Stability and Stabilization of Hybrid Systems: Mikael Johansson

Stability and stabilization of hybrid systems
Mikael Johansson
School of Electrical Engineering
KTH
Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se
Goals and class structure
Goal: After these lectures, you should

• Know some basic theory for stability and stabilization of hybrid systems
• Be familiar with the computational methods for piecewise linear systems
• Understand how the tools can be applied to (relatively) practical systems
Three lectures:
1. Stability theory
2. Computational tools for piecewise linear systems
3. Applications

Part I – Stability theory
Outline:
• A hybrid systems model and stability concepts
• Lyapunov theory for smooth systems
• Lyapunov theory for stability and stabilization of hybrid systems
Acknowledgements: M. Heemels, TU/e
A hybrid systems model
We consider hybrid systems on the form
where
The discrete state indexes vector fields while

is the transition function describing the evolution of the discrete state.
Unless stated otherwise, we will assume that is piecewise continuous

(i.e., that there is only a finite number of mode changes per unit time)
For now, disregard issues with sliding modes, zeno, … (see refs for details)

Example: a switched linear system
(numerical values for matrices Ai are given in notes for Lecture 2)
Stability concepts
Focus: stability of equilibrium point (in continuous state-space)
Global asymptotic stability (GAS): ensure that
Global uniform asymptotic stability (GUAS): ensure that
(i.e., uniformly in )

Three fundamental problems
Problem P1: Under what conditions is
GAS for all (piecewise continuous) switching signals ?
Problem P2: Given vector fields , design strategy :
is globally asymptotically stable.
Problem P3: determine if a given switched system
is globally asymptotically stable.

Outline:
Aim: establishing common grounds by reviewing fundamentals.

Lyapunov theory for smooth systems
Interpretation: Lyapunov function is abstract measure of system energy,

system energy should decrease along all trajectories.
Converse theorem
Under appropriate technical conditions (mainly smoothness of vector fields)
Consequence: worthwhile to search for Lyapunov functions
Remaining challenge: how to perform Lyapunov function search?

Stability of linear systems
Partial proof

Stability of discrete-time systems
Interpretation: energy should decrease at each sampling instant (event)
Performance analysis
Lyapunov techniques also useful for estimating system performance.

Outline:
Content:
– Guaranteeing stability independent of switching strategy
– Design a stabilizing switching strategy
– Prove stability for a given switching strategy
Switching between stable systems
Q: does switching between stable dynamics always create stable motions?
A: no, not necessarily.
Subsystems are stable and share the same eigenvalues,

but stability depends on switching!

P1: Stability for arbitrary switching signals
Problem: when is the switched system
GAS for all (piecewise continuous) switching signals ?
Claim: only if each subsystem
admits a radially unbounded Lyapunov function.
(can you explain why?)
The common Lyapunov function approach

In fact, if the submodels are smooth, the following results hold.
Hence, common Lyapunov functions necessary and sufficient.

Switched linear systems
For switched linear systems
it is natural to look for a common quadratic Lyapunov function
is a common Lyapunov function if
Such a Lyapunov function can be found by solving linear matrix inequalities
(systems that admit quadratic V(x) are called quadratically stable)

Infeasibility test
It is also possible to prove that there is no common quadratic Lyapunov fcn:

Example
Question: Does GUAS of switched linear system imply existence of a

common quadratic Lyapunov function?
Answer: No, the system given by
is GUAS, but does not admit any common quadratic Lyapunov function since
satisfy the infeasibility condition.
(there is, however, a common piecewise quadratic Lyapunov function)
Example
Sample trajectories of switched system

(under two different switching strategies)
1
1
0
0
-1
x1 1
x
-1
-2
-2
-3
-3
0 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 Time 6 8 10
Time
1
1
0.5
0.5
x2 2
x
0
0
-0.5
-0.5
0 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 Time 6 8 10
Time
Even if solutions are very different, all motions are asymptotically stable

P2: Stabilization
Problem: given matrices Ai, find switching rule ν(x,i) such that
is asymptotically stable.
Stabilization of switched linear systems

Stabilizing switching rules (I)
State-dependent switching strategy designed from Lyapunov function for Aeq
Solve Lyapunov equality . It follows that
Thus, for each x, at least one mode satisfies
This implies, in turn, that the switching rule
is well-defined for all x and that it generates

globally asymptotically stable motions.
Stabilizing switching rules (II)
Alternative switching strategy: activate mode i fraction αi of the time, e.g.,
(strategy repeats after duty cycle of T seconds). “Average dynamics” is
and for sufficiently small T the spectral radius of
is less than one (i.e., state at beginning of each duty cycle will tend to zero)

Example
Consider the two subsystems given by
Both subsystems are unstable, but the matrix Aeq=0.5A1+0.5A2 is stable.
State-dependent switching: set Q=I, solve Lyapunov equation to find
Time-dependent switching: choose duty cycle T such that spectral radius of
is less than one. Alternate between modes each T/2 seconds.

Example cont’d
Time-driven switching State-dependent switching
2
2 1
1
1
1
0.5
0 0.5
x1 1
x
0
x1 1
x
-1 0
-1 0
-2
-2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4Time 0.6 0.8 1 -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Time 0 0.2 0.4Time 0.6 0.8 1
2 Time
2 1
1
1
1
0
x2 2
x
0 0.5
x2 2
x
0.5
-1
-1
-2
-2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0
0 0.2 0.4Time 0.6 0.8 1 00 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Time 0 0.2 0.4Time 0.6 0.8 1
Time

P3: Stability for a given switching strategy
Problem: how can we verify that the switched system
is globally asymptotically stable?
Stability for given switching strategy
For simplicity, consider a system with two modes, and assume that
are globally asymptotically stable with Lyapunov functions Vi
Even if there is no common Lyapunov function, stability follows if
where tk denote the switching times.
Reason: Vi is continuous Lyapunov function for the switched system.

Multiple Lyapunov function approach
Multiple Lyapunov function approach
Weaker versions exist:
– No need to require that submodels are stable, sufficient to require that

all submodels admit Lyapunov-like functions:
where Xi contains all x for which submodel fi can be activated.
– Can weaken requirement that Vi should decrease along trajectories of fi
See the references for details and precise statements.

Summary
A whirlwind tour:
• selected results on stability and stabilization of hybrid systems
Three specific problems

• Guaranteeing stability independent of switching signal
• Design a stabilizing switching strategy (stabilizability)
• Prove stability for a given switching strategy
Focus has been on Lyapunov-function techniques

• Alternative approaches exist!
Strong theoretical results, but hard to apply in practice

• Can be overcome by developing automated numerical techniques
(Lecture 2!)
References
R. A. DeCarlo, M. S. Branicky, S. Pettersson and B.

Lennartsson, “Perspectives and results on the stability and
stabilizability of hybrid systems”, Proceedings of the IEEE,
Vol. 88, No. 7, July 2000.
J. P. Hespanha, “Stabilization through hybrid control”, UNESCO

Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems”, 2005.
M. Johansson, “Piecewise linear control systems – a

compuational approach”, Springer Lecture Notes in Control
and Information Sciences no. 284, 2002.
J. Goncalves, ”Constructive Global Analysis of Hybrid Systems”,

Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts InstituteMikael
Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007
of Technology,
Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se
Mikael Johansson
KTH
Part II – Computational tools
• Piecewise linear systems

• Well-posedness and solution concepts
• Linear matrix inequalities
• Piecewise quadratic stability
• Extensions

Computational stability analysis: philosophy
Aim: develop analysis tools that

– are computationally efficient (e.g. run in polynomial time)
– work for most practical problem instances
– produce guaranteed results (when they work)
system computer stable

description program
inconclusive
Piecewise linear systems
Piecewise linear system:
1. a subdivision of into regions
we will assume that are polyhedral and disjoint

(i.e. that cells only share common boundaries)
2. (possibly different) affine dynamics in each region

Example
Saturated linear system:
Three regions: negative saturation, linear operation, positive saturation
Cells are polyhedral (i.e., can be described by a set of linear inequalities)
Well-posedness and solutions

Trajectories: existence and uniqueness
Observation: trajectories may not be unique, or may not exist.
Example:
Initial values in create non-unique trajectories.
Trajectories that reach cannot be continued
Attractive sliding modes
Would like to single out situations with non-existence of solutions.

Generalized solutions
Solution concepts for systems with sliding modes typically averages
dynamics in neighboring cells
Note: Filippov solutions may remain on cell boundaries,

and are not necessarily unique.
Equivalent dynamics on sliding modes
Example: Piecewise linear system
on
Filippov solutions satisfy for some
If x(t) should stay on S1+, we must have , i.e.,
The only solution is given by α=1/2, resulting in the unique sliding dynamics

Non-uniqueness of sliding dynamics
Observation: sliding dynamics on intersecting boundaries often non-unique
Example:
Filippov solutions on are not unique.

(can you explain why?)
Valid Filippov solutions on S12 differ in time constants of a factor four or more.
Establishing attractivity of sliding modes
Note: non-trivial to detect that a pwl system has attractive sliding modes
Example: The piecewise linear system
has a sliding mode at the origin.
However, determining that it is attractive is not easy

– Vector field inspection or quadratic Lyapunov functions can’t be used
(why?)
– Finite-time convergence to the origin can be established by noting that

Key points
Piecewise linear systems: polyhedral partition and locally affine dynamics
For general piecewise linear systems, solution concepts are non-trivial

– Trajectories may not be unique, or may not exist (unless continuous)
– Meaningful solution concepts for attractive sliding modes exist
(e.g. Filippov solutions)
Introducing “new modes” on cell boundaries with sliding dynamics not easy
– Sliding modes may occur on any intersection of cell boundaries
– Hard to determine if potential sliding mode is attractive
– Dynamics of sliding modes may be non-unique and non-linear
Part II – Computational tools
• Piecewise linear systems

• Well-posedness and solution concepts
• Linear matrix inequalities
• Piecewise quadratic stability
• Extensions

Linear matrix inequalities
Linear matrix inequality (LMI): An inequality on the form
where Fi are symmetric matrices, X>0 denotes that X is positive definite.
Example: The condition on standard form:
LMI features
• Optimization under LMI constraints is a convex optimization problem

– Strong and useful theory, e.g. duality
(we have already used it once – when?)
• Multiple LMIs is an LMI

– Example: Lyapunov inequalities
equivalent to single LMI
• Efficient software and convenient user interfaces publicly available

– Example: YALMIP interface by J. Löfberg at ETHZ
• S-procedure, Shur complements, … and much more!

Example: Quadratic stabilization
Recall from Lecture 1 that guarantees that
is GAS for all switching signals i(t) (i.e., GUAS) if P satisfies
an LMI condition!
Consequence: quadratic Lyapunov function found efficiently (if it exists)!
Quadratic stability of PwL systems
is a Lyapunov function for the piecewise linear system
if we have
Note: not necessary to require that
How can we bring the restricted conditions into the LMI framework?

S-procedure
When does it hold that, for all x,
(i.e., non-negativity of quadratic form implies non-neagivity of )
Simple condition: there exists satisfying the LMI
Extension to multiple quadratic forms: if there exist such that
then
(non-trivial fact: simple condition is necessary if there exists u: )

Bounding polyedra by quadratic forms

Example: The polyhedron
can be described by the quadratic form
for
In general: for polyhedra the quadratic form
is non-negative for all if has non-negative entries

Quadratic stability cont’d
Consider the piecewise linear system
(no affine terms, all regions contain the origin). Then,
Example
Recall the switched system
with
from Lecture 1. Applying the above procedure, we find
(stability cannot be verified without S-procedure – can you explain why?)

Piecewise quadratic Lyapunov functions
Natural to consider continuous, piecewise quadratic, Lyapunov functions
Surprisingly, such functions can also be computed via optimization over LMIs.
Relation to multiple Lyapunov functions:
• Local expressions for V(x) are Lyapunov-like functions for

associated dynamics (stronger relationship will emerge in the extensions)
Convenient notation
Use the augmented state vector
and re-write system dynamics as
When analyzing properties of the equilibrium we let
and assume that

Enforcing continuity
How to ensure that the Lyapunov function candidate
is continuous across cell boundaries?
Enforce one linear equality for each cell boundary.
Enforcing continuity (II)

Alternative: direct parameterization
For each region, construct continuity matrices such that
and consider Lyapunov functions on the form
(the free variables are now collected in the symmetric matrix T)
To make Lyapunov function quadratic in regions that contain origin,

we also require
(construction automated in, for example, Pwltools)

Piecewise quadratic stability
Example
Piecewise linear system with partition shown below,
and
(Clearly) not quadratically stable, but pwQ Lyapunov function readily found.

Potential sources of conservatism
1. Quadratic Lyapunov functions necessary and sufficient for linear systems,

but piecewise quadratic Lyapunov functions not necessary for stability of
PWL systems.
2. S-procedure terms effectively the sum of several quadratic forms
hence, S-procedure is not guaranteed to be loss-less (better tools exist)
3. Use of affine terms and strict inequalities can also be conservative.

M
Extensions
Many extensions possible:
• determining regions of attraction (i.e. non-global stability properties)
• Lyapunov functions that guarantee stability of potential sliding modes
• nonlinear and uncertain dynamics in each region
• performance analysis (e.g. L2-gains)
• (some) control synthesis
• hybrid systems (overlapping regions) and discontinuous Lyapunov fncs.
• Lyapunov functionals and Lagrange stability
• stability of limit cycles
• similar tools for discrete-time hybrid systems
M
(too much to be covered in this lecture!)
We will sketch a couple of extensions

Proof. Pre/postmultiply with (x, u), note that LMIs imply dissipation inequality
Example
Saturated linear system (unit saturation)
Quadratic storage functions fail to bound L2-gain.
Piecewise quadratic storage function yields bounds

Linear hybrid dynamical systems
Linear hybrid dynamical system (LHDS)
ν described by finite automaton whose state changes

when x hits transition surfaces
and for each i, the feasible x bounded by a polyhedron
Discontinuous Lyapunov functions
Multiple quadratic (discontinuous, pwq) Lyapunov function via LMIs
Note: conditions (3,4) imply that V(t) decreases at points of discontinuity

Example
Linear hybrid system
with
Trajectories and multiple Lyapunov function found by LMI formulation
Discrete-time versions
Discrete-time piecewise linear systems
and piecewise quadratic Lyapunov (not necessarily continuous) functions
We have
for

Discrete-time versions
Discrete-time globally asymptotically stable if there exist matrices Pi, qi, ri, Uij
where Wij has non-negative entries, and a non-negative scalar ε>0, such that
(note: in most solvers, you will need to treat separately)
Observations:
• Again, LMI conditions, hence efficiently verified!
• Potentially one LMI for every pair (i,j) of modes.
Comparison with alternatives

Biswas et al. generated optimal hybrid controllers for randomly generated
linear systems, and compared performance of several computational methods
Typical results:
Very strong performance, but computational effort increases rapidly

Summary
Computational tools for stability analysis of one class of hybrid systems
Piecewise linear systems

• Partition of state space into polyhedra with locally affine dynamics
• Solution concepts: trajectories and Flippov solutions
• Given a pwl model, it is non-trivial to detect attractive sliding modes
Piecewise quadratic Lyapunov functions

• Efficiently computed via optimization over linear matrix inequalities
• Potentially conservative, but strong practical performance
Many extensions, but much work remains!
References
M. Johansson, “Piecewise linear control systems – a computational approach”,

Springer Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences no 284, 2002.
P. Biswas, P. Grieder, J. Löfberg, M. Morari, ”A survey on stability analysis of

discrete-time piecewise affine systems”, IFAC World Congress, Prague, 2005.
J. Löfberg, YALMIP, http://control.ee.ethz.ch/~joloef/yalmip.msql
S. Hedlund and M. Johansson, “A toolbox for computational analysis of piecewise

linear systems”, ECC, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2002. (http://www.control.lth.se)

Mikael Johansson
KTH
Part III – Examples
• Constrained control via min-max selectors

• Substrate feeding control
• Automatic gear-box control
• A simple relay system

Constrained control via min-max selectors
Common “pre-HYCON” approach for constrained control
Aim: tracking primary variable (y), while

keeping secondary variable (z) within limits
Numerical example
Specific example with
and proportional constraint controllers.
Control without constraint handling Control with constraint handling

A loop transformation
Linear system interconnected with 3-input/1-output nonlinearity
Loop transformation reduces dimension of nonlinearity by one:
still, few techniques apply to such systems

(e.g. small gain and LDI do not work)
Stability analysis
However, nonlinearity (and hence system) is piecewise linear:
LMI computations return quadratic Lyapunov function

(but S-procedure needed)


Fed-batch cultivation of E. coli
Recombinant (genetically modified) E. coli bacteria used to produce proteins.
Bioreactor control: Add feed (nutrition) and oxygen to maximize cell growth.
Fed-batch: feed added continuously, at limiting rate
[Velut, 2005]
Control objective
Objective: maximize feed rate while ensuring that

• oxygen level does not drop too low (acetate production, inhibited growth)
• glucose is not in excess (“overflow metabolism”)
Probing control
Control strategy: increase feed while no acetate formed, decrease otherwise
Acetate formation detected by probing:

– add pulse in feed, observe if oxygen consumed

A piecewise linear abstraction
Simplified model of reactor dynamics
where is a piecewise linear function
Integrating the response over a pulse period,

we find the discrete-time model
Piecewise linear if uk is a linear in x.
Control strategy
Assume a linear integral control
fixed length of probing cycle T and probing pulse T-Tc
To model saturation in glucose uptake, consider
This results in a piecewise linear systems with three regions

(why not two?)
Control objective is now to drive system towards saturation.

Control to saturation
The formulation in Lecture 2 does not return any feasible solution

• integrator dynamics in unbounded regions Æ not exponentially stable
Two potential approaches:
• Prove convergence for initial values within (large but bounded) region
(can be done by adding S-procedure terms)
• Remove implicit equality constraints by state-transformation

(more satisfying, but more complex; see Velut)
With modifications, stability can (often) be proven VIA pwq Lyapunov fncs.
Numerical results
Stability regions for one specific problem instance (reactor parameters)

• red dots bound region where stability can be established numerically
• shaded regions are shown to be unstable (via local analysis)

Stability often not enough with stability – would like to optimize performance
• for example, the ability to track time-varying saturation level
Can compute bound γ on performance
for all reference trajectories r[k] via LMI computations.
Note: typically large system descriptions…
Numerical example
Simulations for specific r[k] γ for all rate-limited references
Parameter contours suggest optimal parameters

Tuning rules
Similar behavior observed for various parameter values of the process.
Based on this observation, Velut suggests the following tuning rules
where σ(t) is the unit step response of the linear dynamics.


A simple model for car dynamics
Simple model:
Inputs: motor torque T and road incline α; output ω
where is the discrete input, determined by the current gear
To emphasize this dependence, we write
[Pettersson, 1999]
Gear-switching
Gear-switching strategy:
Can be represented by hybrid automaton with four discrete states

Torque control and bumpless transfer
Base controller: non-linear PI
Changes in acceleration when shifting gears avoided via bumpless transfer:
for all feasible gear changes iÆj.

( compatible values of Ki, changes in integral state)
Hybrid system model
Need extended hybrid model that allows for jumps in the continuous state
LMI formulation possible if jump map is affine in x.

Numerical example
Closed loop system is switched linear system
where and
Simulation for
Stability
If affine reset maps
then, is guaranteed by solution to LMI
Can extend discontinuous Lyapunov function computations from Lecture 2
Gear-box example: solution found Æ exponential convergence to vref
Remark: analysis needs to be repeated for each value of vref

(as in bioreactor example)


More of a theoretical challenge…

Consider a linear control system under hysteresis relay feedback…
[Hassibi, 2000]
Simulations suggest system is stable, yet no pwq Lyapunov function found.

The challenge
Q: why do piecewise quadratic methods fail, how can they be improved?
The more general challenge:
Put the methods to the test of challenging engineering problems, and

help to contribute to the development to improved analysis tools!
References
M. Johansson, “Piecewise linear control systems – a computational approach”,

Springer Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences no 284, 2002.
S. Velut, “Probing control – analysis and design with application to fed-batch

bioreactors”, PhD thesis, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, June 2005.
S. Pettersson, ”Analysis and design of hybrid systems”, PhD thesis, Chalmers

University, Gothenburg, Sweden, 1999.
A. Hassibi, “Lyapunov methods in the analysis of complex dynamical

systems”, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 2000.

Stability and Stabilization of Hybrid Systems: Mikael Johansson

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stability and Stabilization of Hybrid Systems: Mikael Johansson

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stability and Stabilization of Hybrid Systems: Mikael Johansson

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stability and stabilization of hybrid systems

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Goals and class structure

Goal: After these lectures, you should

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Acknowledgements: M. Heemels, TU/e

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

A hybrid systems model

We consider hybrid systems on the form

The discrete state indexes vector fields while

Unless stated otherwise, we will assume that is piecewise continuous

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

(numerical values for matrices Ai are given in notes for Lecture 2)

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Focus: stability of equilibrium point (in continuous state-space)

Global asymptotic stability (GAS): ensure that

Global uniform asymptotic stability (GUAS): ensure that

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

GAS for all (piecewise continuous) switching signals ?

Problem P2: Given vector fields , design strategy :

is globally asymptotically stable.

Problem P3: determine if a given switched system

is globally asymptotically stable.

Part I – Stability theory

Aim: establishing common grounds by reviewing fundamentals.

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Interpretation: Lyapunov function is abstract measure of system energy,

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Under appropriate technical conditions (mainly smoothness of vector fields)

Consequence: worthwhile to search for Lyapunov functions

Remaining challenge: how to perform Lyapunov function search?

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Interpretation: energy should decrease at each sampling instant (event)

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Lyapunov techniques also useful for estimating system performance.

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Switching between stable systems

Q: does switching between stable dynamics always create stable motions?

A: no, not necessarily.

Subsystems are stable and share the same eigenvalues,

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

GAS for all (piecewise continuous) switching signals ?

Claim: only if each subsystem

admits a radially unbounded Lyapunov function.

(can you explain why?)

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

The common Lyapunov function approach

Hence, common Lyapunov functions necessary and sufficient.

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

it is natural to look for a common quadratic Lyapunov function

is a common Lyapunov function if

Such a Lyapunov function can be found by solving linear matrix inequalities

(systems that admit quadratic V(x) are called quadratically stable)

It is also possible to prove that there is no common quadratic Lyapunov fcn:

Hycon Summer School, Siena July 2007 Mikael Johansson mikaelj@s3.kth.se

Question: Does GUAS of switched linear system imply existence of a