Re: matrix exponential used by the control package
Torsten Lilge <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gnu.octave.maintainers |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 2020-07-21 at 07:22 +0200, Torsten Lilge wrote: > On Mon, 2020-07-20 at 17:22 -0400, Doug Stewart wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 4:38 PM Torsten Lilge1960 Blue Heron Drive, > > < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > the control package uses the SLICOT function mb05nd [1] > > > (__sl_mb05nd__()) instead of the octave function expm() for the > > > matrix > > > exponential. The problem with mb05nd is that when discretizing a > > > static > > > gain in state space results in > > > > > > > > [a,b,c,d] = ssdata (c2d (ss (tf (1,1)),1)) > > > a = [](1x0) > > > b = 0 > > > c = [](1x0) > > > d = 1 > > > > > > Instead, using expm() leads to the correct result > > > > > > > > [a,b,c,d] = ssdata (c2d (ss (tf (1,1)),1)) > > > a = [](0x0) > > > b = [](0x1) > > > c = > > > [](1x0) > > > d = 1 > > > > > > Are there any reasons against using expm()? > > > > > > Torsten > > > > > > > > > [1] http://slicot.org/objects/software/shared/doc/MB05ND.html > > > > > > > > > > Is there a difference in speed? > > If it is slower then we should look and see where the '0" is coming > > from. > > __sl_mb05nd__ is a compiled function and - at least on my system - > approx. 20 times faster. > Hello Doug, The routine mb05nd does not accept input dimensions 0x0 for an empty matrix but it accepts (1x0) which is forced by the wrapper sl_mb05nd for empty matrices. I have therefore pushed changeset 7a8204f62fe1 to the control package which adds the following test to sl_mb05nd: + if (a.numel () == 0) + { + // given matrix is empty, just return the empty matrix, + // otherise mb05d would make a [](1x0) matrix from it + retval(0) = a; + retval(1) = a; + return retval; + } I have also prepared a patch for adding the first order-hold method 'foh' to c2d. This enables us to use 'foh' in lsim() or ramp(). Should I push this to the default branch or should I create a feature branch for this? Torsten