 Research
 Open Access
On stability analysis of discretetime uncertain switched nonlinear timedelay systems
 Marwen Kermani^{1}Email author and
 Anis Sakly^{1}
https://doi.org/10.1186/168718472014233
© Kermani and Sakly; licensee Springer. 2014
 Received: 13 March 2014
 Accepted: 4 August 2014
 Published: 9 September 2014
Abstract
This paper addresses the stability analysis problem for a class of discretetime switched nonlinear timedelay systems with polytopic uncertainties. These considered systems are characterized by delayed difference nonlinear equations which are given in the state form representation. Then, a transformation under the arrow form is employed. Indeed, by constructing an appropriated common Lyapunov function, and also by resorting to the Kotelyanski lemma and the Mmatrix proprieties, new delayindependent stability conditions under arbitrary switching law are deduced. Compared with the existing results of switched systems, those obtained results are formulated in terms of the unknown polytopic uncertain parameters, explicit and easy to apply. Moreover, this method allows us to avoid the search for a common Lyapunov function which is a difficult matter. Finally, a numerical example is presented to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.
Keywords
 discretetime switched nonlinear timedelay systems
 polytopic uncertainties
 global robust asymptotic stability
 Mmatrix properties
 Kotelyanski lemma
 arrow matrix
 arbitrary switching
1 Introduction
Switched systems are an important class of hybrid systems. Generally speaking, a switched system is composed of a family of subsystems described by differential or difference equations and a switching rule orchestrating the switching between the subsystems that have attracted much attention in control theory and practice during recent decades. Switched systems can be efficiently used to model many practical systems which are inherently multimodel in the sense that several dynamical systems are required to describe their behavior. For example, many physical processes exhibit switched and hybrid nature. Switched systems have strong engineering background in various areas and are often used as a unified modeling tool for a great number of realworld systems, such as power electronics, chemical processes, mechanical systems, automotive industry, aircraft and air traffic control and many other fields [1–6].
Undoubtedly, stability is the first requirement for a system to work properly; thus, stability analysis of switched systems presents a theoretical challenge, which has attracted growing attention in the literature [1–37]. However, stability under arbitrary switching is a fundamental issue and an important topic in the design and analysis of these systems. To solve this matter, many effective methods have been developed [11, 15, 16, 24]. Within this framework, we are required to find conditions that guarantee asymptotic stability under arbitrary switching rules. Indeed, it is well known that the existence of a common Lyapunov function [7–9] for all subsystems is sufficient to guarantee the stability under arbitrary switching law. However, finding such a function is often difficult even for discretetime switched linear systems [37]. Consequently, this problem becomes more complicated for discretetime switched nonlinear systems, and relatively fewer results have been reported in this context.
On the other hand, to avoid the problem of the existence of a common Lyapunov function, some attention has been widely given to seeking conditions that guarantee the stability of the switched systems under restricted switching. Although many efficient approaches and important results have been proposed for this alternative, such as the multiple Lyapunov function approach [10] and average dwell time method [11, 12], stability under arbitrary switching, which is considered in this work, remains most preferable for practical systems. Indeed, it offers great flexibility and it allows us to achieve other performances for designing a control law along stability maintained.
As is well known, timedelay phenomena are usually confronted in many engineering systems [1, 16–24, 28–30, 38, 39], such as chemical engineering systems, hydraulic systems, inferred grinding model, neural network, nuclear reactor, population dynamic model and rolling mill. Recently, stability analysis for discretetime switched timedelay systems has been investigated [1, 16–24, 28–30].
It is noteworthy that there are two divisions in the recent literature addressing the stability analysis of timedelay systems, namely delayindependent criteria and delaydependent criteria. Therefore, in view of delayindependent criteria, this paper will try to aid the stability analysis under arbitrary switching law.
On the other hand, when practical systems are modelled, uncertainties of system parameters are often included. Therefore, most of the systems refer to uncertainties in real applications. Indeed, basically, two kinds of uncertainties are simultaneously encountered in the open literature, widely polytopic uncertainties and normbounded. From the practical viewpoint, it is important to investigate switched systems with uncertain parameters [19, 20, 24, 28–30, 33, 36]. Thus, polytopic uncertainties exist in many real systems, and most of the uncertain systems can be approximated by systems with polytopic uncertainties [34]. On the other hand, the polytopic uncertain systems are less conservative than systems with normbounded uncertainties [35].
Up to now, discretetime uncertain switched timedelay systems have received more and more attention. Although many interested and significant results on stability problems for those systems have been established [19, 20, 26, 28–30], those previous works were mainly focused on several hot topics of Lyapunov stability theory and most of them were interested in the linear case [19, 22–26, 28–30]. Thus, due to the complexity of switched nonlinear systems, unfortunately, the available results on the stability of uncertain discretetime switched nonlinear timedelay systems are limited [20].
Motivated by these mentioned shortcomings for the existing results as well as in the sense of various methods that can be employed, in this paper we aim to establish new stability analysis for a class of discretetime switched timedelay systems with polytopic uncertainties. Indeed, based on transforming, the representation of these systems are studied under consideration into the arrow form matrix [31–33, 40–51]. Then, by constructing an appropriated common Lyapunov function and by resorting to the Kotelyanski lemma [52] and the Mmatrix proprieties [53, 54], new delayindependent stability conditions under arbitrary switching law are deduced.
Within the frame of studying the stability analysis, the said approach has already been introduced in [40, 41] for continuoustime delay systems and in our previous work [31] for discretetime switched linear timedelay systems in a field related to the study of convergence.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no results have been reported in the literature on the stability of discretetime switched timedelay systems with polytopic uncertainties by employing the Kotelyanski stability conditions that can be very effective in dealing with a class of more general nonlinear systems.
The contributions in our work mainly include two aspects. First, due to the conservatism of the methods for stability analysis which are based on the common Lyapunov function, this proposed method can guarantee stability under arbitrary switching and allows us to avoid searching for a common Lyapunov function. Second, these obtained results are formulated in terms of the unknown polytopic uncertain parameters, explicit and easy to apply. Furthermore, this proposed approach could be further used as a constructive solution to the problems of state and static output feedback stabilization.
The layout of the paper is as follows. Section 2 presents the problem formulation and some preliminaries. The main results of this paper are presented in Section 3. Section 4 is devoted to deriving new delayindependent conditions for asymptotic stability of switched nonlinear systems defined by difference equations. Some remarks and a numerical example are presented in Section 5 to illustrate the theoretical results. Finally, Section 6 concludes this paper.
Notation The notation used throughout this paper is as follows. For a matrix A, we denote the transpose by ${A}^{T}$. Let ℜ denote the field of real numbers, ${\mathrm{\Re}}^{n}$ denote an ndimensional linear vector space over the reals with the norm $\parallel \cdot \parallel $. For any $u={({u}_{i})}_{1\le i\le n},v={({v}_{i})}_{1\le i\le n}\in {\mathrm{\Re}}^{n}$, we define the scalar product of the vectors u and v as $\u3008u,v\u3009={\sum}_{i=1}^{n}{u}_{i}{v}_{i}$; ${\mathrm{\Re}}^{n\times n}$ is the space of $n\times n$ matrices with real entries. ${\mathrm{\Re}}_{+}$ is a set of positive real numbers. $I[{k}_{1}\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{k}_{2}]$ is a set of integers $\{{k}_{1},{k}_{1}+1,{k}_{1}+2,\dots ,{k}_{2}\}$ and ${I}_{n}$ is an identity matrix with appropriate dimension.
2 Problem formulation and preliminaries
2.1 Problem formulation
where ${A}_{i}(\cdot )$, $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$ and ${D}_{i}(\cdot )$, $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$ are matrices that have nonlinear elements with appropriate dimensions.
It is obvious that ${\sum}_{i=1}^{N}{\xi}_{i}(k)=1$.
where ${A}_{il}(\cdot )$, $l\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{N}_{l}]$ and ${D}_{iq}(\cdot )$, $q\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{N}_{q}]$ are respectively the vertex matrices denoting the extreme points of the polytope ${A}_{i}(\cdot )$, $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$ and ${D}_{i}(\cdot )$, $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$, ${N}_{l}$ is the number of the vertex matrices ${A}_{i}(\cdot )$, ${N}_{q}$ is the number of the vertex matrices ${D}_{i}(\cdot )$ and the weighting factors ${\mu}_{il}(k)$, $l\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{N}_{l}]$, ${\lambda}_{iq}(k)$, $q\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{N}_{q}]$ are unknown polytopic uncertain parameters for each $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$ belong to ${\mu}_{i}(k):{\sum}_{l=1}^{{N}_{l}}{\mu}_{il}(k)=1$, ${\mu}_{il}(k)\ge 0$ and ${\lambda}_{iq}(k):{\sum}_{q=1}^{{N}_{q}}{\lambda}_{iq}(k)=1$, ${\lambda}_{iq}(k)\ge 0$.
2.2 Preliminaries
Now, the following definition, theorem and lemma are preliminarily presented for further development.
For system (2.1) or (2.6) we can give the following definition.
Definition 1 System (2.6) is said to be uniformly robust asymptotically stable if for any $\epsilon >0$, there is $\delta (\epsilon )>0$ such that ${max}_{d\le l\le 0}\parallel \varphi (k)\parallel <\delta $ implies $\parallel x(k,\varphi )\parallel \le \epsilon $, $k\ge 0$. For arbitrary switching law $\sigma (k)$ and all admissible uncertainties (2.4) and (2.5), there is also ${\delta}^{\prime}>0$ such that ${max}_{d\le l\le 0}\parallel \varphi (k)\parallel <{\delta}^{\prime}$ implies $\parallel x(k,\varphi )\parallel \to 0$ as $k\to \mathrm{\infty}$ for arbitrary switching signal (2.3).
The following lemma and theorem will play an important role in our later development.
Kotelyanski lemma [52]
Real parts of the eigenvalues of the matrix $A(\cdot )$, with nonnegative offdiagonal elements, are less than a real number μ if and only if all those of the matrix $M(\cdot )$, where $M(\cdot )=\mu {I}_{n}A(\cdot )$, are positive with ${I}_{n}$ being the n identity matrix.
In this case, all the principal minors of matrix $(A(\cdot ))$ are positive. Then, the Kotelyanski lemma permits to deduce the stability properties of the system given by $A(\cdot )$.
Theorem 1 The matrix $A(\cdot )$ is said to be an Mmatrix if the following properties are verified:

All the eigenvalues of$A(\cdot )$have a positive real part;

The real eigenvalues are positive;

The principal minors of$A(\cdot )$are positive:$(A(\cdot ))\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 2& \cdots & j\\ 1& 2& \cdots & j\end{array}\right)>0,\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\mathrm{\forall}j\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}n];$(2.7)

For any positive real numbers$\eta ={({\eta}_{1},\dots ,{\eta}_{n})}^{T}$, the algebraic equations$A(\cdot )x=\eta $have a positive solution$w={({w}_{1},\dots ,{w}_{n})}^{T}$.
Remark 1 A discretetime system given by a matrix $A(\cdot )$ is stable if the matrix $({I}_{n}A(\cdot ))$ verifies the Kotelyanski conditions, in this case $({I}_{n}A(\cdot ))$ is an Mmatrix.
3 Main results
This section will present the main results on the robust stability conditions for the discretetime nonlinear switched timedelay system with polytopic uncertainties (2.6).
Such sufficient conditions, which are the main theoretical contribution of the paper, are stated in the theorem below.
Proof Let us consider system (2.6) of any switching law (2.3) and all admissible uncertainties (2.4) and (2.5), let $w\in {\mathrm{\Re}}^{n}$ with components (${w}_{p}>0$, $\mathrm{\forall}p=1,\dots ,n$) and $x(k)\in {\mathrm{\Re}}^{n}$ be the state vector.
where the matrix ${T}_{c}(\cdot )$ is defined in (3.1).
Therefore, switched system (2.6) is robust asymptotically stable under switching law (2.3) and all admissible uncertainties (2.4) and (2.5). This completes the proof. □
4 Application to discretetime uncertain switched nonlinear timedelay systems defined by difference equations
where ${\xi}_{i}(k)$, $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$ are the components of the switching function given in (2.3), ${\mu}_{il}(k)$, $l\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{N}_{l}]$ and ${\lambda}_{iq}(k)$, $q\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{N}_{q}]$ are unknown polytopic uncertain parameters given in (2.4) and (2.5) for each $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$.
Therefore, the presence of timedelay terms, the nonlinearities of coefficients, and unknown polytopic uncertain parameters makes the stability analysis for system (4.1) very difficult.
where $x(k)$ is the state vector of components ${x}_{p}(k)$, $p=1,\dots ,n$. ${\xi}_{i}(k)$, $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$ are the components of the switching function given in (2.3), ${\mu}_{il}(k)$, $l\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{N}_{l}]$ and ${\lambda}_{iq}(k)$, $q\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}{N}_{q}]$ are unknown polytopic uncertain parameters given in (2.4) and (2.5) for each $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}N]$.
To simplify the application to the Kotelyanski lemma, we consider a coordinate transformation into the arrow matrix form.
where ${\alpha}_{j}$ ($j=1,\dots ,n1$), ${\alpha}_{j}\ne {\alpha}_{q}$, $\mathrm{\forall}j\ne q$, are free real parameters that can be chosen arbitrarily.
Now, after the above formulation, based on the Kotelyanski lemma, we are in a position to give sufficient stability conditions for system (4.5) that are presented in the following theorem.
where the elements ${\overline{t}}^{j}(\cdot )$ are defined in (4.22).
From (4.23), it is clear that all the elements of ${T}_{c}(\cdot )$ are positive. Therefore, the application of the Kotelyanski lemma to the matrix $({I}_{n}{T}_{c}(\cdot ))$ enables us to conclude the stability of system (4.5).
It is clear that for $j=1,\dots ,n1$, condition (4.20) is verified as follows: $0<{\alpha}_{j}<1$.
It follows that $1({\overline{t}}^{n}(\cdot )){\sum}_{j=1}^{n1}({\overline{t}}^{j}(\cdot )){\beta}_{j}{(1{\alpha}_{j})}^{1}>0$.
This ends the proof of Theorem 3. □
To simplify the use of the stability conditions, Theorem 3 can be reduced to the corollary below.
Now, by considering relations (4.26) and (4.28) in Corollary 1 and substituting (4.15), (4.16) into (4.31), we obtain (4.27).
which indicates that condition (4.27) is satisfied.
Robust asymptotical stability of system (4.5) under any arbitrary switching law (2.3) and all admissible uncertainties (2.4) and (2.5) follows. This completes the proof. □
5 An illustrative example
where τ is the timedelay, ${a}_{il}(\cdot )$ and ${d}_{iq}(\cdot )$ are nonlinear coefficients, ${\mu}_{il}(k)$ and ${\lambda}_{iq}(k)$ are unknown polytopic uncertain parameters for each $i\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}2]$, $l\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}2]$ and $q\in I[1\phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}2]$. ${\xi}_{i}(k)$ is the arbitrary switching rule given in (2.3).
where $f(\cdot )$ and $\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )$ are general nonlinear functions.
Let us introduce unknown uncertainty parameters satisfying the following conditions: ${\mu}_{11}(\cdot )={\lambda}_{11}(\cdot )=\rho (\cdot )$, ${\mu}_{12}(\cdot )={\lambda}_{12}(\cdot )=1\rho (\cdot )$, ${\mu}_{21}(\cdot )={\lambda}_{21}(\cdot )=\rho (\cdot )$ and ${\mu}_{22}(\cdot )={\lambda}_{22}(\cdot )=1\rho (\cdot )$ with $\rho (\cdot )$ being a general nonlinearity such that $0\le \rho (\cdot )\le 1$.
 (i)
$0<\alpha <1$,
 (ii)
$\rho (\cdot )({P}_{11}(\alpha )+{Q}_{11}(\alpha ))+(1\rho (\cdot ))({P}_{12}(\alpha )+{Q}_{12}(\alpha ))<0$,
 (iii)
$\rho (\cdot )({P}_{21}(\alpha )+{Q}_{21}(\alpha ))+(1\rho (\cdot ))({P}_{22}(\alpha )+{Q}_{22}(\alpha ))<0$,
 (iv)
$\rho (\cdot )({P}_{11}(1)+{Q}_{11}(1))+(1\rho (\cdot ))({P}_{12}(1)+{Q}_{12}(1))>0$,
 (v)
$\rho (\cdot )({P}_{21}(1)+{Q}_{21}(1))+(1\rho (\cdot ))({P}_{22}(1)+{Q}_{22}(1))>0$,
 (vi)
$\rho (\cdot )({\gamma}_{11}^{2}(\cdot )+{\delta}_{11}^{2})+(1\rho (\cdot ))({\gamma}_{12}^{2}(\cdot )+{\delta}_{12}^{2})>0$,
 (vii)
$\rho (\cdot )({\gamma}_{21}^{2}(\cdot )+{\delta}_{21}^{2})+(1\rho (\cdot ))({\gamma}_{22}^{2}(\cdot )+{\delta}_{22}^{2})>0$.
 (i)
$({\alpha}^{2}1.77\alpha +0.8+f(\cdot )(0.4\alpha 0.8)+\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )(0.6\alpha 0.2))$ + $(\rho (\cdot ))(0.067\alpha 0.13+f(\cdot )(0.1\alpha 0.05)+\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )(0.1\alpha 0.05))$ < 0,
 (ii)
$({\alpha}^{2}1.95\alpha +0.82+f(\cdot )(0.8\alpha 0.7)+\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )(0.45\alpha 0.3))$ + $(\rho (\cdot ))(0.05\alpha 0.17+f(\cdot )(0.3\alpha 0.15)+\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )(0.35\alpha 0.1))$ < 0,
 (iii)
$(0.4f(\cdot )+0.4\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )+0.03)+(\rho (\cdot ))(0.15f(\cdot )0.15\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )0.063)>0$,
 (iv)
$(0.1f(\cdot )+0.15\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )0.13)+(\rho (\cdot ))(0.45f(\cdot )+0.25\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )0.12)>0$,
 (v)
$(0.4f(\cdot )0.6\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )+1.77\alpha )+(\rho (\cdot ))(0.1f(\cdot )+0.1\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )0.067)>0$,
 (vi)
$(0.8f(\cdot )0.45\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )+1.95\alpha )+(\rho (\cdot ))(0.3f(\cdot )0.35\mathrm{\Phi}(\cdot )0.05)>0$.
Based on these typical results plotted in Figures 13, we can see that the stability domains are closely related to the values taken by the uncertainty parameters.
It can be seen from Figures 46 that the system is stable, which demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed method.
Therefore, Figures 79 allow to conclude that the switched system converges to zero.
This example was used to illustrate the effectiveness of our developed approach with different values of delay and different switched time. Besides, this example shows that the obtained stability conditions are sufficient and very close to be necessary.
It is should be noted that this proposed approach is less conservative that searching for a common Lyapunov function. In fact, in [37] the authors introduced a simple linear example without timedelay for which a common Lyapunov function does not exist. Therefore, we cannot guarantee stability under arbitrary switching.
6 Conclusions
This paper has investigated new robust delayindependent stability conditions for a class of discretetime switched nonlinear timedelay systems with polytopic uncertainties. These stability conditions were deduced with the help of the construction of an appropriated common Lyapunov function, and also by the resort to the Kotelyanski lemma and the Mmatrix proprieties.
Compared with the existing results of switched systems, these obtained results are formulated in terms of the uncertain parameters, explicit and easy to apply. Moreover, this method allows us to avoid searching for a common Lyapunov function. A numerical example is given to show the effectiveness of our proposed approach.
This proposed approach could be further used as a constructive solution to the problems of state and static output feedback stabilization.
The limits of this paper are that it has been confined to the boundaries of numerical examples. It would be beneficial to extend the research further so as to include real systems and to conduct a comparative study with an example for which a common Lyapunov function exists.
Declarations
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the referees and the editor for helpful suggestions incorporated into this paper.
Authors’ Affiliations
References
 Mahmoud S: Switched TimeDelay Systems. Springer, Boston; 2010.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Liberzon D: Switching in Systems and Control. Springer, Boston; 2003.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Li Z, Soh Y, Wen C: Switched and Impulsive Systems: Analysis, Design and Applications. Springer, Berlin; 2005.MATHGoogle Scholar
 Yu M, Wang L, Chu TG, Xie GM: Stabilization of networked control systems with data packet dropout and network delays via switching system approach. 4. Proc. the 43th IEEE Conf. Decision and Control 2004, 35453550.Google Scholar
 Donkers M, Heemels W, Wouw N, Hetel L: Stability analysis of networked control systems using a switched linear systems approach. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2011, 56: 21012115.View ArticleMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
 Gans NR, Hutchinson SA: Stable visual servoing through hybrid switchedsystem control. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2007, 23: 530540.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Narendra KS, Balakrishnan J: A common Lyapunov function for stable LTI systems with commuting A matrices. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 1994, 39: 24692471. 10.1109/9.362846MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Shim H, Noh DJ, Seo JH: Common Lyapunov function for exponentially stable nonlinear systems. J. Korean Inst. Electr. Eng. 2001, 11: 108111.Google Scholar
 Vu L, Liberzon D: Common Lyapunov functions for families of commuting nonlinear systems. Syst. Control Lett. 2005, 54: 405416. 10.1016/j.sysconle.2004.09.006MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Branicky MS: Multiple Lyapunov functions and other analysis tools for switched and hybrid systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 1998, 43: 475482. 10.1109/9.664150MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Ishii H, Francis BA: Stabilizing a linear system by switching control with dwell time. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2002, 47: 19621973. 10.1109/TAC.2002.805689MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Hespanha JP, Morse AS: Stability of switched systems with average dwelltime. 38th IEEE Conf. Decision and Control 1999. PhoenixGoogle Scholar
 Daafouz J, Riedinger P, Iung C: Stability analysis and control synthesis for switched systems: a switched Lyapunov function approach. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2002, 47: 18831887. 10.1109/TAC.2002.804474MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Chang L, Ker Y, JenqDer C, LongYeu C: Sufficient conditions for global exponential stability of discrete switched timedelay systems with linear fractional perturbations via switching signal design. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2013., 2013: Article ID 39Google Scholar
 Jianyin F, Kai L: Stabilization of nonlinear systems under arbitrary switching law. Proceedings of the 30th Chinese Control Conference 2010. Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
 Zhang WA, Yu L: Stability analysis for discretetime switched timedelay systems. Automatica 2009, 45: 22652271. 10.1016/j.automatica.2009.05.027View ArticleMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
 Lien CH, Yu KW, Chang HC, Chung LY, Chen JD: Switching signal design for exponential stability of discrete switched systems with interval time varying delay. J. Franklin Inst. 2012, 349: 21822192. 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2012.04.001MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Sangapate P: New sufficient conditions for the asymptotic stability of discrete timedelay systems. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012., 2012: Article ID 28Google Scholar
 Sun YG, Wang L, Xie GM: Delaydependent robust stability and stabilization for discretetime switched systems with modedependent timevarying delays. Appl. Math. Comput. 2006, 180: 428435. 10.1016/j.amc.2005.12.028MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Lien CH, Yu KW, Chung YJ, Chang HC, Chung LY, Chen JD: Switching signal design for global exponential stability of uncertain switched nonlinear systems with timevarying delay. Nonlinear Anal. Hybrid Syst. 2011, 5: 1019. 10.1016/j.nahs.2010.08.002MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Dong Y, Wei J: Output feedback stabilization of nonlinear discretetime systems with timedelay. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012., 2012: Article ID 73Google Scholar
 Zhang WA, Yu L: Stability analysis for discretetime switched timedelay systems. Automatica 2009, 45(10):22652271. 10.1016/j.automatica.2009.05.027MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Sun XM, Wang W, Liu GP, Zhao J: Stability analysis for linear switched systems with timevarying delay. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., Part B, Cybern. 2008, 38: 528533.Google Scholar
 Zhang L, Shi P, Basin M: Robust stability and stabilization of uncertain switched linear discrete timedelay systems. IET Control Theory Appl. 2008, 2: 606614. 10.1049/ietcta:20070327MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Zhai G, Lin H, Antsaklis PJ: Quadratic stabilizability of switched linear systems with polytopic uncertainties. Int. J. Control 2003, 76: 747753. 10.1080/0020717031000114968MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Lin H, Antsaklis PJ: Switching stabilizability for continuoustime uncertain switched linear systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2007, 52: 633646.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Sun Z, Ge SS: Switched Linear Systems Control and Design. Springer, London; 2005.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Ibrir S: Stability and robust stabilization of discretetime switched systems with timedelays: LMI approach. Appl. Math. Comput. 2008, 206: 570578. 10.1016/j.amc.2008.05.149MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Liu J, Liu X, Xie WC: Delaydependent robust control for uncertain switched systems with timedelay. Nonlinear Anal. Hybrid Syst. 2008, 2: 8195. 10.1016/j.nahs.2007.04.001MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Sun YG, Wang L, Xie G: Delaydependent robust stability and H ∞ control for uncertain discretetime switched systems with modedependent time delays. Appl. Math. Comput. 2007, 187: 12281237. 10.1016/j.amc.2006.09.053MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Kermani M, Jaballi A, Sakly A: A new stability analysis for discretetime switched timedelay systems. Int. J. Control Energy Electr. Eng. 2014, 1: 2330.Google Scholar
 Kermani M, Sakly A, M’Sahli F: A new stability analysis and stabilization of discretetime switched linear systems using vector norms approach. World Acad. Sci., Eng. Technol. 2012, 71: 13021307.Google Scholar
 Kermani M, Sakly A, M’Sahli F: A new stability analysis and stabilization of uncertain switched linear systems based on vector norms approach. 10th International MultiConference on Systems, Signals & Devices (SSD) 2013. Hammamet, TunisiaGoogle Scholar
 Xie D, Xu G: Computation of performance robustness bounds for control systems with parameter uncertainties: an LMI approach. IEE Proc., Control Theory Appl. 2005, 152: 675682. 10.1049/ipcta:20045015View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Chen N, Gui W, Liu B: Parametric absolute stability of interconnected Lurie control systems. Acta Autom. Sin. 2007, 33: 12831289.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Zhanga X, Gaoc Y, Xia Z: Stabilization of switched systems with polytopic uncertainties via composite quadratic functions. Nonlinear Anal. Hybrid Syst. 2014, 11: 7183.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Minh VT: Stability for switched dynamic hybrid systems. Math. Comput. Model. 2013, 57: 7883. 10.1016/j.mcm.2011.05.055MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Shatyrko A, Diblik J, Khusainov D, Ruzickova M: Stabilization of Lur’etype nonlinear control systems by LyapunovKrasovski functionals. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012. 10.1186/16872012229Google Scholar
 Khusainov D, Shatyrko A: Absolute stability conditions for difference systems. Bull. Taras Shevchenko Natl. Univ. Kyiv Cybern. 2010, 10: 3448.Google Scholar
 Elmadssia S, Saadaoui K, Benrejeb M: New delaydependent stability conditions for linear systems with delay. International Conference on Communications, Computing and Control Applications (CCCA) 2011. Hammamet, TunisiaGoogle Scholar
 Elmadssia S, Saadaoui K, Benrejeb M: New delaydependent stability conditions for linear systems with delay. Syst. Sci. Control Eng. 2013, 1: 3741.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Benrejeb M, Soudani D, Sakly A, Borne P: New discrete Tanaka Sugeno Kang fuzzy systems characterization and stability domain. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Control 2006, 1: 919.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Sfaihi B, Benrejeb M: On stability analysis of nonlinear discrete singularly perturbed TS fuzzy models. Int. J. Dyn. Control 2013, 1: 2031. 10.1007/s4043501300033View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Benrejeb M, Borne P: On an algebraic stability criterion for nonlinear processes. Interpretation in the frequency domain. Proceedings of the Measurement and Control International Symposium MECO’78 1978. AthensGoogle Scholar
 Benrejeb M, Gasmi M: On the use of an arrow form matrix for modelling and stability analysis of singularly perturbed nonlinear systems. Syst. Anal. Model. Simul. 2001, 40: 509525.MATHGoogle Scholar
 Benrejeb M, Gasmi M, Borne P: New stability conditions for TS fuzzy continuous nonlinear models. Nonlinear Dyn. Syst. Theory 2005, 5: 369379.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
 Filali RL, Hammami S, Benrejeb M, Borne P: On synchronization, antisynchronization and hybrid synchronization of 3D discrete generalized H12 non map. Nonlinear Dyn. Syst. Theory 2012, 12: 8196.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
 Benrejeb M, Borne P, Laurent F: Sur une application de la représentation en flèche à l’analyse des processus. RAIRO. Autom. 1982, 16: 133146.MATHGoogle Scholar
 Borne P, Gentina JC, Laurent F: Sur la stabilité des systèmes Échantillonnés non linéaires. Rev. Fr. Autom. Inform. Rech. Opér. 1972, 2: 96105.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
 Borne P, Vanheeghe P, Duflos E: Automatisation des processus dans l’espace d’état. Editions Technip, Paris; 2007.MATHGoogle Scholar
 Borne P: Nonlinear system stability: vector norm approach. 5. System and Control Encyclopedia 1987, 34023406.Google Scholar
 Kotelyanski DM: Some properties of matrices with positive elements. Mat. Sb. 1952, 31: 497505.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
 Robert F: Recherche d’une M matrice parmi les minorantes d’un opérateur liéaire. Numer. Math. 1966, 9: 188199.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Gantmacher FR: Théorie des matrices. Dunod, Paris; 1966. Tomes 1 et 2MATHGoogle Scholar
Copyright
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.