IEEE TRANSAmONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MAY 1994
A Robust Stabilization Problem of Fuzzy
Control Systems and Its Application to
Backing up Control of a Truck-Trailer
Kazuo Tanaka, Member, IEEE and Manabu Sano, Member, IEEE
Abstract-A robust stabilization problem for fuzzy systems is
discussed in accordance with the definition of stability in the
sense of Lyapunov. We consider two design problems: nonrobust
controller design and robust controller design. The former is a
design problem for fuzzy systems with no premise parameter
uncertainty. The latter is a design problem for fuzzy systems
with premise parameter uncertainty. To realize two design prob-
lems, we derive four stability conditions from a basic stability
condition proposed by Tanaka and Sugeno: nonrobust condition,
weak nonrobust condition, robust condition, and weak robust
condition. We introduce concept of robust stability for fuzzy
control systems with premise parameter uncertainty from the
weak robust condition. To introduce robust stability, admissible
region and variation region, which correspond to stability margin
in the ordinary control theory, are defined. Furthermore, we
develop a control system for backing up a computer simulated
truck-trailer which is nonlinear and unstable. By approximating
the truck-trailer by a fuzzy system with premise parameter
uncertainty and by using concept of robust stability, we design a
fuzzy controller which guarantees stability of the control system
under a condition. The simulation results show that the designed
fuzzy controller smoothly achieves backing up control of the
truck-trailer from all initial positions.
I. INTRODUCTION
0 NE of the most important concepts concerning the
properties of control systems is stability. Stability anal-
ysis of fuzzy control systems has been difficult because
fuzzy systems are essentially nonlinear systems. Recently,
some useful stability techniques [ 11-[4], which are based
on nonlinear stability theory, have been reported. Therefore,
stability analysis of fuzzy control systems became easy. In
order to develop fuzzy control theory in the future, we will
have to seek more advanced stability theory. An approach
to construct more advanced stability theory is to develop an
analysis technique for robust stability.
This paper deals with a robust stablizationproblem for fuzzy
control systems with premise parameter uncertainty as shown
+
in Fig. 1. In Fig. 1, W A W denotes a fuzzy controlled object
(fuzzy model) with premise parameter uncertainty (PPU),
where AW is unknown PPU. C denotes a fuzzy controller.
In this paper, the fuzzy model and the fuzzy controller are
represented by Takagi and Sugeno’s model whose consequent
parts are described by linear equations. The purpose of the ro-
Manuscript received February 16, 1993; revised November 4, 1993.
The authors are with the Deparbent of Mechanical Systems Engineering,
Kanazawa University, 2-40-20 Kodatsuno Kanazawa 920 Japan.
IEEE Log Number 9216353.
1063-6706/94$04.00 0 1994 IEEE
119 - __ .
Reference
Input
t
--t f - c w+aw *
Fig. 1. A robust stabilization problem.
bust stabilization problem is to find out an admissible region of
A W such that the fuzzy control system is asymptoticallystable
in the large when W and C are given. We mainly consider the
robust stabilization problem for PPU in this paper because it
is a peculiar problem in fuzzy control systems. On the other
hand, we can also consider consequent parameter uncertainty.
However, consequent parameter uncertainty is not a peculiar
problem because each consequent part is represented by a
linear equation. We can easily analyze a robust stabilization
problem for consequent parameter uncertainty by using the
ordinary robust control theory such as H , control. Therefore,
we will not consider consequent parameter uncertainty in this
paper.
Next, we design a control system for backing up a computer
simulated truck-trailer by applying the robust stabilization
problem. It is shown that the designed fuzzy controller guar-
antees stability of the control systems under a condition. It
is well known that backing up control of truck-trailers is a
difficult exercise for all but the most skilled truck drivers since
its dynamics is nonlinear and unstable. In practice, in order to
succeed backing up the desired position, drivers often have to
attempt backing, going forward, backing again, going forward
again, etc., and can finally realize backing up to the desired
position. Thus, the forward and backward movements help
to position the truck-trailer for successful backing up to the
desired position. A more difficult backing up sequence would
only allow backing, with no forward movements permitted.
The specific problem in this simulation is to back up a truck-
trailer along the desired trajectory from an arbitrary initial
position by manipulating the steering. Of course, only backing
up is allowed. Some papers have reported that learning controls
such as fuzzy control, neural control, and both of them [5]-[8]
realize bqku?g up control of a computer simulated truck-
trailer. However, as far as we know, these studies have not
analyzed stability of the control system. It is, in practice,
important to guarantee stability of control systems. Our goal
. ~-
 .*-. -
120 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MAY 1994

in this simulation is to design a fuzzy controller such that the The free system of (1) is defined as
control system is asymptotically stable in the large, that is,
such that backing up control can be perfectly achieved from
all initial positions.
Recently, Tanaka, and Sugeno [3], [9] have derived some
conditions for ensuring stability of fuzzy dynamic systems.
In Section 11, we derive a stability condition by weakening
i=l
the basic stability condition (BSC) proposed by Tanaka and
Sugeno. This condition is named weak stability condition where it is assume that
(WSC). Section 111 shows two design problems: nonrobust
controller design and robust controller design. The former is a
design problem for fuzzy systems with no PPU. The latter is
a design problem for fuzzy systems with PPU. To realize two
design problems, we derive four stability conditions: nonrobust
stability condition (NSC), weak nonrobust stability condition
(WNSC), robust stability condition (RSC), and weak robust for all k . Each linear consequent equation represented by
stability condition (WRSC). In particular, WRSC is the most Aix(k) is called “subsystem.”
important condition. Because, we can introduce concept of The basic stability condition (BSC), proposed by Tanaka
robust stability for fuzzy control systems with PPU by using and Sugeno, for ensuring stability of ( 2 ) is given as follows.
the WRSC. To introduce robust stability, admissible region Theorem 2.1 131: Basic stability condition (BSC): The equi-
and variation region, which correspond to stability margin in librium of a fuzzy system described by (2) is asymptotically
the ordinary control theory, are defined. In Section IV, we stable in the large if there exists a common positive definite
develop a control system for backing up a computer simulated matrix P such that
truck-trailer model. We show that the designed fuzzy controller
guarantees stability of the control system under a condition.

11. BASICSTABILITYCONDITION for i = 1,2, . . . , T , that is, for all the subsystems.
AND WEAK STABILITY CONDITlON The proof of this theorem will be given in Appendix A.
This theorem is reduced to the Lyapunov stability theorem for
The fuzzy system, proposed by Takagi and Sugeno [lo],
linear discrete systems when T = 1. Theorem 2.1 gives, of
is described by fuzzy IF-THEN rules which locally represent
course, a sufficient condition for ensuring stability of (2). We
linear input-output relations of a system. This fuzzy system
may intuitively guess that a fuzzy system is asymptotically
is of the following form:
stable in the large if all its subsystems are stable, that is, if all
+
Rule: IF z ( k ) is dli and . . . and z ( k - n 1) is d,i
its Ai’s are stable matrices. However, this is not the case in
+
THEN xi(k 1) = Aix(k) B i u ( k ) , + general: we will discuss it in Example 2.1.
where
We should notice that the BSC of (4) depends only on A;.
XT(k) = [ s ( k ) ,s ( k - l ) ,. . . , z ( k - n + l)], In other words, the BSC does not depend on wi(k).This fact
becomes a key point when weakening the BSC.
UT(k) = [ u ( k ) , u ( k - l ) , - , u ( k - m + l)],
[Example 2.11 Let us consider the following fuzzy free
system;
i = 1 , 2 , .. . ,T and T is the number of IF-THEN rules. x;(k+l)
is the output from the i-th IF-THEN rule, and d;j is a fuzzy
set. Given a pair of (x(k),u(k)),the final output of the fuzzy Rulel: I F z ( k - l ) i s A l T H E N x l ( k + l ) =Alx(k),
system is inferred as follows. Rule2: I F z ( k - l ) i s d a T H E N x 2 ( k + l ) = A2x(k),

where

X(k)T = [ z ( k )
z(k - l)],

i=l
1 0 -05
A1 = [1:0
-1.0
0 1 4 2 = 1.0 [ -0.5
0 ]
where Fig. 2 shows membership functions of dl and d 2 . Fig. 3(a)
and (b) illustrates the behavior of the following linear systems
for the inSal.‘%ondition z(0) = -0.70 and z(1) = 0.90,
+ +
respectively: x(k 1) = Alx(k) and x(k 1) = A2x(k).
These linear systems are stable since A1 and A2 are stable
dij(z(k-j+l))is the grade of membership of s ( ( k - j + l ) ) matrices. However, the fuzzy system, which consists of these
in d;j. stable linear systems, is unstable as shown in Fig. 3(c).
TANAKA AND SANO: FUZZY CONTROL SYSTEMS 121 - __ .

111. DESIGNPROBLEMS OF NONROBUST

CONTROLLER AND ROBUSTCONTROLLER
We have shown the stability conditions for fuzzy systems
in the previous section. We apply the stability conditions to
two design problems of fuzzy controllers in this section. We
consider two cases.

Fig. 2. Membership functions.

Case 1 No premise parameter uncertainty.
Case 2 Premise parameter uncertainty.

2 *25 T I
Cases 1 and 2 are related to nonrobust controller design and
robust controller design, respectively. As shown in Section 11,
the final output of a fuzzy system is calculated by (1) if it has
1.5 no PPU, that is, (Case 1). Conversely, if it has PPU, that is,
(Case 2), the final output is calculated by
1

0.5

- 0
Y
1

-0.5
i=l
-1
-1.5 where Aw;(lc) denotes unknown PPU. A w ; ( k )is a value such
that
- 2

Fig. 3. (a) Behavior of Alx(k). (b) Behavior of A z x ( k ) . (c) Behavior of

fuzzy system.

Next, we weaken the BSC of (4). If it is possible, we may for all k . Equation (6) is reduced to (1) when Aw;(k) = 0
be able to find Lyapunov functions more easily. Theorem 2.2 for all k and i.
gives a weakened condition for the BSC, that is, a WSC. We stabilize the fuzzy system, (1) or (6), by the following
Theorem 2.2: Weak stability condition (WSC): The equilib- controller.
rium of a fuzzy system described by (2) is asymptotically Rule: IF z ( k ) is dli and . . . and z ( k - n 1) is Ani +
stable in the large if there exists a positive definite matrix P THEN ui(k)= F i x ( k ) ,
such that where i = 1 , 2 , . . . ,T . The final output of this fuzzy controller
is calculated by
r
s= w i ( k ) w i ( k ) { ~ T ~-~ iP}
i=l

i<j (7)
- (Ai - Aj)TP(Ai- Aj)} < 0. (5)

Prooj? It follows directly from the proof of Theorem 2.1.

As mentioned above, the BSC of (4) depends only on Ai.
The WBSC of (5) depends not only on Ai but also on w i ( k ) .
This means that the BSC is weakened. In other words, we may
be able to find a positive definite matrix P which satisfies the
WBSC even if there does not exist a common positive definite
matrix P which satisfies the BSC. We will show it in Example
3.1. However, we should notice that Theorem 2.2 gives, of
course, a sufficient condition for ensuring stability of (2).
+
where we must use w,(k) instead of wi(lc) A w ; ( k ) as a
weight of i-th rule because Awi(k)'s are unknown. Of course,
parameters of the controller are the consequent matrices F , .
We de&e two nonrobust stability conditions and two robust
stability conditions for ensuring stability of the fuzzy control
system which consists of (1) [or (6)] and (7). The former is
related to nonrobust controller design (Case 1). The latter is
related to robust controller design (Case 2).
~

1
1

-_
122 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 2, NO. 2. MAY 1%

I' A. Nonrobust Stability Conditions (Case 1 ) Proofi It follows directly from Theorem 2.1.
Assume that Aw;(k) = 0 for all k and i. By substituting The nonrobust design problem for Theorem 3.1 is to select
(7) into (l), we obtain Fj ( j = 1,2, . . . , T - ) which satisfies the NSC of (1 1) for a
common positive definite matrix P when Aj and Bj are given.
r r
Next, we weaken the NSC of Theorem 3.1 by applying
Theorem 2.2 to (10). Theorem 3.2 gives a weakened NSC,
this is, a WNSC.
Theorem 3.2: Weak nonrobust stability condition (WNSC):
The equilibrium of a fuzzy control system described by (10)
is asymptotically stable in the large if there exists a positive
definite matrix P such that
From (8),
r(T+l)/z
s= w ~ ( ~ ) ~ ~ ( ~ ) { H-TP}P H ~
i=l

+ C u i ( k ) W j ( k ) { ~-TP~+HTPH~
~, -P
i<j

- (Hi - Hj)TP(Hi- Hj)} < 0. (12)

Proof: It follows directly from Theorem 2.2.
The nonrobust design problem for Theorem 3.2 is to select
F, ( j = 1,2, . . . , T - ) which satisfies the WNSC of (12) for a
common positive definite matrix P when Aj and B j are given.
Example 3.1 shows that we can find a positive definite
matrix P which satisfies the WNSC of (12) even if there does
where not exist a common positive definite matrix P which satifies
the NSC of (1 1).
[Example 3.11 Let us consider the following fuzzy system
and fuzzy controller;
Rule : IFz(k)isAl THENxl(k + 1) = Alx(k) + B ~ u ( k )
Rule: IFz(k)isAzTHENxz(k+ 1) = Azx(k) +Bzu(k)
Without loss of generality, (9) can be rewritten as follows:
where
r(T+1)/2
vi(k)Hix(k)
1.0 0.5
0 1 B1= ]O;[
x ( k + 1) = Z=l
r(r+1)/2 (10) 1 0 - 0o'5
A2 = [l:o ] B Z=
Vi(k)
i=l
Rule : IFx(k)isA1THENul(k)= Flx(k)
where
Rule : IFx(k)isA2THENuz(k) = Fzx(k)
where
F1 = [-5.0 -3.751
F2 = [-1.72 0.431.
From A I ,A z , B1, Bz,F1, and Fa, we obtain
By applying Theorem 2.1 to (lo), we derive a nonrobust
stability condition (NSC) for the fuzzy control system, (IO),
with no PPU. Theorem 3.1 gives a NSC for (10).
Theorem 3.1: Nonrobust stability condition {NSC): The equi-
librium of a fuzzy control system described by (10) is asymp-
HZ= [-,62 -1.04
0 1
.

totically stable in the large if there exists a common positive It is found that there does not exist a common positive definite
definite matrix P such that matrix P s u e t h t

H'PH~ -P <o
HTPH; -P <o i = 1,2,3
(1 1)
since HZ is an unstable matrix. Therefore, the NSC of (1 1 )
for i = 1 , 2 , . . . , T ( T + 1)/2. is not satisfied.
TANAKA AND SANO: FUZZY CONTROL SYSTEMS

Next, we show that the WNSC of (12) is satisfied if we 2

select
1.5
2.2
[
= 0
0
1.21 1

as a common positive definite matrix P. This matrix P was

selected by the construction procedure of the literature [12]. W(k) Q-5
By substituting H1 N H3 and P into (12), we obtain
0

-0.s

where -1
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

w m
Fig. 4. Positive region of fi(w~(E),
ulz(k)).

Fig. 4 shows apositive region such that fl(wl(k), wz(k)) > 0.

It is found from Fig. 4 that
fl(Wl(k), WZ(k)) >0
when 0 5 wl(k) 5 1 and 0 5 w ~ ( k )5 1. This means
a<O and axp-yxy>O. that the WNSC of (12) is satisfied for 0 5 q ( k ) 5 1 and
0 5 wz(k) 5 1, that is, for any fuzzy sets dl and d z .

B . Robust Stability Conditions (Case 2 )

By substituting (7) into (6), we obtain
T T

where
G;j = Ai + BiF,
Without loss of generality, (13) can be rewritten as follows.
T X T

CVi(k)HiX(k)
i=l
x(k+1) = TxT (14)
CWi(k)
i=l
into the above equation, we obtain where
H(;-l)XT+'j = Gi'j
fl(Wl(k),WZ(k)) =
+
1.06w?(k) 6.75w:(k)w2(k) v(i-l)XT+j(k) = (wi(k) + AwZ(k))wj(k)
+ 9.62w7(k)wg(k) for all i and j. By appling Theorem 2.1 to (14), we derive a
robust stability condition (RSC) for the fuzzy control system
- 5.29w:(k)w;(k)
(14) with PPU. Theorem 3.3 gives a RSC for (14).
- 18.4wf(k)w;(k) - 5.29w:(k)wE(k) Theorem 3.3: Robust stability condition (RSC): The equi-
+ 9.62w;(k)w:(k) librium of .,a, fuzzy control system described by (14) is
+ 6 . 7 5 ~ 1 ( k ) d ( k+) 1.06w;(k) asymptogally stable in the large if there exists a common
positive definite matrix P such that
where ; P<o
H ~ P H- (15)
for i = 1,2;..,7- x T.
124 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MAY 19%
--

given. By introducing AR and VR, robust stability for the

- WRSC - fuzzy system with PPU can be defined. Definition 3.1 shows
the definition of robust stability. We will concretely explain
how to find AR and V R in Example 3.2.
[Definition 3.11 Assume that AR and V R denote an ad-
missible region and a variation region for a fuzzy system with
PPU, respectively. If the AR perfectly includes the VR, that
is,

V R G AR (17)

it is said that the fuzzy system with PPU is robust stability.

[Definition 3.21 If
-NSC - VR1 C VR2 C AR
WNSC it is said that a fuzzy system (FS1)with VR1 is more robust
than a fuzzy system ( F S 2 )with VR2, that is, a stability margin
Fig. 5 . Relation among NSC, WNSC, RSC, and WRSC. of the FS1 is larger than that of the FSz.
Example 3.2 gives a simple example for robust stability.
Proo$ It follows directly from Theorem 2.1. [Example 3.21 Let us consider the following fuzzy system
The robust design problem for Theorem 3.3 is to select and fuzzy controller:
F, ( j = 1 , 2 , - . ., T ) which satisfies the RSC of (15) for a
common positive definite matrix P when A, and B, are given.
+ 1) = A l x ( k ) + B l u ( k )
Rule : I F x ( k ) i s d 1 T H E N x l ( k
It is clear that (15) implies (11). Rule : I F x ( k ) i s d 2 THENxa(k + 1) = Azx(k) + Bau(k)
Next, we weaken the RSC of Theorem 3.3 by applying where
Theorem 2.2 to (14). Theorem 3.4 gives a weakened RSC,
that is, a WRSC. 1.0 0.5
Theorem 3.4: Weak robust stability condition (WRSC): The
equilibrium of a fuzzy control system described by (14) is
asymptotically stable in the large if there exists a positive
definite matrix P such that
rxr
Rule : I F x ( k ) i s d 1 THENul(k) = F l x ( k ) ,
s = C v , ( k ) v , ( k ) { ~ T-~P)
~,
2=1
Rule : I F x ( k ) i s d z T H E N u z ( k ) = Fzx(k),
+C~,(~)V,(~){HTPH,
- P + HTPH, - P where
F1 = [-5.0 -3.751
- (H, - H,)TP(H, - H,)} < 0. (16)
F2 = [-2.5 0.631.
Proofi It follows directly from Theorem 2.2.
Fig. 6 shows membership functions of the fuzzy sets dl and
The robust design problem for Theorem 3.4 is to select
z , FFz,
d 2 . From A ~ , A ~ , B ~ , B and ~ , we obtain
F, ( j = 1,2, , r ) which satisfies the WRSC to (16) for
a common positive definite matrix P when A, and B, are
given. Of course, (16) implies (12).
Fig. 5 shows the relation among four conditions: NSC,
WNSC, RSC, and WRSC.
H 2 = [ 0.5
1 0.63
0 3. H3= [;’ i2].

C . Admissible Region and Variation Region It is found that there does not exist a common positive definite
To introduce robust stability, we define admissible region matrix P such that
and variation region, which correspond to stability margin in
the ordinary control theory, from the WRSC of Theorem 3.4.
HTPH~ - P < o i = i,2,3,4
When a positive definite matrix P is given, by substituting H; since H2 and H3 are unstable matrices. Therefore, the RSC
and q ( k ) into (16) and by solving (16) for Aw;(k), we can of (15) is rst .tatisfied.
find an admissible region (AR) of Aw;(k)’s which guarantee Next, let us find an admissible region of Aw,(k)’s which
stability of the fuzzy system, (14), with PPU. On the other satisfies the WRSC of (16). Assume that
hand, we can find a variation region (VR) of Awi(k)’s, which
shows model error between a real system and an approximated
fuzzy model, if a mathematical model of the real system is
P= [:: 102].
 TANAKA AND SANO: FUZZY CONTROL SYSTEMS

'tx
1
1

0.5

0 x(k)
0 5
-0.5
Fig. 6. Membership functions.

This matrix P was selected by the construction procedure of -1

the literature [12]. By substituting H1 w H4 and-P into (16), 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
we obtain w 1(k)

Fig. 7. Negative region of g i ( w ( k ) . w i ( k ) ) .

s=[I; I: 4
L
r - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - -- .- -- .-

where
0.5

(Y = -w?(k) - 0.45v;(k) + 1.2~32(k) -

Awl&) 0
- 2211(k)W2(k) - 2211(k)W3(k) - 4.2W2(k)W3(k)
- 2Vi(k)V4(k) - 2V2(k)V4(k) - 2%(k)v4(k)
-0.5
p = - l . O S ~ f ( k ) - 0.34~;(k) - 7 . 6 ~ $ ( k-) l.OGv~(k)
- 3.OgVl(k)V~(k)- 0.20Vl(k)V3(k) - 2.13Ul(k)'U4(k)
-1
- 7.9oVz(k)v3(k) - 3.09~2(k)V4(k)- 0.20W3(k)V4(k),
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y =0.69w;(k) + 4.40~,2(k)- O.28vl(k)~2(k) Wl(k)
+ 0.55vl(k)~3(k)- 3.58vz(k)v3(k) Fig. 8. Positive region of Y Z ( U > ~ ( u~' )i (. k ) )
+
- 0.28v2(k)v4(k) 0.55?&(k)v4(k).

into the above equations with respect to Q , P , Y and by

In order that S is negative definite matrix, it must be satisfied w 2 ( k )and Aw2(k), we can derive
that g l ( w l ( k ) ,Awl(k)) = -1.0 + 0.55Aw:(k)
- 1.Iwl (k)Awl ( k )

(Y<O and ( Y X , O - Y X Y > O . + l . l w l ( k ) A w f ( k ) + 0.55wT(k)

+ 0.55wf(k)Aw,2(k) - l . l w t ( k )
+ l.lw;(k)Awl(k) + 0.55wf(k)
To obtain a graphical image of an admissible region which
guarantees robust stability, we assume that
g 2 ( ~ 1 ( k )Awl(k))
. +
= 1.06 0.96Awl(k) - 2 . 3 4 A ~ f ( k )
- 0.96wl(k) 5.65wl(k)Awl(k) +
- 4.69wl(k)Aw:(lc) - 1.38wf(k)
- 2.34wf(k)Aw?(k) 4.69w;(k) +
- 4 . 6 9 ~ ; ( k ) A w l ( k ) - 2.34wf(k)

g l ( w l ( k ) , A w l ( k ) ) < 0. Fig. 8 shows a positive

region such that g2(w1(k),Awl(k)) > 0. The AR, which
guarantees robust stability, is intersection region of the
negative region and the positive region. Fig. 9 shows the AR.
126 IEEE TRANSACTTONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS. VOL. 2. NO. 2. MAY 1994 - __ .

4 F - - - - - - - - - - - ---------_---

-1 -
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Wl(k)

Fig. 9. Admissible region ( A R ) for robust stability.

1

Fig. 1 1 .
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Wl(k)

Variation region ( V R ) for case b).

1

we obtain

0 . 5- I\l
I
Awl(k) = 1 - ~ l ( k ) ,
+
Awl(k) = - i ~ ( k ) 59 - wl(k),
x(k)< 4
4 <x(k)5 9

Awl(k)oPm
Admissble region ] Awl(k) = - ~ 1 ( k ) . 9 <x(k)
By substituting
Ai(x(k)) = w i ( k ) = 1, x(k)< o
-0.5 A l ( ~ ( k ) =) w l ( k ) = - ; z ( k ) + 1, 0 <x(k)2 5

U -1
0 0 . 2 0.4 0.6 0 . 8 1
Ai(x(k)) = w i ( k ) = 0,
into the above equations and by eliminating x ( k ) , we can
derive
5 <x(k)

W W Awl(k) = 1 - wl(k) 0.2 < Wl(k) I 1

Fig. 10. Variation region ( V R ) for case a). Awl(k) ~ 0 . 8 , 0 < Wl(k) 5 0.2
Awl ( k ) E [0,0.8] Wl(k) =o
Let us consider robust stability for three cases of fuzzy From the above relation between wl(k) and Awl(k), we
systems with different premise parameter uncertainty; obtain the V R for this case. Fig. 11 shows the V R . By
Casea) Awl(k) = 0 comparing the AR in Fig. 9 with the V R in Fig. 11, V R C
AR. Therefore, this control system is robust stability.
Caseb) wl(k) + Awl(k) = Al(z(k) + 4) In Case c),
Casec) wl(k) + Awl(k) = Al(x(k) - 4) Awi(k) = A i ( x ( k ) - 4) - Ai(x(k))
for all k. Case a) means that the fuzzy system has no PPU. = A l ( x ( k ) - 4) - wl(k).
In order to check robust stability defined in Definition 3.1, we From
need to find the V R for each case. Fig. 10 shows the V R
for the Case a). In this case, the V R becomes a straight line A l ( z ( k ) - 4) = O , x ( k ) < -4
(Awl(k) = 0) because of no PPU. By comparing the AR in A l ( z ( k ) - 4) = - ; ~ ( k ) ;,+ -4 < x ( k ) 5 1
Fig. 9 with the V R in Fig. 10, V R c AR. Therefore, this A l ( z ( k ) - 4) = 1, 1<x(k)
control system is robust stability.
In Case b), in the same way as the Case b), we obtain
AWl(k) = -W1(k), 0 5 wl(k) 5 0.8
~ 1 ( k=
) -0.8 0.8 < wi(k) < 1
Awl(k) E [-0.8,0]. ~ l ( k=
) 1.
From
From the relation, we obtain the V R for Case c).
di(z(k) + 4) = 1, ~ x(k) < 4 Fig. 12 shows the V R . By comparing the AR with the
V R ,V R p‘ AR. For example, when z ( k ) = 1,wl(k) = 0.8
+
A l ( ~ ( k ) 4) = - ; z ( k ) + g, 4 <z(k)5 9
and Awl(k) = -0.8, that is, (0.8, -0.8) which corresponds
+
A i ( ~ ( k ) 4) = O , 9 <z(k) to the point “ P” in Fig. 12. This point “P”does not belong
 TANAKA AND S A N 0 FUZZY CONTROL SYSTEMS
127 - -- .

0.5
I Admissbleregion ]

-
x3
Awi(k) 0
x3
-0.5

-1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 ..........._..
V-q
‘ L .!I
w m
Fig. 12. Variation region (VR) for case c). Fig. 14. Truck-trailer model and its coordinate system.

x(k) backing up control can be perfectly achieved from all initial

2.5 T positions.
2

1 .5
A . Models of a Truck-Trailer
We use the truck-trailer model formulated by Ichihashi [71
1
in this simulatiofl. After simplifying the truck trailer-model, we
0.5 approximate the simplified model by a fuzzy model with PPU.
0 Ichihashi used the following truck-trailer model.
-0.5 +
zo(k + 1) = z 0 ( k ) U . t/Z . tan [ ~ ( k ) ] (18)
-1 Zl(k) = z o ( k ) - d k ) (19)
-1.5 + +
z2(k 1) = z 2 ( k ) v . t / L . sin [ z l ( k ) ] (20)
5 3 ( k + 1) = z 3 ( k ) + U . t . cos [Zl(k)]
-=- case (a)
-2.5 case (b)
+
. sin [ { z z ( k+ 1) 22(k)}/2] (21)
5 4 ( k + 1) = Q ( k ) + U . t . cos [ X l ( k ) ]
-3 -+- case (c)
+ +
. cos [ { z 2 ( k 1) z2(k)}/2] (22)
Fig. 13. Control results.
where

to the AR. Therefore, robust stability may not be guaranteed

in this case. angle of truck
x0(k):
Fig. 13 shows control results for x(0) = z(1) = 0.5. It is angle difference between truck and trailer
Xl(k):
found from Fig. 13 that the control system of Case c) is not 4k): angle of trailer
asymptotically stable in the large. vertical position of rear end of trailer
x3(k):
54(k): horizontal position of rear end of trailer
u(k): steering angle
I v . ROBUSTCONTROL OF A TRUCK-TRAILER
We have shown an analysis technique of robust stability in
Section 111. In this section, we apply the analysis technique 1 is the length of truck, L is the length of trailer, t is sampling
to backing up control of a computer simulated truck-trailer. time, and ‘U is the constant speed of backing up. In this paper,
It is well known that backing up control of a truck-trailer is 1 = 2.8 [m], L = 5.5 [m], ‘U = -1.0 [ d s ] , and t = 2.0 [SI.
very difficult since its dynamics is nonlinear and unstable. With respect to ~ ~ ( l c 90 ) , [deg] and -90 [deg] correspond
Some papers have reported that learning controls such as to two “jackknife” positions. Fig. 14 shows the truck-trailer
fuzzy control, neurtal control, and both of them [4]-[7] realize model and its coordinate system.
backing up control of a computer simulated truck-trailer. Let’s simplify the Ichihashi’s model. If z 1 ( k ) and u ( k ) are
However, as far as we know, these studies have not analyzed always sfii;aikralues, the Ichihashi’s truck-trailer model can be
stability of the control system. It is, in practice, important to simplified as follows.
guarantee stability of control system. Our final goal in this
simulation is to design a fuzzy controller such that the control
system is asymptotically stable in the large, that is, such that
128 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 2. NO. 2, MAY 1994 - -. -

generally become complex, that is, that fuzzy sets represented

by 6 1 and w2 are not always unimodal and normal. As pointed
out in Zadhe's papers [14]-[16], fuzzy sets can be regarded as
linguistic variables. This is the most important feature when
applying fuzzy sets to real systems. In general, normal and
unimodal (simple) fuzzy sets are required to represent concept
of lingustic variables such as big and very high, more or less
Of course, the dynamics of this simplified model may not old and so on. In this approach, the important feature is lost
perfectly agree with that of the Ichihashi's model when the although it realizes an exact approximation. On the other hand,
value of zl(k) or ~ ( k is ) a large value. We will consider in Tanaka and Sano's approach [ l l ] , normal and unimodal
influence of the model error in the simulation. fuzzy sets are used in premise parts although it does not always
In the case of backing up control, the controlled variable realize an exact approximation. We will show later that, by
2 4 ( k ) is not necessary, because the purpose of our control
introducing concept of PPU, this approach also realizes an
is to back up a truck-trailer along a desired trajectory (the
-
straight line of x 3 ( k ) = 0 ) , that is, to regulate q ( k ) 2 3 ( k )
by manipulating the steering angle U ( k ) .
exact approximation, that is, non-linear systems can be exactly
described by fuzzy models with PPU.
Let us approximate the simplified model by a fuzzy model.
From (23), (24), and (25), we obtain From the above discussion with respect to sine function,
+
~ 1 ( k 1) = (1- W . t / L ) z l ( k )+ W . t / l . ~ ( k ) . (28)
On the other hand, from (25) and (26),
53(k + 1) = 2 3 ( k )+v .t .sin [ ~ ( k+v.t/{2L}
) '51 ( k ) ] . (29) Therefore,

Therefore, the simplified model can be described by (28), (25),

and (29). We should notice that (29) has nonlinearity.
Next, we approximate the simplified model by a fuzzy
model. A fuzzy approximation method, proposed by Tanaka
and San0 [ 111, is used to approximate the simplified model. As The left-hand side and the right-hand side of the inequality
mentioned above, (29) has nonlinearity because its second term
is represented by sine function whose value changes according
+
correspond to ~ ( k ) 'U . t/{2L} . ~ ( k =) 0 and ~ ( k ) +
v . t/{2L} . z l ( k ) = 180" or -180" (T (rad) or -T (rad),
to the value of 2,(k)+w.t/{2L).~l(k). We should notice that respectively. Therefore, when
any sine function can be exactly described by a fuzzy model.

O 5 sin(z) 5 X , -T 5x5n
x2(k) + t/{2L} . z l ( k ) O[deg],

the sine function can be exactly described by the state equation of the simplified model is approximated by

where y1 = 0, y2 = x and
5i=l i=li
GiYi/&W

61,2212 E [0,1], that is,

, "
I" :1
+
U2 . t2
1

This means that the sine function can be interpolated by using

y1 and y2. By solving the above equation for Gi,we can obtain On the other hand, when
the membership value for each X. Assume that Gl 6 2 = 1. + Zz(k) +W.t/{2L} .Xl(k)
Then, since
= 180" or - 1 8 0 " ( ~ (rad) or -T (rad))
61yl + (1- G1)y2 = sin (x)
the state equation of the simplified model is approximated by
we obtain
sin (x)- y2 sin (x)- x sin (x)
=I--
I

w1= -
Y l - Y2 -X X
- sin(s)

[3
w2 =-.
X
Kawamoto [13] has reported that nonlinear models can be
exactly described by fuzzy models using this idea. A disad- + .(IC).

vantage of this approach is that fuzzy sets in premise parts

TANAKA AND SANO: FUZZY CONTROL SYSTEMS 129 - -. .

However, we must notice that ( 3 2 ) is uncontrollable. There- about x (rad.) or - R (rad.)

fore, a control law cannot be uniquely determined in this case.
To avoid it, we approximate the simplified model for
.c2(k) + v . t / { 2 L } .Zl(k)
= 179.997[deg] or -179.997[deg] (33)
instead of v.t
X2(k>+ZXl(k)
z p ( k ) + T J t. / { 2 L } . z l ( k ) = 180 [deg] or - 180[deg]. -n 0 n(rad.)

Then, it can be described by Fig. 15. Fuzzy sets.

[I: 3
Q ( k + 1) =
0

d . ~ . t1
0

0
because

v.t
Ix2(k) +p ( k )
(34) for
179.997' < zz(k)+ 'U. t / { 2 L } . ~ < -179.997'
l ( k )

where d = 1Op2/7r. Of course, this system is theoretically This means that the dynamics of the simplified model can
controllable. be interpolated by two linear systems, A l x ( k ) b l u ( k ) and +
From (31) and (34), a fuzzy model, which approximately
represents the dynamics of the truck-trailer, can be derived as
+
A2z(k) b 2 u ( k ) , under
follows. 179.997" < ~ 2 ( k+) TJ . t / { 2 L } . ~ l ( k<) -179.997".
Rule : If z 2 ( k ) + 1 1 . t / { 2 L } . zl(k) isabout 0 (rad). That is, for j w i ( k ) E [0,1] and all k, (36) exactly describes
+ +
thenx(k 1) = A l x ( k ) b l u ( k ) the dynamics of the simplified model.
+
Rule : If x 2 ( k ) U ' t / { 2 L } . x 1 ( k ) isabout 7r 2

(rad) or -7r (rad).thenx(k + 1) = A2x(k) + bp*u(k) CG(k){Aix(k) +biu(k)}

i=l
f ( x ( k ) . u(k))= 2 . (36)
where ~ ( k =) [zl(k),
~ z 2 ( k ) ,x 3 ( k ) ] .The consequent equa-
tions of Rule l and Rule 2 correspond to (31) and (34),
respectively. After all, the dynamics of the approximated fuzzy
model is represented by

i=l

where w , ( k ) is membership value of the fuzzy set in Rule where A , w z ( k )is a value such that
i. Fig. 15 shows the fuzzy sets of "about 0 (rad)" and
"about 7r (rad) or -7r (rad)." We define the fuzzy sets as -1 5 AW,(k) I 1.
for all i
simple triangles. The fuzzy sets are unimodal and normal,
f.
+
u i z ( k ) Awt(k) >_ 0.
for all i
however, the dynamics of the approximated fuzzy model does
not exactly describe that of the simplified model. Let us show CiWdk) + Awx(k))> 0
that an exact approximation can be realized by using a fuzzy 1=l
model with PPU instead of (35). for all k . Equation (37), a fuzzy system with PPU, exactly
The simplified model can be generally represented by describes the dynamics of the simplified model under
x(k + 1) = f ( X ( k ) , ?L(k)) 179.997' < z Z ( k ) + TJ . t / { 2 L } . ~ i ( k )< -179.997'.
where f is a nonlinear function. Then, the condition, B. Controller Design and Robust Stability Analysis
Aix(k) + biu(k) I f ( x ( k - ) . u ( k ) )I A2x(k) + b n u ( k ) We design a fuzzy controller for backing up the truck-trailer
described by (37). The main idea of the controller design is
is satisfied under
to derive each control rule so as to compensate each rule of a
179.997' < ~ 2 ( k+) T Jt./ { 2 L } . x l ( k ) < -179.997' fuzzy system. Fig. 16 shows concept of the controller design.
130 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MAY 1994 - -. -

Fuzzy System Fuzzy controller

Rule r t

into (16) by eliminating wz(k) and Awz(k), we can find an

/ / / AR of Awl(k) which satisfies the WRSC of (16). Fig. 25
Linear controllerdesign technique shows the AR.
Next, we find a VR by comparing the simplified model
Fig. 16. Concept of controller design. described by (28), (25), and (29) with the approximated fuzzy
model with PPU described by (37). Now, let us assume that
From Rule 1 and Rule 2 of the approximated fuzzy model, we u.t
derive Rule 1 and Rule 2 of fuzzy controller, respectively: = +
p ( k ) z 2 ( k ) -x1(k).
2L
(38)

Rule: +
If22(k) w-t/{2L} .z1(k)isaboutO(rad), It is sufficient to find a V R for
thenu(k) = flx(k), 0" 5 p ( k ) 5 180"
Rule : If 2 2 ( k ) +
t/{2L} . z l ( k ) isabout 7r (rad) because each membership function is symmetric with respect
or -7r (rad), thenu(k) = f2x(k), to the ordinate ( p ( k ) = 0) as shown in Fig. 15. Moreover,
where f1 and f 2 are feedback gains. We use the exact same sin ( p ( k ) ) , is also symmetric with respect to the ordinate
fuzzy sets in the premise part of the fuzzy controller. The ( p ( k ) = 0). In other words, the same V R is obtained also
purpose of controller design is to determine feedback gains for p ( k ) < 0. The membership function of the fuzzy set A1
of fi and f 2 . The following feedback gains are used in the defined in Fig. 15 is represented by
simulation:
f i l = 1.2837, f12 = -0.4139, f13 = 0.0201
when
Riccati equation for linear discrete systems was used to de- 0" 5 p ( k ) 5 180". (40)
termine these feedback gains because each consequent part is
From (30), we can derive the following equation.
represented by a linear state equation. The detailed derivation
of feedback gains f1 and f2 will be given in Appendix B. +
(wl(k) Awl(k)) . p ( k ) = sin p ( k ) . (41)
Next, we consider robust stability of the backing up control
system which consists of the simplified model and the fuzzy By solving the above equation for Awl(k), we obtain
controller. From AI, Az, bl, and b2 of the approximated
fuzzy model and f1 and f 2 of the fuzzy controller, we obtain
0.448 0.296 On the other hand, by solving (39) for p ( k ) ,
-0.364 1
0.364 -2 1
-0:14i7
0.666 0.051 -0.383 x 10-31 By substituting (43) into (42), we obtain

[-0.364
0.364
0.448
1
-2
0.296
O1
-0.014
1.
-0.364 1 V R is a region which satisfies (44) for 0 5 w1(k) < 1 and
0.116 x -.0.637 x low2 1 -1 5 Awl(k) 5 1. Fig. 26 shows the V R . The V R (the line)

H4= [ 0.666
-0.364
0.116 x
0.051
1
-0.637 x lov2
-0.383 x
0
1 1
perfectly belongs to the AR when

0.0484 < wl(k).

From (38) and (43), (45) corresponds to
(45)

We can find the AR of Awi(k)'s which satisfies the WRSC

of (16) if we select z2(k) + U .t/{2L} . z l ( k ) < 2.99 [rad] = 171.29[deg]

1
113.9 -92.61 2.540 Therefore,&t. cgntrol system at least satisfies the WRSC when
-179.29[deg] < x2(k) + z1. t/{2L}. x1(k) < 171.29[deg]
2.540 -3.038 0.5503
(46)
as a common positive definite matrix P. This matrix P was for all k. In other words, under the condition of (46), the
selected by the construction procedure of the literature [12]. designed fuzzy controller guarantees stability of the control
TANAKA AND S A N 0 FUZZY CONTROL SYSTEMS 131 . -_

Initiai, x3
posj t i o n \

!
20
lni!i!l
pas I :I \PO
\
0

-20
Fig. 17. Control result for Case 1 (simplified model).
Fig. 20. Control result for Case 4 (simplified model).

Initial VP
TABLE I
POSITIONS
INITIAL OF TRUCK-T~AILER

zl(0) [degl ~ ( 0 [degl

) ~ ( 0[ml
)
Case 1 0 0 20
Case 2 0 180 20
Case 3 -45 90 - 10
-90 135 -10

10
Case 4

1-20
Fig. 18. Control result for Case 2 (simplified model).

x3
t20 +-20
Fig. 21. Control result for Case 1 (Inchihashi’s model).
lnitiai, ~

Initial, x3

Fig. 19. Control result for Case 3 (simplified model).

Lo
system which consists of the simplified model and the fuzzy
controller, that is, the backing up control can be perfectly
achieved from all initial positions.
The line of V R is close to the straight line of A w l ( k ) = 0
in the all range of 2u1 ( I C ) . This means that the dynamics of the
approximated fuzzy system agree well that of the simplified Fig. 22. Control result for Case 2 (Inchihashi’s model).
model, that is, that a fairly good approximation is realized.
model. The following points can be pointed out from the
simulation results.
C. Simulation Results 1) The designed fuzzy controller can effectively achieve
In this simulation, we use two kinds of the controlled backing up control even from difficult initial positions
objects: the Ichihashi’s model and the simplified model. Table such as Cases 2 and 4 in both of the Ichihashi’s model
I shows four cases of initial positions used in this simulation. and the simplified model.
Case 2 and Case 4 require to turn the truck-trailer in order to 2) The dynamics of the simplified model agree well with
realize a perfect backing up control. In particular, Case 4 is thakef‘rhe Ichihashi’s model.
a jackknife position. ~
Nobody can deny the first point, because the control system
Figs. 17-20 shows simulation results for four cases of initial is asymptotically stable in the large under the condition of (46).
positions in the simplified model. Figs. 21-24 show simulation The second point shows that a fairly good approximation is
results for four cases of initial positions in the Ichihashi’s realized.
 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MAY 1%
-_
132

?O

Initial ~

-20
Fig. 23. Control result for Case 3 (Inchihashi’s model).
0 j 0.2 0.4
W1($.6
0.8 1
x3 0.0451

Fig. 26. Variation region of the truck-trailer system.

Initial
p s s i t i on\\
simulated truck-trailer which is nonlinear and unstable. By
approximating the truck-trailer by a fuzzy system with premise
parameter uncertainty and by using concept of robust stability,
we have designed a fuzzy controller which guarantees stability
of the control system under a condition. The simulation results
show that the designed fuzzy controller smoothly achieves
Fig. 24. Control result for Case 4 (Inchihashi’s model). backing up control of the truck-trailer from all initial positions.

APPENDIX A
THE PROOF OF THEOREM
2.1
A lemma is necessary in order to prove the condition of
Theorem 2.1. The proof of the lemma is given in the literature
~31.
Lemma 131 If P is a positive definite matrix such
that

-
I
L - Wk) ATPA-P<O and BTPB-P<O
0.045 1
Fig. 25. Admissible region of the truck-trailer system.
then

V. CONCLUSION
A robust stabilization problem for fuzzy systems has been A~PBB~PA - 2~ < 0. +
discussed in accordance with the definition of stability in
the sense of Lyapunov. We have considered two design
The proof of Theorem 2.1 Consider the scale func-
problems: nonrobust controller design and robust controller
tion V(x(k)) such that
design. The former is a design problem for fuzzy systems
with no premise parameter uncertainty. The latter is a design
problem for fuzzy systems with premise parameter uncertainty. V(z(lc))= xT(k)Px(k)
To realize two design problems, we have derived four stability
conditions from a basic stability condition proposed by Tanaka
and Sugeno: nonrobust condition, weak nonrobust condition, where P is a positive definite matrix. This function satisfies
robust condition and weak robust condition. We have intro- the following properties:
duced concept of robust stability for fuzzy control systems
with premise parameter uncertainty from the weak robust
condition. To introduce robust-stability, admissible region and a) V ( 0 )= 0
variation region, which oorrespond to stability margin in the b) V ( x ( k ) )> 0 for x ( k ) # 0
ordinary control theory, have been defined. Furthermore, we
have developed a control system for backing up a computer c) V(x(lc)) approaches infinity as llx(k)(l-+ 00.
 -
TANAKA AND SANO: FUZZY CONTROL SYSTEMS 133 - -. .

Next, In the case of the truck-trailer model, T is a scalar since it is

a single input system. (A, b) must be at least controllable in
AV(x(k>) order that the Riccati equation can be solved for P. By solving
= V(x(k + 1)) - V(x(k))
= XT(k + l)Px(k + 1) - xT(k)Px(k) PI = ATPlAl+ Q - ATPlbl(r + b ~ P l b l ) - l b ~ P I A l
T i r
for P1 and by substituting the P1 into

P
fi = - ( T + bTPlbl)-’bTP1Al
r ~ 10,qz
where f1 = [ f ~ ~ , f 1 2 r f 1 3 1 = ~ = 1,43 = 1, and
T = 1000, we obtain

fll = 1.2837, fi2 = -0.4139, f13 = 0.0201.

Using the same manner, we can obtain the feedback gains, f 2 ;

fil = 0.9773, f22 = -0.0709, f23 = 0.0005

where q1 = 10,q2 = 10,q3 = 0.01, and T = 1000.

REFERENCES

[l] R. Langari and M. Tomizuka, “Analysis and synthesis of fuzzy linguistic

control systems,” in 1990 ASME Winter Annual Meet., 1990, pp. 3542.
[2] S. Kitamura and T. Kurozumi, “Extended circle criterion, and stability
analysis of fuzzy control systems,” in Proc. Int. Fuzzy Engin. Symp.
where w;(k) 2 0 f o r i E {l,Z,...,r} and C;=,w;(k) > 0. ‘91, vol. 2, 1991, pp. 634643.
From the above Lemma and (4), we obtain [3] K. Tanaka and M. Sugeno, “Stability analysis and design of fuzzy control
systems,” Fuzzy Sets and Sysr., vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 135-156, 1992.
[4] F. Hara and M. Ishibe, “Simulation study on the existence of limit cycle
d) AV(x(k)) < 0. oscillation in a fuzzy control system,” in Proc. Korea-Japan Joint Conf.
Fuzzy Sfstems and Engin., 1992, pp. 25-28.
From (a)-(d), V(x(k)) is a Lyapunov function and the fuzzy [SI D. Nguyen and B. Widrow, “The truck backer-upper: An example
system (2) is asymptotically stable in the large. of self-leaming in neural networks,” in Proc. Int. Joint Con5 Neural
Networks (IJCNN-89). vol. 2, June 1989, pp. 357-363.
[6] S. G. Kong and B. Kosko, “Adaptive fuzzy systems for backing up a
truck-and-trailer,” IEEE Trans. Neural Net., vol. 3, pp. 21 1-223, March
APPENDIX B
1992.
THE DERIVATIONOF FEEDBACK GAINS [7] G. K. Park and M. Sugeno, “Learning based on linguistic instructions
using fuzzy theory,” in h o c . 8th Fuzzy System Symp., May 1992, pp.
By solving the Riccati equation, 561-564, in Japanese.
[8] M. Tokunaga and H. Ichihashi, “Backer-upper control of a trailer truck
P = ATPA + Q - ATPb(r + bTPb)-lbTPA by neuro-fuzzy optimal control,” in Proc. 8th Fuzzy System Symp., May
1992, pp. 49-52, in Japanese.
for P, we can obtain the optimal feedback control law [9] K. Tanaka and M. Sugeno, “Stability analysis of fuzzy systems using
Lyapunov’s direct method,” in Proc. ofNAFIPS’90, 1990, pp. 133-136.
[lo] T. Takagi and M. Sugeno, “Fuzzy identification of systems and its
u ( t )= - ( T + bTPb)-lbTPAx(t) = fx(t) applications to modeling and control,” IEEE Trans. Sysr., Man, and
Cyber., vol. 15, pp. 116-132, 1985.
such that the quadratic performance function [I I] K. Tanaka and M. Sano, “A design method of fuzzy servo systems,” in
Proc. 8th Fuzzy System Symp., May 1992, pp. 501-504, in Japanese.
CC [12] K. Tanaka and M. Sugeno, “Stability of fuzzy systems and construction
+
J = X ( ~ ( k ) ~ Q x ( ku) ( ~ ) ~ T u ( ~ ) ) procedure for Lyapunov functions,” Trans. JSME, vol. 58, no. 550, C,
pp. 17661772, in Japanese, 1992.
k=O [13] S. Kawamoto et al., “Construction of exact fuzzy system for nonlinear
system and its stability analysis,” in Proc. 8th Fuzzy System Symp., May
is minimized, where Q and T are a weighting matrix and a 1992, pp. 517-520, in Japanese.
weighting value, that is, [I41 L. A. Zadeh, “The concept of a linguistic variable and its application
to a p x i m a t e reasoning part 1,” Information Sciences, vol. 8, pp.

Q=

T
[“‘
>O.
0
0
42
0 :I
43
41 > 0742 > 0, and 43 >0
199-249, 1975.
[15] -, “The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to ap-
proximate reasoning part 2,” Information Sciences, vol. 8, pp. 301-357,
1975.
[16] -, “The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to
approximate reasoning part 3,” Inform. Sci., vol. 9, pp. 43-80, 1975.
134 IEEE TRANSACIIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS. VOL. 2. NO. 2, MAY 19%

Kazuo Tanaka (S’87-M’91) received the B.S. Manabu San0 (M’93) received the B.S. and MS.
and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from degrees in mechanical engineering from Kanazawa
Hosei University, Tokyo, Japan, in 1985 and 1987, University, Kanazawa, Japan, in 1973 and 1975. and
and Ph.D. degree, in systems science from Tokyo Dr.Eng. degrees in control engineering from Tokyo
Institute of Technology, in 1990, respectively. Institute of Technology, in 1983, respectively.
He is currently an Associate Professor in the He is an Associate Professor in the Mechanical
Mechanical Systems Engineering Department at Systems Engineering Department at Kanazawa Uni-
Kanazawa University. He was a Visiting Scientist versity. His research interests include fuuy l+c
in Computer Science at the University of North control, pattern recognition, and computational neu-
Carolina at Chapel Hill. He received the Young ral networks.
c Engineer Award from the Japan Society for Fuzzy
Theory and Systems in 1990, the Theoretical Papers Award at the 1990
Annual NAFTPS Meeting in Toronto, Canada, in 1990, and an Award at the
Joint Hungarian-Japanese Symposium on Fuzzy Systems and Applications in
Budapest, Hungary, in 1991, and the Young Engineer Award from the Japan
Society of Mechanical Engineers, in 1994. His research interests include
principle, analysis and design of intelligent control systems such as fuzzy
control, near0 control, evolutionary control and so on.