Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Controllability and observability are dual aspects of the same problem. Roughly, the concept of controllability denotes the ability to move a system around in its entire configuration space using only certain admissible manipulations. The exact definition varies slightly within the framework or the type of models applied.
In control theory, we may need to find out whether or not a system such as ˙ = + () = + is controllable, where , , and are, respectively, , , and matrices for a system with inputs, state variables and outputs.
Controllability and observability are main issues in the analysis of a system before deciding the best control strategy to be applied, or whether it is even possible to control or stabilize the system. Controllability is related to the possibility of forcing the system into a particular state by using an appropriate control signal.
IFRS 9 began as a joint project between IASB and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), which promulgates accounting standards in the United States. The boards published a joint discussion paper in March 2008 proposing an eventual goal of reporting all financial instruments at fair value, with all changes in fair value reported in net income (FASB) or profit and loss (IASB). [1]
A special case of this result appeared first in 1963 in a paper by Elmer G. Gilbert, [1] and was later expanded to the current PBH test with contributions by Vasile M. Popov in 1966, [3] [4] Vitold Belevitch in 1968, [5] and Malo Hautus in 1969, [5] who emphasized its applicability in proving results for linear time-invariant systems.
We can see that is a symmetric matrix, therefore, so is .. We can use again the fact that, if is stable (all its eigenvalues have negative real part) to show that is unique.
Observability is a measure of how well internal states of a system can be inferred from knowledge of its external outputs. In control theory, the observability and controllability of a linear system are mathematical duals.
While Feigenbaum's term "quality costs" is technically accurate, it's easy for the uninitiated to jump to the conclusion that better quality products cost more to produce. Harrington adopted the name "poor quality costs" to emphasize the belief that investment in detection and prevention of product failures is more than offset by the savings in ...