778 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 55, NO.

3, MARCH 2010

Consensus of a Class of Second-Order Multi-Agent Systems technique [16]. Liu et al. addressed an asynchronous discrete-time for-
With Time-Delay and Jointly-Connected Topologies mulation with fixed topology and derived conditions under which a
multi-agent system achieves cohesiveness in the presence of time-delay
Peng Lin and Yingmin Jia, Member, IEEE and uncertainty [17]. However, most of the existing results for second-
order multi-agent systems are concerned with the networks with zero
time-delay on jointly-connected topologies or nonzero time-delay on
connected topologies, and there are few results available to treat the
Abstract—This technical note investigates consensus problems of a class
of second-order continuous-time multi-agent systems with time-delay and networks with jointly-connected topologies and time-delay.
jointly-connected topologies. We first introduce a neighbor-based linear In this technical note, we study consensus problems of second-order
protocol with time-delay. Then we derive a sufficient condition in terms continuous-time multi-agent systems in a way to extend the results
of linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) for average consensus of the system. in [5]. The communication topology considered is jointly-connected
Furthermore, we discuss the case where the time-delay affects only the in-
and coupled with time-delay, different from [15], where each possible
formation that is being transmitted and show that consensus can be reached
with arbitrary bounded time-delay. Finally, simulation results are provided communication topology is required to be connected. As commonly
to demonstrate the effectiveness of our theoretical results. known, it is much harder to study consensus problems on jointly-con-
nected topologies than on connected topologies, especially when time-
Index Terms—Average consensus, jointly-connected topologies, second-
order dynamics, time-delay. delays are involved. Based on the local velocity information and the
distributed relative position information, we introduce a delayed linear
consensus protocol, and by employing a contradiction approach, we
I. INTRODUCTION derive a sufficient condition in terms of LMIs for average consensus of
the system. The condition is composed of a set of LMIs and each LMI
Consensus problems of multi-agent systems have drawn substantial corresponds to one possible connected component of the communica-
research effort from many researchers [1]–[24], due to recent techno- tion topology, making it possible to simplify the network analysis just
logical advances in communication and computation, and their impor- by studying connected components with different topology structures.
tant practical applications such as cooperative control of unmanned In addition, we also discuss the case where the time-delay affects only
vehicles and control of communication networks. In the past decade, the information that is being transmitted, and show that consensus can
many studies have been conducted on consensus problems for first- still be reached with arbitrary bounded time-delay.
order multi-agent systems [1]–[11]. In [1], Vicsek et al. proposed a The following notations will be used throughout this technical
simple model for the phase transition of a group of self-driven particles note. m denotes the set of all m dimensional real column vec-
and demonstrated by simulation that the headings of all agents con- I
tors; m denotes the m x
dimensional unit matrix; i denotes the th i
verge to a common value. In [2], Jadbabaie et al. studied the observed x
component of the vector ;
denotes the kronecker product; 1
behavior reported in [1] and analyzed the alignment of an undirected represents [1 1 1 1 1 1]T with compatible dimensions (sometimes, we
;; ;
network of agents with switching topologies that are periodically con- n
use 1n to denote 1 with dimension ); 0 denotes a zero value or a
nected. Moreover, the work of [3] and [4] extended the results of [2] zero matrix with appropriate dimensions; k 1 k refers to the standard
and presented some more relaxable conditions for consensus of infor- Euclidean norm of vectors; the symbol 3 denotes the symmetric term
mation under dynamically changing topologies. By a Lyapunov-based of a symmetric matrix; ([ ] n ) represents the Banach space of
C a; b ;
approach, Olfati-Saber et al. investigated a systematical framework of continuous functions mapping the interval [ ] into n .
a; b
consensus problems and gave conditions for average consensus of the
system with directed graphs or time-delay [5]. Recently, more atten-
tion has been paid to consensus problems for second-order multi-agent II. GRAPH THEORY AND CONSENSUS PROTOCOL
systems [12]–[20]. For example, Ren et al. proposed a second-order
protocol and provided sufficient conditions for networks with fixed and A. Graph Theory
switching topologies [14]. Founded on the work of [14], Lin et al. gave
In this subsection, we present some definitions and results in
sufficient conditions for state consensus of the system with switching
graph theory that will be used in this technical note (referring to
topologies and time-delay on connected graphs [15]. Also, Hong et
G ; ;
[25]). Let (V E A) be an undirected graph of order , where n
al. studied a leader-follower scheme with jointly-connected topolo-
; ;
V = fs1 1 1 1 sng is the set of nodes, E  V 2 V is the set of edges,
gies by a Lyapunov-based approach and related space decomposition
a
and A = [ ij ] is a weighted adjacency matrix. The node indexes
; ; ;n G
belong to a finite set I = f1 2 1 1 1 g. An edge of is denoted by
e ;
ij = (si sj ). Since the graph considered is undirected, it means that
Manuscript received February 04, 2009; revised July 02, 2009, November e e
once ij 2 E , then ji 2 E . The adjacency matrix is defined as ii = 0 a
10, 2009, November 12, 2009, and November 16, 2009. First published
a a
and ij = ji  0, where ij a > e
0 if and only if ij 2 E . The set of
February 05, 2010; current version published March 10, 2010. This work
was supported by the NSFC (60727002,60774003,90916024,60921001), the N
neighbors of node si is denoted by i = fsj 2 V : (si sj ) 2 Eg. ;
COSTIND (A2120061303), and the National 973 Program (2005CB321902). The Laplacian corresponding to the undirected graph is defined as
L l l
= [ ij ], where ii =
n ij and ij = 0 ij , 6= . Obviously,
a l a i j
Recommended by Associate Editor Z. Qu.
T j =1
P. Lin is with the Seventh Research Division and the Department of Systems
L L = for any undirected graph. A path is a sequence of ordered
and Control, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China. He is also with the
Institute of Astronautics and Aeronautics, University of Electronic Science and ; ; ; ;
edges of the form (si si ) (si si ) 1 1 1, where si 2 V . If there is
Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China (e-mail: lin_peng0103@sohu. a path from every node to every other node, the graph is said to be
com). G ; ;G
connected. The union of a collection of graphs  1 1 1 1  m , with the
Y. Jia is with the Seventh Research Division and the Department of Systems
and Control, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China. He is also with the
G
same node set V , is defined as the graph  10m , whose node set is V
and edge set is the union of the edge sets of all graphs in the collection.
Key Laboratory of Mathematics Informatics and Behavioral Semantics, Bei-
hang University, Beijing 100191, China (e-mail: ymjia@buaa.edu.cn). G ; ;G
Moreover, this collection,  1 1 1 1  m is jointly-connected if its
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TAC.2010.2040500 G
union graph  10m is connected.

0018-9286/$26.00 © 2010 IEEE

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:542 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 55, NO. 3, MARCH 2010 779

Lemma 1: [25] If the undirected graph G is connected, then its Since the graph G is undirected, we have 1T L = 0 and L 1 = 0
Laplacian L has a simple zero eigenvalue (with eigenvector 1) and all by Lemma 1. Thus, 1T [(In
A)(t) 0 (L
B)(t 0 )] = 0, i.e.,
n (x_ (t) + v_ (t)) = 0, which implies  = (1=2n) n (x (t) +
its other eigenvalues are positive and real. i=1 i i i=1 i
Lemma 2: Consider the matrix Cn = nIn 0 11T . Then there vi (t)) is an invariant quantity. Let (t) = (t) 0 1. Then the system
exists an orthogonal matrix Un 2 n2n such that UnT Cn Un =
diagfnIn01 ; 0g nand p
the last column of Un is 1= n. Given a
(4) can be transformed into

matrix D 2 2n such that 1T D = 0 and D1 = 0, then _ = (In

A)(t) 0 (L
B)(t 0 )
(t) (5)
UnT DUn = diagfUnT DUn ; 0g, where Un denotes the first n 0 1 with the initial condition (s) = (0), s 2 (01; 0]. Evidently,
columns of Un .
i=1 i (t) = 0. Also, if t!
lim (t) = 0, then t!lim (t) = 1, i.e.,
2n
+1 +1
B. Consensus and Protocol lim x
t!+1 i n
(t) = lim
t!+1 i
v (t) =  , which implies lim x (t) =
tn!+1 i
(1=n) i=1 (xi (0) + vi (0)=k1) = (1=n) i=1 xi (0) and
Suppose that the multi-agent system under consideration consists of
n agents. All these agents share a common state space . At each time, lim v (t) = 0 for any i 2 I . That is, average consensus is
t!+1 i
each agent updates its current state based upon the information received achieved.
from its neighbors. Undirected graphs are used to model communica-
tion topologies. Each agent is regarded as a node. Each edge (sj ; si ) or III. MAIN RESULTS
(si ; sj ) corresponds to an available information link between agent si Consider an infinite sequence of nonempty, bounded and contiguous
and agent sj . In reality, the communication topology usually switches time-intervals [tr ; tr+1 ), r = 0; 1; 1 1 1, with t0 = 0 and tr+1 0 tr 
due to link failure or creation. To describe the variable topologies, T1 for some constant T1 > 0. In each interval [tr ; tr+1 ), there is a
we define a piecewise constant switching function (t) ( in short): sequence of subintervals
[0; 1] 7! P = f1; 2; 1 1 1 ; Ng, where N denotes the total number
of all possible communication undirected graphs. The communication [tr ; tr ) ; [tr ; tr ) ; 1 1 1 ; tr ; tr
graph at time t is denoted by G and the corresponding Laplacian L .
Suppose the ith agent (i 2 I) has the dynamics as follows: with tr = tr and tr = tr+1 satisfying tr 0 tr  T2 , 0 
j  mr 0 1 for some integer mr  0 and given constant T2 > 0
x_ i (t) = vi (t); such that the communication topology G switches at tr and it does
v_ i (t) = ui (t) not change during each subinterval [tr ; tr ). Evidently, there are at
most m3 = bT1 =T2 c subintervals in each interval [tr ; tr+1 ), where
(1)

where xi (t) 2 is the position state, vi (t) 2 is the velocity state,

bT1 =T2c denotes the maximum integer no larger than T1 =T2 .
and ui (t) 2 is the protocol. As in [17], we assume xi (s) = xi (0),
Remark 1: With the switching topologies defined above, the right-
hand side function of (5), (In
A)(t)0(L
B)(t0), is piecewise
s 2 (01; 0], and thus vi (s) = vi (0) = 0, s 2 (01; 0]. continuous in t for any (s) = (s) 2 C([t0; t]; 2n ), s 2 [t0; t].
We say that the protocol ui (t) solves the consensus problem
if the states of the agents satisfy lim [xi (t) 0 xj (t)] = 0, and
Thus, we need to work with a concept of weaker solution, i.e.,
t!+1 t
lim
t!+1
vi (t) = 0 , for all i; j 2 I . Furthermore, if lim xi (t) =
t!+1
(1=n) nj=1 xj (0), we say the protocol ui solves the average con- (t) = (0) + [(In
A)(s) 0 (L
B)(s 0 )] ds: (6)
sensus problem. 0
In [5], Olfati-Saber et al. gave a sufficient and necessary condition Under the initial condition (s) = (0), s 2 (01; 0], the function
for average consensus of first-order multi-agent systems with time- (6) is piecewise differentiable and satisfies (5) almost everywhere. The
delay and fixed topology. In this technical note, our main objective function (6) is also absolutely continuous and provides a solution of
is to extend the work of [5] to second-order multi-agent systems with (5) in the sense of Carathéodory according to [26] and [27] (see p.55
jointly-connected topologies. To solve the consensus problem, we use of [26] and p.10 of [27]). The solution of (5) will be discussed in this
the following linear consensus protocol: sense.
Some preliminary definitions and results need to be presented before
ui (t) = 0k1 vi (t) + aij (t)[xj (t 0 ) 0 xi (t 0 )] (2) the main result of this technical note. Suppose that the (time-invariant)
s 2N (t) communication graph G in the subinterval [tr ; tr ) has l  1
where  > 0 is the time-delay, aij (t) is the adjacency weight of the
connected components with the corresponding sets of nodes denoted by
communication graph G , Ni (t) is the neighbor set of the ith agent
'1r ; '2r ; 1 1 1 ; 'rl . Then there exists a permutation matrix E 2 n2n
and 0k1 vi (t) is the local velocity negative feedback with feedback
such that
gain k1 > 0. ET L E = diag L1 ; L2 ; 1 1 1 ; Ll (7)
To simplify the analysis, we make a model transformation. Denote
and
vi (t) = 2vi (t)=k1 + xi (t);
(t) = [x1 (t); v1 (t);1 1 1 ; xn (t); vn (t)]T ; T (t)(E
I2 ) = 1 T ; 2 T ; 1 1 1 ; l T (8)

A = 0k 1 =2 k1 =2
k1 =2 0k1 =2 ; B = 2=k1 0 :
0 0 (3) where each block matrix Li 2 d 2d is the Laplacian of the corre-
sponding connected component and di denotes the number of nodes
Under the protocol (2), the closed-loop network dynamics is in 'ir . Then in each subinterval [tr ; tr ), the system (5) can be de-
composed into the following l subsystems:
_ = (In
A)(t) 0 (L
B)(t 0 )
(t)
_i (t) = Id
A i (t) 0 Li
B i (t 0 );
(4)

with the initial condition (s) = (0), s 2 (01; 0]. i = 1; 2; 1 1 1 ; l (9)

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:542 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
780 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 55, NO. 3, MARCH 2010

T 2d
where i (t) = [i 1 (t); 1 1 1 ; i 2d (t)] 2 . It is easy to see that which shows that V (t) is essentially composed of a sum of decou-
T
1T
_
i
(t)
= 0, t 2 [tr ; tr ri
1 i
= (1=2d )
2d i pled Lyapunov-Krasovskii functions of the form i (t)i (t) +
). Hence, k=1 k (t) 0 t T
_ _
is an invariant quantity in each subinterval [tr ; tr i
). Then  (t) can 0 t+ i (s)i (s)dsd corresponding to each connected com-
be decomposed into i (t) = (i (t)0ri 1)+ri 1, where 1T (i (t)0 ponent.
ri 1) = 0. In the following, we take two steps to prove the theorem.
For the ith connected component in each subinterval [tr ; tr ), Step 1) Calculating V_ (t), we get
consider a symmetric matrix 9i 2 5d 25d given by l
iT i
V_ (t) = 2  (t) Id
A  (t)
i i 1 i 1 i=1
9 11 Q
0  L
Li
B
0 01 i T i i
i T 0 2  (t) L
B  (t 0  )
9 = 4 Li 2 i i 1 (10)
3  0 2Q 0Q
t
k 0 T
3 3 0 I2d = 0 _
i ()_i ()d


0
t

A2 ) with 8
T
where 9i 11 = 8i + 8i +  (Id

i
= Id
A0 i i i
T
+ Id A  (t) 0 L B  (t 0  )
i
L
B and i
Q 2
d 2d is a matrix satisfying

i i i
2 Id
A  (t) 0 L
B  (t 0  ) :
i T
0
i
 Q = Q ; rank
i
Q =
i
d 0 1 and
i
Q 1 = 0: (11)
t
By the Newton-Leibniz formula, 0
t 
_
i ()d =  i (t)0 i (t0 ),
 
T
i T T we have
Lemma 3: Let q1 = z T ] for any y 2 d
and [ (t); y ;
2d  i   
any z 2 and H = diagfU2d ; Ud ; I2d g with U2d and 02
iT
 (t) L
i

i
B  (t 0  ) = 02
iT
 (t) L
i

i
B  (t)
T

U d as defined in Lemma 2. If Hi 9i H  i < 0, then q T 9i q1 
 1  t
2
9 k (t) 0 r 1k , where 9 < 0 is the largest nonzero eigen-
i i
i T
B _
i i ()d
+ 2  (t) L

value of 9i .
T
Proof: After simple calculations, we have 9i [1T2d ; 0T3d ] = 0
0
t

T
and 9i [0T2d ; 1dT ; 02Td ] = 0. By Lemma 2, it is easy to see that and
T
9  0 and rank(9 ) = 5d 0 2 if and only if Hi 9 H
i i i i i t
 < 0.
T i 1 1 iT i 1 0
Denote q2 = i T
ri 1T ; y T 0 (1T =d
[ (t) 0
i
) yk ; z T ] . It is
d 3 =  (t 0  ) Q

k=1  0 0
i
clear that 9 (q1 0 q2 ) = 0 and q2 is orthogonal to the null space of the 0
t
T T
matrix 9i , spanned by [1T2d ; 03Td ] and [0T2d ; 1dT ; 02Td ] . Hence 2  (t) 0  (t 0  ) 0  _
i i
i () d = 0

T i T i T i
q1 9 q1 = (q1 0 q2 ) 9 (q1 0 q2 ) + q2 9 q2 where Qi satisfies (11).
2 2
 9 k q2 k  9
i
 (t) 0
i
r 1 : (12) Consequently
l
iT i 2 i
Theorem 1: Consider a network of agents with time-delay and V_ (t) =  (t) 2 8 +  Id
A  (t)
switching topologies, where the collection of graphs in each interval i=1
t
[tr ; tr+1 ) is jointly-connected. For each subinterval [tr ; tr ), if
d 2d
i T
B _
i i ()d
there is a common constant > 0 and Q 2 i
, i = 1; 1 1 1 ; l , + 2  (t) L

satisfying (11) such that t 0

t
T T iT
Hi 9 H
i i
 < 0 (13) 0 _
i ()_i ()d 0 2 
  (t)

t 0
then average consensus can be achieved. i i
2 L
(AB )  (t 0  )
Proof: Define a Lyapunov-Krasovskii function for the system (5)
as follows: iT i T i T i
+  (t 0  ) L L
(B B ) (t 0  )
0 t t
l
V (t) =  (t) (t) +
T T
_ (s)_ (s)dsd; > 0: (14) 1 iT i 2 i
=  (t) 2 8 +  Id
A  (t)

0 t+ i=1
0
t

i T
B _
i i ()
It is easy to see that there exist positive constants 1 and 2 such that + 2  (t) L

1 k (t)k2  V (t)  2 sup k (t + )k2 , which implies that T iT

 2[02;0] 0  _
i ()_i () 0 2 
  (t) L
(AB )
i

V (t) is a positive definite decrescent function. V (t) contains two parts:

i iT i T i
one describes the current dynamics; the other describes the integral 2  (t 0  ) +   (t 0  ) L L
impact of the dynamics over the past interval [t 0 ; t]. Moreover, from T i

( B B ) (t 0  ) d: (15)
(8), V (t) can be rewritten as
0 2
l l t 1 0 4=(k1 ) 0
T Note that AB = , BT B = . It
i (s)_i (s)dsd
_
T i
V (t) =  (t) (t) +  01 0 0 0
i=1 i=1
0 t+ is clear that each nonzero term of V_ (t) and 3
i
does not

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:542 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 55, NO. 3, MARCH 2010 781

contain any component of (Id

[0; 1])i (t 0  ). Let Denote i = max
k
max
s2[t ;t ]
i
j
( k (s) 0 ri j). To proceed, we use
T
=[ (t);  (t 0  )(Id
[1; 0] );  _
i T ()] . It
i (t; ) iT iT T
the bounds  and c to discuss the following two cases:
follows that: Case 1) there exists i0 2 f1; 1 1 1 ; l g such that i =!  tr 0 tr .
l l t Suppose that i = jk i
(tb ) 0 r j, tb 2 [tr ; tr
i
],
k 2 f1; 1 1 1 ; 2d g. Since j_k (t)j < ! , then it is easy
i 1 T i i i
V_ (t) = V_ (t) + 2 3 = i (t; )9 i (t; )d:
i=1

i=1t0 to see that jki
(t) 0 r j > i + ! (t 0 tb )  0 for
i

t 2 [tr ; tb ], and jk (t) 0 ir j > i 0 ! (t 0 tb )  0

i

Recall that (13) holds if and only if 9i  0 and rank(9i ) = 5di 0 for t 2 [tb ; tr ]. Also, i 0 ! (t 0 tr )  0 for t 2
and t [i + ! (s 0 tb )]2 ds + t
t
i
2. Under the condition (13), all the eigenvalues of 9 are nonpositive. [tr ; tr ]
t
[i 0
Let max = maxf9 6= 0g < 0. (Since the number of all possible
! (s 0 tb )]2 ds  2
t
;i [i 0 ! (s 0 tr
t )] ds. Note that
undirected graphs is finite, the maximum exists.) By Lemma 3, we have
tr 0 tr  T2 . Then, from (18), we have
2
T i
i (t; )9 i (t; )  max i
 (t) 0 ri 1 : t
l 2
> 0 max
i
 (s) 0 ri 1 ds
Thus
t i=1
l t
2 t
V_ (t)  (max = ) i
 (t) 0 ri 1 d
0 i
max  (s) 0 ri 1
2
ds
i=1t0
l t
2
= max
i
 (t) 0 ri 1  0: (16) t
2
i=1
0 i
max k (s) 0 ir ds
This implies that the system (5) is stable [29]. Hence,  (t) and  (t 0 t
 ) are bounded. Also, _ (t) is bounded. That is, there exists a positive t
constant ! such that j_k (t)j < ! , k = 1; 2; 1 1 1 ; 2n. Then from (8), we 2 ds
have j_k
i
j < !, i = 1; 1 1 1 ; l , k = 1; 2; 1 1 1 ; 2di . 0 max i 0 ! s 0 tr
Step 2) In this step, we prove V (t) ! 0 as t ! +1 by contra- t
diction. Knowing that V (t) is nonincreasing and bounded below by = 0 max tr 0 tr i 0! tr 0 tr =2
2
zero, we easily see that the limit of V (t) exists, denoted by V0  0, as 3 =12
t ! +1, i.e., for any  > 0 there exists T () < +1 such that 0 max !2 tr 0 tr
 0 max!2 T23 =12 > 
0  V (t) 0 V0 <  when t > T (): (17)
which is a contradiction.
Suppose that V0 > 0. We claim that there must exist k 2 f1; 1 1 1 ; 2ng Case 2) i =! < tr 0 tr for i = 1; 1 1 1 ; l .
and tc 2 [t 0 2; t] for any time t such that jk (tc )j  c = Similar to case 1), we have  > 0 0
 =!
max (i 0 !s)2 ds 
V0 =[2n( +  2 F )], where F is the largest eigenvalue of the 3
0max i =(3!). Since  < 0maxic =(3 2 i106n3 m33 !),2then it
3
In L (AB )
A2
follows that i = max max (jk (t) 0 r j) < c=(10 nm3 ).
matrix F =
(L L ) (B B )
T
3
for all possible graphs.

k t2[t ;t
1
]
1
2 f 111 g 2 f 111 g (j (t) 0  1 (tc )j) < 2c=(102 nm3 ). In
i
Equivalently, there must exist i 1; 2; ; l , k 1; 2; ; 2d Hence, max max
and tc 2 0
[t
i
2; t] for any time t such that k (tc ) c from (8). j j k t2[t ;t ] k
other words, the states of agents that are connected to the pth agent all
fall in the interval (1 1 (tc ) 0 2c=(102 nm3 ); 1 1 (tc )+2c=(102 nm3 )).
If not, we have
0 t By an analogous method, it is not hard to see that for the next
V (t) =  (t) (t) +
T T T
 (s);  (s 0 ) F subinterval [tr ; tr ), the states of agents which are jointly-con-
0 t+ nected to the pth agent during [tr ; tr ) fall in the interval
1 2 1 2
T ( 1 (tc ) 0 4c=(10 nm3 );  1 (tc ) + 4c=(10 nm3 ) 2 2). Since
2 T T
 (s);  (s 0 ) dsd all agents are jointly-connected during [tr ; tr+2 ) and the interval
0 t [tr ; tr+3 ) has at most 3m3 subintervals, by induction, we have
< 2 nc +
2 F 4nc dsd = V0
2  V (t)
0 t+ max
k t2[t
max
;t ]
k (t) 0 1 1 (tc ) <
2c
102 nm3
3m3 <
10n
c
:

which is a contradiction. Since j1 1 (tc )j  c, then each k (t) has the same sign as 1 1 (tc ) and
Without loss of generality, we assume that j1 1 (tc )j  c, tc 2 2n k (t) 6= 0 for t 2 [tr+2 ; tr+3 ], which contradicts the fact that
k=1
[tr ; tr ) with tr > T () and the corresponding node index of 2n k (t) = 0 for any t 2 [0; +1).
1 1 (tc ) is denoted as p. k=1

Therefore, lim V (t) = 0 and lim  (t) = 0; that is, average
Take  < minf0max ! 2 T23 =12; 0max c3 =(3 2 106 n3 m33 ! )g, t!+1 t!+1
where m3 = bT1 =T2 c. It follows from inequalities (16) and (17) that consensus is achieved.
Remark 2: To analyze the stability of multi-agent systems, there
 > V tr 0V tr are many other possible approaches such as the Lyapunov-based ap-
t proaches [5], [6], [11], [15], [16] and the approaches based on the prop-
l 2 erties of matrices [2]–[4], [7]–[10], [21]. However, all these approaches
0 max
i
 (s) 0 ri 1 ds: (18) cannot be applied straightforwardly to our model in this technical note.
t i=1 Moreover, the approach proposed in Theorem 1 can be employed to

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:542 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
782 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 55, NO. 3, MARCH 2010

deal with the average consensus problem for first-order multi-agent

systems with time-delays and jointly-connected topologies.
Remark 3: Theorem 1 shows that average consensus can be
achieved with the initial condition xi (s) = xi (0), s 2 (01; 0],
i 2 I . Actually, if xi (s) is not identically equal to xi (0), s 2 (01; 0],
i 2 I , all agents can still reach consensus but the final position
state of each agent is (1=n) n i=1
(xi (0) + vi (0)=k1 ) rather than
(1=n) i=1 xi (0).
n

Remark 4: The condition in Theorem 1 is given in terms of LMIs

and each LMI corresponds to one possible connected component of
the communication topology. Note that some of the connected com-
ponents may have the same topology structure. Then we can study the
consensus problem of networks just on the connected components with
Fig. 1. Four undirected graphs.
different topology structures, which might simplify the network anal-
ysis.
Proposition 1: The condition (13) is always feasible in Qi and
for sufficiently small  if k12 > 2dmax , where dmax denotes the largest
diagonal entry of all possible L .
Proof: Denote the eigenvalues of Li as 0 = 1 < 2  1 1 1  Fig. 2. Two different topology structures of all possible connected components
d
 . of the network.
By Lemma 1, there exists an orthogonal matrix W 2 d 2d such
that WT Li W = diagf1 ; 2 ; 1 1 1 ;  g. Let Qi = yLi for some
d

constant y > 0. Recall that (13) holds if and only if 9i  0 and Proof: The proof is essentially the same as the proof of Theorem
rank(9 ) = 5d 0 2. Pre- and post-multiplying the matrix 9 with
i i i
1 taking into account Proposition 1.
diagfW
I2 ; W ; W
I2 g and diagfW
I2 ; W ; W
I2 g
T T T

respectively, and by permutation, we have (13) holds if and only if

5 = diagf51 ; 52 ; 1 1 1 ; 5d g  0 and rank(5) = 5d 0 2, where
i
IV. DISCUSSION
As an extension of the results in [5], Theorem 1 presents a sufficient
5k1 +  A
2 yk 1 0  k 1 k B condition for average consensus of the system. In [5], it is shown that
0 01
5k =
3 4 k 2 0 2yk 0yk [1 0]
the time-delay cannot be arbitrarily large, which is different from many
k recent results [6]–[10]. For example, in [6], it is assumed that the time-
3 3 0I2 = delay affects only off-diagonal terms in the differential equation and
the model is robust with respect to an arbitrary bounded time-delay. In
with 5k1 = 2 A 0 k (B + B T ) for k = 1; 1 1 1 ; di . fact, if we assume that the time-delay affects only the information that
Take  sufficiently small. It is clear that 51 is negative semi-definite is being transmitted as in [6] and use the following protocol:
and has two zero eigenvalues since 1 = 0. Hence (13) holds if and
only if 5k < 0, k = 2; 1 1 1 ; di . ui (t) = 0k1 vi (t) + aij [xj (t 0  ) 0 xi (t)] (21)
By the Schur complement lemma [28], we have 5k < 0 is equivalent s 2N (t)
to 0I2 = < 0 and
then the multi-agent system (1) can also reach consensus when the
2
A2 + 2 k BB T k
01 0 y k 2 0 time-delay is arbitrary bounded and the communication topology is
1
 2 jointly-connected. (However, in this case, the final position state of each
 k +
4( ) 2 k 2 agent cannot be obtained.) To show this, we first consider the case of
3 k
+y 
 = 0. By the variable substitution (3), the network dynamics is
1
5k1 yk
0 < 0: (19) _(t) = 8  (t) (22)
3 02yk
where 8 = In
A 0 L
B . Clearly, 8 1 = 0 holds. Take dmax <
Noting that  is sufficiently small and by the Schur complement lemma k12 =4. Then the diagonal entries of 8 are negative and the off-diagonal
again, (19) holds if 02yk < 0 and entries are nonnegative. For the case of  6= 0, the time-delay affects
only some off-diagonal terms in (22). Then from [8, Theorems 1 and
0 k (B + B T ) + y2
k
1 0
2 A < 0: (20) 2], we easily see that consensus can be achieved with arbitrary bounded
0 0
time-delay and jointly-connected topologies. As far as we know, this is
Then by choosing k12 > maxfk g and y= sufficiently small, we
the first result to extend the work of [6] to second-order continuous-
;k time multi-agent systems in the literature.
easily see that (20) holds. Also, based on Geršgorin disk theorem, In Theorem 1, we only discuss the uniform delay case. Actually, by
k 2
2dmax > maxf g. Hence (13) is always feasible for k1 > 2dmax an analogous method, the result can be extended to the nonuniform
;k
and sufficiently small  . delay case and average consensus can be achieved under the protocol
Corollary 1: Consider a network of agents with switching topolo- given by
gies in the absence of time-delay, where the collection of graphs in each
interval [tr ; tr+1 ) is jointly-connected. Then average consensus can be ui (t) = 0k1 vi (t) + aij [xj (t 0 ij ) 0 xi (t 0 ij )]
achieved if k12 > 2dmax . s 2N (t)

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:542 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 55, NO. 3, MARCH 2010 783

Fig. 3. Position trajectories of all agents. Fig. 5. Position trajectories of all agents.

Fig. 4. Velocity trajectories of all agents.

Fig. 6. Velocity trajectories of all agents.

where ij = ji , i.e., the delays in transmission between the ith
and the j th agents are identical. However, in this case, the Lya- REFERENCES
punov-Krasovskii function should be taken as
[1] T. Vicsek, A. Cziroók, E. Ben-Jacob, O. Cohen, and I. Shochet, “Novel
h
0 t type of phase transition in a system of self-deriven particles,” Phys. Rev.
( ) =  (t)(t) +
V t
T _ (s)_(s)dsd;

T
> 0 Lett., vol. 75, no. 6, pp. 1226–1229, 1995.
[2] A. Jadbabaie, J. Lin, and A. S. Morse, “Coordination of groups of
k =10 t+ mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules,” IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 988–1001, Jun. 2003.
where h  n(n 0 1)=2 and k 2 f ij ; i; j 2 Ig for k = 1; 1 1 1 ; h. [3] L. Moreau, “Stability of multi-agent systems with time-dependent
communication links,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 50, no. 2, pp.
169–182, Feb. 2005.
V. SIMULATIONS [4] W. Ren and R. W. Beard, “Consensus seeking in multi-agent systems
under dynamically changing interaction topologies,” IEEE Trans.
Numerical simulations are given to illustrate the obtained theoretical Autom. Control, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 655–661, May 2005.
results. Fig. 1 shows four different graphs each with 6 nodes. All graphs [5] R. Olfati-Saber and R. M. Murray, “Consensus problems in networks of
agents with switching topology and time-delays,” IEEE Trans. Autom.
in this figure are not connected and the weight of each edge is 0.5. The Control, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 1520–1533, Sep. 2004.
communication topology of the multi-agent system switches every 0.1 [6] L. Moreau, “Stability of continuous-time distributed consensus algo-
s in the sequence of hGa ; Gb ; Gc ; Gd ; Ga i. Suppose that all initial con- rithm,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision Control, 2004, pp. 3998–4003.
ditions are set randomly, but satisfying xi (s) = xi (0), s 2 (01; 0], [7] L. Fang and P. J. Antsaklis, “Information consensus of asynchronous
i 2 I. discrete-time multi-agent systems,” in Proc. Amer. Control Conf.,
According to Corollary 1, we take k1 = 2. From Fig. 1, we easily see
2005, pp. 1883–1888.
[8] D. Angeli and P. A. Bliman, “Extension of a result by Moreau on sta-
that all possible connected components of the network have only two bility of leaderless multi-agent systems,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision
different topology structures as shown in Fig. 2. As stated in Remark 4, Control, Eur. Control Conf., 2005, pp. 759–764.
we can study the consensus problem on the graphs G1 and G2 in Fig. 2 [9] M. Cao, A. S. Morse, and B. D. O. Anderson, “Reaching an agree-
ment using delayed information,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision Con-
instead of all possible topologies of the entire network. Calculating trol, 2006, pp. 3375–3380.
(13) on the graphs G1 and G2 , it is solved that (13) is feasible for [10] H. G. Tanner and D. K. Christodoulakis, “State synchronization in
 = 0:5. Then according to Theorem 1, average consensus is achieved local-interaction networks is robust with respect to time delays,” in
for  = 0:5. By employing the MATLAB software, we present the Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision Control, Eur. Control Conf., 2005, pp.
4945–4950.
corresponding simulation results with and without time-delay in Figs.
[11] P. Lin and Y. Jia, “Average-consensus in networks of multi-agents with
3–6. It is clear that average consensus can be asymptotically achieved, both switching topology and coupling time-delay,” Physica A, vol. 387,
although the velocity trajectories are not perfectly smooth due to the no. 1, pp. 303–313, 2008.
switching of the network topology. [12] R. Olfati-Saber, “Flocking for multi-agent dynamic systems: Algo-
In addition, we also perform simulations for the network with and rithms and theory,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 51, no. 3, pp.
without time-delay for k12 < 2dmax and find that consensus cannot be
410–420, Mar. 2006.
[13] H. Tanner, A. Jadbabaie, and G. Pappas, “Stable flocking of mobile
achieved for some values of k1 . The corresponding simulation results agents, part II: Dynamic topology,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision Con-
are omitted due to the limitation of space. trol, 2003, pp. 2016–2021.

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:542 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
784 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 55, NO. 3, MARCH 2010

[14] W. Ren and E. Atkins, “Distributed multi-vehicle coordinated control Discrete-Time PI-Nonlinear Estimation
via local information exchange,” Int. J. Robust Nonlin. Control, vol. 17,
no. 10–11, pp. 1002–1033, 2007. M. D. S. Aliyu, Member, IEEE,
[15] P. Lin, Y. Jia, J. Du, and S. Yuan, “Distributed control of multi-agent El-Kebir Boukas, Senior Member, IEEE, and
systems with second-order agent dynamics and delay-dependent com-
munications,” Asian J. Control, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 254–259, 2008. Yuvin Chinniah
[16] Y. Hong, L. Gao, D. Cheng, and J. Hu, “Lyapunov-based approach to
multiagent systems with switching jointly connected interconnection,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 943–948, May 2007. Abstract—In this technical note, exact and approximate solutions of the
[17] Y. Liu and K. M. Passino, “Cohesive behaviors of multiagent systems discrete-time suboptimal proportional-integral- -estimation problem
with information flow constraints,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. for affine nonlinear systems using finite-dimensional estimators (filters)
51, no. 11, pp. 1734–1748, Nov. 2006. are presented. Sufficient conditions for the solvability of the problem are
[18] Y. Liu, K. M. Passino, and M. M. Polycarpou, “Stability analysis of given in terms of discrete-time Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaac’s equations. For
M-dimensional asynchronous swarms with a fixed communication linear systems, it is shown that, these equations reduce to a system of
topology,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 76–95, Jan. linear-matrix inequalities. Simulation results are also presented to show
2003. the benefit of the new approach.
[19] P. Ögren, E. Fiorelli, and N. E. Leonard, “Cooperative control of mo-
bile sensor networks: Adaptive gradient climbing in a distributed envi- Index Terms— -gain, discrete-time nonlinear estimation,
ronment,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 1292–1302, Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs equations (HJIEs), linear-matrix inequalities
Aug. 2004. (LMIs), proportional-integral (PI)-estimators.
[20] L. Wang and G. Xie, “Consensus control for a class of networks of
dynamic agents,” Int. J. Robust Nonlin. Control, vol. 17, no. 10–11,
pp. 941–959, 2007. I. INTRODUCTION
[21] Z. Qu, J. Wang, and R. A. Hull, “Cooperative control of dynamical
systems with application to autonomous Vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Many researchers have considered H1 filtering techniques for
Control, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 894–911, Apr. 2008. nonlinear discrete-time systems [1], [10], [14]. As is well-known, the
[22] J. A. Fax and R. M. Murray, “Information flow and cooperative control
of vehicle formations,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 49, no. 9, pp.
H1 -filter has several advantages over the extended-Kalman filter
[2], among which are robustness towards `2 -bounded disturbances
1465–1476, Sep. 2004.
[23] R. Olfati-Saber, J. A. Fax, and R. M. Murray, “Consensus and coop-
and uncertainties, as well as the fact that it is derived from a com-
eration in networked multi-agent systems,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 95, no. 1, pletely deterministic setting. Moreover, previous statistical nonlinear
pp. 215–233, Jan. 2007. filtering techniques developed using minimum-variance as well as
[24] W. Ren, R. W. Beard, and E. M. Atkins, “A survey of consensus maximum-likelihood [3], [4], [7] criteria are infinite-dimensional and
problem in multiagent coordination,” in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., too complicated to solve the filter differential equations. On the other
2005, pp. 1859–1864.
[25] C. Godsil and G. Royle, Algebraic Graph Theory. New York:
hand, the nonlinear H1 -filter is easy to derive, and relies on finding
Springer-Verlag, 2001. a smooth solution to a discrete-time Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaac’s (DHJI)
[26] J. Hale, Theory of Functional Differential Equations. New York: partial-differential-equation (PDE) or DHJIE in short, which can be
Springer-Verlag, 1977. found using polynomial approximations or other methods.
[27] D. Liberzon, Theory of Functional Differential Equations. Boston, Recently, the authors have proposed two-degrees-of-freedom
MA: Birkhäuser, 2003.
(2-DOF) proportional-derivative (PD) filters for discrete-time non-
[28] B. Boyd, L. E. Ghaoui, E. Feron, and V. Balakrishnan, Linear Matrix
Inequalities in System and Control Theory. Philadelphia, PA: SIAM, linear systems [1]. The advantages of such an approach over the 1-DOF
1994. filters have also been demonstrated. Therefore, in this note, we present
[29] K. Gu, V. L. Kharitonov, and J. Chen, Stability of Time-Delay Sys- another class of 2-DOF estimators, namely, proportional-integral (PI)
tems. Boston, MA: Birkhäuser, 2003. estimators for discrete-time nonlinear systems. We expect that based
on experience with the corresponding controllers, this estimator will
also have better performance than the P-estimator, especially in terms
of steady-state estimation error. Furthermore, it is always desirable
for a controlled system to have a high-gain at low-frequency and
low-gain at high-frequency. This is however not always available with
certain controllers, but can be compensated for using proportional-in-
tegral-filter (PIF) [11]. Moreover, this class of estimators has been
considered in other [5], [8], [12] for linear systems. However, to the
best of our knowledge, the nonlinear problem has not been discussed
in any reference.
Accordingly, we shall first give an exact solution to the PI-estimation
problem which is implicit, and then derive approximate solutions which
are more amenable to computations. The results are also extended to
 -integrator or P I n -estimators. Even though these estimators may be
n

Manuscript received May 04, 2009; revised August 22, 2009. First published
February 05, 2010; current version published March 10, 2010. Recommended
by Associate Editor X. Chen.
M. D. S. Aliyu and E. K. Boukas are with the Department of Mechanical
Engineering, Ecole Polytechnic de Monreal, QC H3C 3A7, Canada (e-mail:
mds.aliyu@polymtl.ca; el-kebir.boukas@polymtl.ca).
Y. Chinniah is with the Department of Mathematics and Industrial Engi-
neering, Ecole Polytechnic de Monreal, QC H3C 3A7, Canada (e-mail: yuvin.
chinniah@polymtl.ca).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TAC.2010.2040501

0018-9286/$26.00 © 2010 IEEE

Authorized licensd use limted to: IE Xplore. Downlade on May 13,20 at 1:542 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.