemes using as scalar example. The
a distribution does not consider failures that occur in bursts.
obtained results do not give a conclusive answer to the
The burst failure indicates that when a network failure occurs
question of which approach is better in terms of performance.
the probability that another fail occurs is higher for the next
Depending on the packed loss rate and the definition of the
few instants. A model that considers such occurrence is the
controlled output, either the Zero or the Hold approach may
Gilbert model, presented in [9], composed by two network
be the best one.
modes. Fig. 2 shows a Gilbert scheme.
Consider the Eq. (1), and specifically, the measured output
signal denoted by y(k). The matrices that weights the states
1-Pcc
are Cyi and the influence of the disturbance in the measured
Pcc Pff
output is determined by Eyi . Under the Zero approach scheme,
these matrices may be written as,
Successful Failure

Cyi = ∆i Cy , Eyi = ∆i Ey , (9)

1-Pff
where Cy and Ey are the deterministic plant matrices and
∆i ∈ Rq×q is a matrix that models the occurrence of a failure Fig. 2: Gilbert scheme.
transmission for the measurements through the following
structure,
Matrix P for that model is,
∆i = diag(δ1 , . . . , δq ), (10)
 
Pcc 1 − Pcc
P= . (14)
where δj ∈ {0, 1} represents transmission failure in the j-th 1 − Pf f Pf f
measurement channel whenever δj = 0 and δj = 1 otherwise.
Conversely, the Hold approach can be implemented as a The burst failure can also represent other types of failure,
buffer, since it retains the information of the last successful like communication losses caused by an obstacle. An example
transmission and uses it until a new one is received. The hold is the signal loss in GPS when the cars get into a tunnel.
approach is far more complicated, it is necessary to consider
an augmented state vector [x(k)0 y(k − 1)0 ]0 and the space
state realization becomes, IV. C AR M ODELLING
     
A 0 B J This section is separated into two parts. The first one will
Ai = , Bi = , Ji = , (11)
∆i C y I − ∆i 0 ∆i Ey present the kinematic model for the vehicle, the second part
 
Czi = Cz 0 , Dzi = Dz , Ezi = Ez , (12) will be about the constraint we assumed in order to have a
 
Cyi = ∆i Cy I − ∆i , Eyi = ∆i Ey . (13) linear model to deal with.

E. Network Modeling A. Kinematic Model

The network model chosen is an end-to-end network, mean- The model we are using here is known in the literature as
ing that the cars only communicate with their neighbors. A bicycle model, [1], [2], [19], [23]. The scheme of this model
representation of the car convoy is presented in Fig. 1. is presented in Fig. 3.
 Y
driver. All the follower must follow exactly the same trajectory
of the leader. The following diagram presents the topology and
the possible location of failures.

Leader
Driver
Input
Sensor

Fig. 3: Bicycle model Network Follower

Actuator
Each of the variables and parameters of this model are Controller

described in Table I. Sensor

TABLE I: Definition for variables and parameters in Fig. 3.

Fig. 4: Topology block diagram.
Symbol Definition
Jv car inertia momentum
lf distance between the gravitational center and the front axis The block diagram in Fig. 4 illustrates that the first car
lr distance between the gravitational center and the rear axis does not have any type of controller and that the network
cf front wheel cornering stiffness parameters
cr rear wheel cornering stiffness parameters that transmits the sensors signals from the leader to the
m car mass followers’ controller is subject to packet loss. However, the
vx velocity in the x axis communication between the controller and actuators does not
vy velocity in the y axis
δ front wheel steering angle suffer from any type of packet loss, only the usual noise.
r angular rate about the yaw axis
L distance between the axes VI. P ROPOSED S OLUTION

The main purpose of this model is to determine the lateral The solution to the problem described in the previous
force that actuates in the vehicle when it changes direction. section can be summarized as follows: it is necessary to
After several geometrical and physical manipulations the kine- consider an augmented state-space model to include the dy-
matic model is obtained, namics of all the cars in the convoy. For simplicity, in the
      next equations we only show the case of two cars. The state
ẋ cos(θ) 0 vector is given by x(k) = [vy1 (k) r1 (k) vy2 (k) r2 (k)]0 ,
ẏ   sin(θ)  0 which includes the state variables of the two car models
  =  tan(δ)  v +   δ. (15)
 θ̇    0 according to (16). The exogenous vector is composed of
L
δ̇ 0 1 w(k) = [δ1 (k) d2 (k) η1 (k)0 η2 (k)0 ]0 , where δ1 (k) is the
For a full description of this model see [19], [3]. input front wheel steering angle for the leader car, d2 (k)
is a disturbance affecting the steering angle of the follower,
B. Dynamic Model η1 (k) ∈ R2 contains the measurement noises of the leader
To obtain the dynamic model based on the bicycle model and η2 (k) ∈ R2 are the measurement noises of the follower.
presented in the last section, a few assumptions were made: The control input is applied only on the follower and is
the velocity in the x axis is considered constant and the lateral u2 (k) = δ2 (k).
slip angle is ignored. In space-state form we get,      
Ad 0 0 Bd 0 0 0
(lr cr +Lf cf )
x(k + 1) = x(k) + u2 (k) + w(k),
− (cmv
r +cf ) 0 Ad Bd 0 ed Bd 0 0
" #  
cf 
− vx vy
 
v˙y mvx
= x
(lr cr −lf cf ) lr2 cr +lf2 cf + lfmcf δ. (16) (17)
ṙ − r m
    
J v vx J v vx 
I 0 0 0 en I 0 



For a full description of how this model was designed, see 






 x(k) + 
 
 w(k), if θ(k) = successs,

[19]. 




0 I 0 0 0 en I

V. C ASE OF S TUDY y(k) =

    

Consider a line of cars chasing a leader, where the path 

0 0 0 0 0 0 



taken by the first car is deterministic and all the other vehicles 





 x(k) + 
 
 w(k), if θ(k) = failure,


are unmanned with constant velocity in the x axis. We have 
 0 I 0 0 0 en I
the measurements of all state variables at each vehicle and all     (18)
states are controllable. Each vehicle only communicates with 1 0 −1 0 0
the car immediately in front and with the car immediately z(k) = 0
 1 0 −1 x(k) +  0  u2 (k). (19)
behind. The leader’s input is deterministic, determined by its 0 0 0 0 eu
In the equations (17)–(19), Ad and Bd are the discrete time
matrices representing A, B from the car model (16) with
zero-order holder and sampling time of Ts = 40 [ms]. The
parameters ed and en represent scale factor for the influence of
the actuator disturbance and measurement noises, respectively.
For the simulation, we used ed = en = 0.1, i.e. the influence
of those exogenous input is of 10 %. It can be noticed from
(18) that there are two cases for the measurement values
that are transmitted to the follower vehicle, depending on the
occurrence of packet loss on the transmission of the values
from the leader. Finally, eu in (19) indicates how the control
effort should be penalized during the optimization, that has the
objective to bring the error between the two car states to zero.
We used en = 1 in the simulations. The HOLD approach is Fig. 5: H∞ xPcc xPf f for vx = 15 m/s
more complex like we explained in III-D, and the matrices for
the dynamical model are obtained similarly. The blue curve represents the HOLD approach and the
The values of each parameter used to create the matrices red surface represents the ZERO approach. The plot for the
are in Tab. II. Fig. 5 for the velocity vx = 15 m/s presents an increase
in the norm when the values of Pcc decreases and of Pf f
TABLE II: The parameter values. increases.This result is expected because the studied system is
more sensitive to disturbance when the packet loss is higher.
Symbol Value Unit
Jv 1436.24 kg.m2
Another important point is that for all graphic the ZERO
lf 1.165 – approach presents a slightly lower norm.
lr 1.165 –
cf 155494.663 N/rad B. vy and Yaw rate behavior for changing lane situation and
cr 155494.663 N/rad vx Values
m 1140 kg
vx 15 m/s In order to provide a good comparison of the Zero and
Hold approaches, we tested all the controllers with the lane
changing situation. This scenario was chosen because this kind
All the values were extracted from [19], and represent actual of maneuver is frequently used when driving in a highway. The
values from a real car. graphics presented in this section are the standard deviation
and mean square error for 25.000 Monte Carlo realizations.
VII. R ESULTS The value of vx 15 m/s.
The graphics 6a, 6b are the standard deviation and mean
square error for the value of vx = 15 m/s. In the standard
The results are divided in two analysis: the first one is
deviation graphics and the mean square error, the red line
the analysis of the H∞ norm behavior with respect to the
represents the Markov Controller with Zero approach, the blue
packet loss for different values of vx ; the second one is a
line represents the Markov Controller with Hold approach and
stochastic investigation about the controller performance in a
the cyan line is the classic H∞ controller.
situation similar to changing lanes in street. In the latter case
We notice that the both Markov controllers show an equiv-
we will make the comparison between the Markov controller
alent or better performance than the classic H∞ controller,
and the Classic H∞ output-feedback controller design without
and at some points in the simulations reaching a difference of
taking the possibilities of packet dropouts into account. The
more than 10 times better. It is also possible to see that as
transition probabilities in the Gilbert model were Pcc = 0.8
the velocity in the x axis rises, higher will be the difference
and Pf f = 0.3, leading to a packet loss rate of around
between the classic and Markov controller. Another important
P LR = 0.25. Since the process is stochastic, in order to
result is that the Hold approach shown is for the problem
estimate the expected values we have run 25,000 Monte Carlo
presented in this work. The mean square error is practically
simulations. We considered a noise input signal in the form
the same comparing the Hold and Zero controller, however,
of a sinusoidal wave with amplitude of 0.3 and frequency of
the Hold approach shows a better performance in the standard
0.6Hz.
deviation graphics, and it is highly desired to keep the standard
deviation as lower as possible to ensure reliability.
A. H∞ Norm Behavior Versus Packet Loss
VIII. C ONCLUSION
In this section we make an analysis about the effects of the This work presents a solution to the control of the trajectory
packet loss rates in the H∞ norm. The figure below shows the of a car following a leader taking the issue of packet loss in
plot for vx = 15m/s. the network into account. Our primary effort was to point

(a) Standard deviation
(b) Mean square error
Fig. 6: Standard deviation and mean square error for vy .
out the advantages granted by using NCS theory to address
this kind of problems. The most prominent advantages are
the guarantee of robustness against disturbance and stochastic
failures in networks, sensors, actuators, etc.
These advantages turn the NCS theory in an attractive
option for problems like the one treated here, because they
use wireless networks and/or long distance communications,
like GPS. Moreover, topologies like Local Simple Remote
Complex (LSRC) are technologies that, whenever compared
with a wired network, have a lower reliability level. This lack
of reliability can be addressed by using NCS theory and a well
designed network model.
The next step are to use a more complete model for the
vehicle dynamics and to design a GAZEBO simulation. One
of our goals for future research is to design controllers that are
robust to polytopic parametric uncertainty. Such a design can
be used to determine a controller even if only a range of values
for the parameteres are known. A parameter for which this
technique could be applied is the cornering stiffness because
it changes according to the load inside the car.
IX. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We acknowledge André Marcorin de Oliveira for the tech-
nical support. Research supported by Coordenação de Aper-
feiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior CAPES.
R EFERENCES
[1] García, O.: Design and simulation for path tracking control of a
commercial vehicle using MPC. SBR-LARS Robotics Symposium and
Robocontrol (SBR LARS Robocontrol), 1 (2014), 61-66.
[2] García, O.; Dynamic model of a commercial vehicle for steering control
and state estimation, Simposio Brasileiro de Automação Inteligente
(SBAI), Brazil, 2013.
[3] Avak, B.; Modeling and Control of a Superimposed Steering System,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Location, 2010.
[4] Fioravanti, A.R.; Gonçalves, A.P.C.; Geromel, J.C.: Filter inputs with
Markovian lossy links: Zero or hold?, Control and Automation (ICCA),
2011 9th IEEE International Conference on, Santiago, 2011, 656 - 661.
[5] Seiler P.; Sengupta, R.: An H∞ approach to networked control, Auto-
matic Control, IEEE Transactions on, 2005, 356-364.
[6] Seiler P.; Sengupta, R.: A bounded real lemma for jump systems.
Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on 48.9 (2003): 1651-1654.
[7] Geromel, José C., Alim PC Gonçalves, and André R. Fioravanti.
Dynamic output feedback control of discrete-time Markov jump linear
systems through linear matrix inequalities. SIAM Journal on Control
and Optimization 48.2 (2009): 573-593.
[8] Gonçalves, Alim PC, André R. Fioravanti, and José C. Geromel.
Filtering of Discrete-Time Markov Jump Linear Systems Through Linear
Matrix Inequalities. Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on 54.6
(2009): 1347-1351.
[9] Gilbert, Edgar N.; Capacity of a Burst Noise Channel.; Bell system
technical journal; 1960, 1253-1265.
[10] Marcondes, G. A. B. Modelos discretos para análise de ocorrências de
erros em redes sem fio. Diss. M. Sc. Thesis, Inatel, Brazil, 2005 (in
portuguese), 2005.
[11] Fioravanti, A.R., Gonçalves, A.P.C., Geromel, J.C.; Filtering of Discrete-
Time Markov Jump Linear Systems with Cluster Observation: An
Approach to Gilbert-Elliot’s Network Channel, European Control Con-
ference, Budapest, Hungary, pp. 2283-2289, 2009.
[12] Brackstone, M., McDonald, M.; Car-following: a historical review.
Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 2.4
(1999): 181-196.
[13] Baffet, G., Charara, A., Lechner, D.; Estimation of vehicle sideslip, tire
force and wheel cornering stiffness. Control Engineering Practice ,2009,
1255-1264.
[14] Chung, Taeyoung, and Kyongsu Yi.: Design and evaluation of side
slip angle-based vehicle stability control scheme on a virtual test track.
Control Systems Technology, IEEE Transactions on 14.2 (2006): 224-
234.
[15] Schenato, Luca: To zero or to hold control inputs with lossy links?.
Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on 54.5 (2009): 1093-1099.
[16] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. "National Motor Ve-
hicle Crash Causation Survey Report to Congress." National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration Technical Report DOT HS 811 (2008):
059.
[17] Association For Safe International Road Travel, Annual Global
Road Crash Statistics,"http://asirt.org/initiatives/informing-road-users/
road-safety-facts/road-crash-statistics",accessed 16-September-2015.
[18] Geromel,J.C., Korogui,R.H.: Controle Linear de Sistemas Dinamicos
: Teoria, Ensaios Praticos e Exercicios, Editora Edgard Blucher Ltda,
2011.
[19] Snider, J.M.: Automatic Steering Methods for Autonomous Automobile
Path Tracking, Robotics Institute,Carnegie Mellon University , Pitts-
burgh, Pennsylvania, 2009.
[20] Zhou, K.,Doyle, J.C., Glover, K.: ROBUST AND OPTIMAL CON-
TROL, Prentice Hall, 1996.
[21] Naidu, D.S.: Optimal control systems. CRC press, 2002.
[22] Leon-Garcia, A.: Probability and Random Processes., Addison Wesley,
Table 3 (1989): 126-127.
[23] Buehler, M., Iagnemma, K., Singh, S., eds. The DARPA Urban Chal-
lenge: Autonomous vehicles in city traffic. Vol. 56. springer, 2009.
[24] Costa, O.L.V., Fragoso, M.D., Marques, R.P.: Discrete-time Markov
jump linear systems. Springer Science and Business Media, 2006.