Nonlinear Dyn (2012) 67:1337–1356
DOI 10.1007/s11071-011-0072-9
O R I G I N A L PA P E R
Observer-based model reference adaptive control
for unknown time-delay chaotic systems with input
nonlinearity
Hassan Adloo · Navid Noroozi ·
Paknosh Karimaghaee
Received: 7 November 2010 / Accepted: 4 May 2011 / Published online: 2 June 2011
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
Abstract Existence of unknown time-delay in the
systems is a drastic restriction that it can menace the
stability criteria and even deteriorate the performance
system. This undesired case would be more inten-
sified if that the uncertain input nonlinearity effects
are also considered. To handle the input nonlineari-
ties effects (results in dead-zone and/or hysteresis phe-
nomena) and also unknown time-delay in the chaotic
systems, this paper presents an observer-based Model
Reference Adaptive Control (MRAC) scheme for a
class of unknown time-delay chaotic systems with dis-
turbances. This new method is a delay-independent
variable-structure control method which is integrated
with an observer system. The main task of the pro-
posed approach is to accomplish a perfect tracking
procedure such that unknown parameters are adapted
via output estimation error. Furthermore, stability of
the closed-loop system is achieved by means of the
Lyapunov stability theory. Finally, the proposed meth-
ods are applied to some famous chaotic systems to ver-
ify the effectiveness of the proposed methods.
H. Adloo () · N. Noroozi · P. Karimaghaee
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
Shiraz University, 71377-54633, Shiraz, Iran
e-mail: adloo@shirazu.ac.ir
N. Noroozi
e-mail: noroozi@shirazu.ac.ir
P. Karimaghaee
e-mail: kaghaee@shirazu.ac.ir
Keywords Chaos control · Model reference adaptive
control · Observer-based system · Dead-zone and
hysteresis nonlinearity
1 Introduction
During past two decades, problem of chaos control has
generated great deal interesting in the control com-
munity. This comes from the fact that chaos phenom-
ena in some practical systems such as gyroscopes and
plates generate the irregular oscillations which may of-
ten cause harm in the systems. However, having better
system performance against this catastrophic situation
requires moving the state trajectory to a desired region
through the control methods. From the Ott’s work [1]
in 1990 as a first effort concerning with the chaos con-
trol, many researchers have developed control meth-
ods for various chaotic systems via different tech-
niques. Among them, robust control method [2], adap-
tive observer-based approach [3], sliding mode con-
trol [4], CLF approach [5], and backstepping design
[6] can be mentioned. Nevertheless, most of the rele-
vant works in literature have been investigated on the
chaotic systems without time delay. It is well known
that in many natural systems, especially in the chaotic
systems, commonly there exists unknown time delay
which is due to practical limitations in measurements
devices, transportation lag, computing time, and so on.
However, time-delayed chaotic systems represent poor
system performance and because of their distributed
1338
characteristic, require to more complicated control de-
sign. Tian and Gao [7] presented two model reference
adaptive control methods for a class of first order time-
delay chaotic systems in two cases, known and un-
known time delay. Nevertheless, in the previous men-
tioned works, except unknown time delay, any distur-
bance and/or uncertainties are not considered. Another
work related to this case was presented by Hua and
Guan [8]. In that work, two adaptive and nonadaptive
control approaches, which are independent of the time
delay, are investigated. However, in [8], it is assumed
that all states of the system is available while it is a re-
strictive assumption in practice. This problem can be
handled implicitly by using the observer systems. For
example, a fuzzy observer-based adaptive control for
the chaotic-fuzzy systems was proposed by Ting [9].
The work has solved the problems of synchronization,
stabilization, and tracking control. To see the several
techniques concerning it, refer to [10–12].
Two another physical limitations which reduce sys-
tem performance and even may cause instability are
dead-zone and hysteresis nonlinearities. Generally,
properties of these nonlinearities phenomena exist in
the control system components, for example, the hys-
teresis nonlinearity can be observed in electronic re-
lay circuits and electromagnetic devices. Moreover,
the dead-zone nonlinearity effects generally appear in
mechanical actuators, servo systems, and other physi-
cal dynamics. However, the proposed approaches in
the previous works are applied to the chaotic sys-
tems without the nonlinearities effects with unknown
time delay simultaneously while it is appeared in some
chaotic systems. Motivated by the removing these ef-
fects, for the nonchaotic systems, one can find sev-
eral proposed techniques in literature (see [13–18]).
Beside, some earlier works concerning the chaos sys-
tem control with only input nonlinearities can be men-
tioned in [19–24]. Adaptive control methods inte-
grated with approximation procedure of nonlinearities
input function are effective to deal with the input non-
linearity effects in the chaotic systems is. For exam-
ple, [19] and [20] have proposed approximation meth-
ods to tackle unknown dead-zone nonlinearity using
fuzzy-neural network and fuzzy logic systems. Other
approaches are also investigated in some authors such
as the backstepping control method [21], fuzzy con-
trol systems [22], sliding mode control [23], and the
adaptive variable-structure control method [24].
In this paper, to perform a perfect tracking pro-
cedure for a class of unknown time-delay chaotic
H. Adloo et al.
systems when they exposed to the unknown input
nonlinearities (dead-zone or hysteresis nonlinearity),
a model reference adaptive variable-structure control
is presented. Furthermore, an adaptive nonlinear ob-
server is designed to estimate the system states. Using
Lyapunov stability theory, it is shown that the closed-
loop system is stable and the states of the system track
the desired trajectory. Finally, the effectiveness of the
proposed methods is examined by presenting three nu-
merical examples.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Sec-
tion 2 represents a lemma and some notations are
reviewed. In Sect. 3, a general form of the time-
delay chaotic systems is introduced and some assump-
tions are also presented. The main proposed adaptive
method is proposed in Sect. 4. Section 5 contains the
simulation results. Section 6 provides the concluding
remarks.
2 Preliminaries
Throughout this paper, we will use some necessary no-
tations and lemmas which are here presented. Assume
w is a vector such that
w = [w1 · · · wi · · · wn ]T (1)
Let w∞ , w1 , and w represent ∞-norm,
1-norm, and the Euclidean norm (2-norm) respec-
tively. Also, sgn(w) indicates a vector sign function
of w that is defined as follows:
 T
sgn(w) = sgn(w1 ) · · · sgn(wi ) · · · sgn(wn ) (2)
where
⎧
⎨ 1: wi > 0
sgn(wi ) = 0: wi = 0 for i = 1, 2, . . . , n. (3)
⎩
−1: wi < 0
Lemma ([25, 29]) For any vector x and y in R n , we
have
x ≤ x1
 T 
x y  ≤ x∞ y1 (4)
1
xTy ≤ x2 + λy2
4λ
where λ is a positive real number.
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems 1339

3 Problem statement Assumption 4 (A4) There exist a matrix M and posi-

tive definite matrices P and Q satisfying the following
Consider a class of unknown time-delay chaotic sys- equalities
tems with disturbance that its dynamic equation is
P (A − MC) + (A − MC)T P = −Q
  (10)
ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t) B TP = C

+ Bu(t) + Bν(t) (5) Assumption 5 (A5) There exist a matrix K and posi-
y(t) = Cx(t) tive definite matrices R and S satisfying

S(A + BK) + (A + BK)T S = −R (11)

where x(t) ∈ R n is the state variable, u(t) ∈ R p and
y(t) ∈ R p are the input and the output of the sys- Moreover, in the proposed scheme, a linear reference
tem, respectively. η(·) is an unknown nonlinear vector- model represented in (12) have been employed which
valued function, τ (t) denotes the unknown varying gives the desired output trajectory.
time-delay, and v(t) represents the unknown distur-
bances. A, B, and C are known constant matrices with ẋm (t) = Am xm (t) + Bm r(t)
suitable dimensions. (12)
ym (t) = Cxm (t)

Remark 1 It can be easy shown that there are several
chaotic systems which can be categorized in the form
of (5), such as the Chua circuit [9] and the Mackey–
Glass model [27].
Assume that system (5) satisfies some reasonable
conditions and are stated as follows.
Assumption 1 (A1) There exist two unknown posi-
tive values, τ1 and τ2 such that
where xm (t) ∈ R n is the reference state variable and
r(t) ∈ R l and ym (t) ∈ R p are the reference input
signal and the desired output trajectory, respectively.
Am and Bm are also constant matrices with proper di-
mensions. It is well known that Am is a Hurwitz ma-
trix.
Assumption 6 (A6) There exist two matrices F ∈
R p×n and L ∈ R p×l such that
Am = A + BF (13)

τ (t) ≤ τ1 (6) Bm = BL (14)

τ̇ (t) ≤ τ2 (7) Remark 2 All the above assumptions are reasonable

such that A1 presents the limitation of the time-delay
Assumption 2 (A2) Nonlinear vector-valued function function and its derivative that are natural conditions.
η(·) satisfies the following condition: However, most of the chaotic systems have fixed time

 




delay and they are satisfied in this assumption [7–9].

η x(t), x t − τ (t)
≤ α
x(t)
+ β
x t − τ (t)
A2 and A3 are commonly considered to guarantee ex-
istence of the solution of the system (5). A4 represents
(8)
a common strictly positive real (SPR) condition and
A5 shows the controllability of the system. Note that
where α and β are unknown positive real numbers.
two equalities represented in A6 are common match-
ing conditions.
Assumption 3 (A3) Consider the disturbance, v(t), is
bounded such that
 

4 Proposed adaptive control methods
supv(t) =
v(t)
∞ ≤ δ (9)
t
Consider the chaos system description (5) satisfying
where δ is an unknown positive real number. assumptions A1 to A6. In this section, for the sake of
1340 H. Adloo et al.

readability of the note, first, the main scheme of the ˙ = k2

B T P ê(t)

μ̂ (20)
1
controller is introduced when the input nonlinearities
are not considered; then by making some modifica- where k1 and k2 are the positive numbers. Now notice
tions in the controller, it is shown that the proposed the following theorem.
method is robust against the hysteresis and dead-zone
input nonlinearities effects. Theorem 1 Consider the time-delayed chaotic system
dynamic (5) satisfying assumptions A1–A6. By apply-
4.1 Design without input nonlinearity ing the adaptive controller (18) with respect to the ob-
server system (15) while the unknown parameters are
Notice that our main objective in this section is to adapted as (19) and (20), it is shown that the closed-
make the system output (5) capable to track a desired loop system dynamics are stable and the estimation er-
trajectory constructed by system (12). To perform this ror, ê(t), and the tracking error, e(t), converge to zero.
and noting to the fact that we do not have any access
to the states of the system, x(t), it is required to design Proof Noting (16) and according to (5) and (15), the
an observer system which gives the estimation of x(t). estimation error dynamics can be written as
For this purpose, introduce the following dynamic sys-  
˙ = Aê(t) + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t) + Bν(t)
ê(t)
tem as an observer model:
 θ̂ 
˙ = Ax̂(t) + Bu(t) + 1 θ̂ B y(t) − C x̂(t)
x̂(t) − B y(t) − C x̂(t)
2 2
1  μ̂ 
+ μ̂Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (15) − Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (21)
2 2
ŷ(t) = C x̂(t) On the other hand, from (12), (15), and (17), the track-
where x̂(t) ∈ ∈
R n , ŷ(t) Rp
are the state and output ing error dynamic is
estimation variable, respectively. θ̂ and μ̂ are the adap-
θ̂ 
tation parameters. ė(t) = Ax̂(t) + Bu(t) + B y(t) − C x̂(t)
2
Remark 3 Note that the dynamic equation of many μ̂ 
+ Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t)
chaotic systems can be described by (15). For exam- 2
ple, Chen, Lorenz, Lu, and Rossler systems are the − Am xm − Bm r(t) (22)
important samples of them.
Replace control input (18) and then by applying
Define the estimation error and the tracking error, matching condition (13) and (14), we have
respectively, as follows:
ė(t) = (A + BK)e(t) + BF xm + BLr(t)
ê(t) = x(t) − x̂(t) (16) 1  
− B θ̂ y(t) − C x̂(t)
e(t) = x̂(t) − xm (t) (17) 2
 
+ μ̂ sgn y(t) − C x̂(t)
Now, consider that the control input, u(t), is chosen as
shown below: 1  
− BF xm − BLr(t) + B θ̂ y(t) − C x̂(t)
2
θ̂   
u(t) = Ke(t) + F xm + Lr(t) − y(t) − C x̂(t) + μ̂ sgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (23)
2
μ̂  After removing the extra terms in (23), the tracking
− sgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (18)
2 error dynamic is
where the adaptation parameters θ̂ and μ̂, are gener- ė(t) = (A + BK)e(t) (24)
ated by the following update laws:


2 Now to show the stability of the error dynamics
θ̂˙ = k1
B T P ê(t)
(19) (21) and (24) with respect to the updating laws (19)
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems 1341


2
and (20), let us introduce the following candidate − λ
ê t − τ (t)

Lyapunov–Krasovskii function

2 1
+
e t − τ (t)
+ θ̃˙ θ̃ + μ̃
1 ˙
 t μ̃ (28)
λ 

k1 k2
V (t) = êT P ê + eT Se +
ê(s)
2
1 − τ2 t−τ (t) According to A2 and noting to the errors in (16) and


2 1 2 1 2 (17), we have
+
e(s)
ds + θ̃ + μ̃ (25)
2k1 2k2  
2êT P Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)
where λ is a positive real constant and θ̃ = θ − θ̂, μ̃ =






≤ 2
B T P êT
α
x(t)
+ β
x t − τ (t)

μ − μ̂ are the adaptation parameter errors such that



θ and μ denote the actual values. As you know, the = 2

B T P êT
α
ê(t) + x̂(t)

asymptotic stability occurs when the time derivative of

 

+ β
ê t − τ (t) + x̂ t − τ (t)

the Lyapunov–Krasovskii functional (25) be negative






definite, so ≤ 2
B T P êT
α
ê(t)
+ β
ê t − τ (t)






λ 
+ α
x̂(t)
+ β
x̂ t − τ (t)

V̇ (t) = 2êT P ê˙ + 2eT S ė +

ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2
1 − τ2








2

2 ≤ 2
B T P êT
α
ê(t)
+ β
ê t − τ (t)

− λ
ê t − τ (t)
+
e t − τ (t)





+ α
e(t)
+ β
e t − τ (t)

1 ˙ 1 ˙ 




+ θ̃ θ̃ + μ̃ μ̃ (26) + α
xm (t)
+ β
xm t − τ (t)
(29)
k1 k2
Now replace (21) and (24) into (26), that is, Note that the desired state, xm , is bounded, therefore,
 it can be assumed that
 




V̇ (t) = 2ê P Aê(t) + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)

T
α
xm (t)
+ β
xm t − τ (t)
< σ

θ̂  where σ is a constant positive number. So

+ Bν(t) − B y(t) − C x̂(t)
2  
2êT P Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)
μ̂ 





− Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t)

2 ≤ 2
B T P êT
α
ê(t)
+ β
ê t − τ (t)






+ 2eT S(A + BK)e(t) + α
e(t)
+ β
e t − τ (t)
+ σ (30)
λ 




+
ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2 Using the lemma, we can write
1 − τ2  


2

2 2êT P Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)
− λ
ê t − τ (t)
+
e t − τ (t)

4 2

2 

2
≤ α + β 2
B T P êT
+ λ
ê(t)

+ θ̃˙ θ̃ + μ̃
1 1 ˙
μ̃ (27) λ
k1 k2

2

2
+
ê t − τ (t)
+
e(t)

By applying A4, we can write



2
 +
e t − τ (t)
+ 2σ
B T P ê
(31)
V̇ (t) = êT P (A − MC) + (A − MC)T P ê
  Also, from the lemma, it can be easily shown that
+ 2êT P MC ê + 2êT P Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)

T

T

B P ê
≤
B P ê
(32)
+ 2êT P Bν(t) − θ̂ êT P B y(t) − C x̂(t) 1

− μ̂êT P Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) Thus,
 
+ 2eT S(A + BK)e 2P B êT η x(t), x t − τ (t)
λ 



4 2

2 

2
+
ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2 ≤ α + β 2
B T P ê
+ λ
ê(t)

1 − τ2 λ
1342 H. Adloo et al.


2

2 
+
ê t − τ (t)
+
e(t)
4 1
T
2
+ −θ̂ + α 2 + β 2 +
B P ê


2

λ ϕ
+
e t − τ (t)
+ 2σ
B T P ê
1 (33) 

+ −μ̂ + 2σ + 2
v(t)
∞
B T P ê
1
Moreover, we have the following inequality: 1 ˙ 1 ˙
+ θ̃ θ̃ + μ̃ μ̃ (39)
1 k1 k2
2ê P MC ê ≤ ϕ êP MM P ê + êP BB T P ê
T T
(34)
ϕ So, substituting updating laws (19) and (20), we have
where ϕ is a positive value. In addition, it can be veri- 
λ
fied that V̇ (t) ≤ −ê Q − ϕP MM P − λI −
T T
ê
1−τ





êT P Bν(t) ≤
v(t)
∞
B T P ê
1 (35) λ
− eT R − λI − e
1−τ
Also, 
4 1
T
2
 + −θ̂ + α 2 + β 2 +
B P ê

μ̂êT P Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) λ ϕ





= μ̂êT P Bsgn B T P ê(t) = μ̂

B T P ê
1 (36) + −μ̂ + 2σ + 2
v(t)
∞
B T P ê
1


2

and − θ̃
B T P ê
− μ̃
B T P ê
1 (40)

θ̂ êT P B y(t) − C x̂(t) Thus,


2 
= θ̂ êT P BB T P ê = θ̂
B T P ê
(37) V̇ (t) ≤ −ê Q − ϕP MM T P − λI −
T λ
ê
1 − τ2
Now, apply expressions (33)–(37) to (28), therefore, 
λ
we have − eT R − λI − e
1 − τ2
1 
V̇ (t) ≤ −êT Qê + ϕ êP MM T P ê + êP BB T P ê 4 1

B T P ê
2
ϕ + −θ + α 2 + β 2 +
λ ϕ
4

2 

2 


T

+ α 2 + β 2
B T P êT
+ λ
ê(t)
+ −μ + 2σ + 2
v(t)

B P ê
(41)
λ ∞ 1


2

2
+ ê t − τ (t)
+
e(t)

Since the adaptations laws, (19) and (20), are increas-


2

ing, hence choosing sufficiently large positive values
+
e t − τ (t)
+ 2σ
B T P ê
1 for initial conditions θ̂0 and μ̂0 and also selecting






2 smallest values for ϕ and λ lead to V̇ (t) ≤ 0. There-
+ 2
v(t)
∞
B T P ê
1 − θ̂
B T P ê
fore, the closed-loop system is uniformly bounded and

− μ̂
B T P ê
1 + 2eT S(A + BK)e estimation error, ê, and tracking error, e, will be con-
verged to zero. 
λ 




+
ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2
1 − τ2 4.2 Robustness to the input nonlinearities


2

2
− λ
ê t − τ (t)
+
e t − τ (t)
Due to some practical limitations in the control sys-
tems, it is commonly observed that the control input
+ θ̃˙ θ̃ + μ̃
1 1 ˙
μ̃ (38)
k1 k2 is conditioned by the unknown nonlinear and/or nons-
mooth functions. Among them, hysteresis and dead-
Then by doing some simplifications, we can write zone nonlinearities very commonly occurred, which
 limit the system performance and sometimes even
λ
V̇ (t) ≤ −ê Q − ϕP MM P − λI −
T T
ê causes the instability.
1 − τ2
 In this section, we will introduce the dead-zone
λ nonlinearity and a model of hysteresis function, re-
− eT R − λI − e
1 − τ2 spectively.
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems 1343

Theorem 2 For the chaotic system dynamic (43) sat-

isfying A1 to A6, if the observer system (15) and the
adaptive controller (44) with the updating laws (19)
and (20) are used then the closed-loop system is sta-
ble and the tracking error, e, and the estimation error,
ê, converge to the zero in spite of the unknown input
dead-zone nonlinearity.

Proof The proof is given in Appendix A. 

4.2.2 Hysteresis nonlinearity

Fig. 1 Dead-zone nonlinearity The hysteresis nonlinearities are another undesirable

phenomenon for which various models have been pre-
sented. Because the current output variable of the hys-
4.2.1 Dead-zone nonlinearity
teresis models depends on the rate of the input vari-
able, its input-output relation is inherently dynamical.
Generally, the static model of the dead-zone nonlinear- A well-known model of the hysteresis phenomenon is
ity is described by the following input-output relation: the Backlash-like hysteresis model. The general de-
⎧ scription of the backlash-like hysteresis can be repre-
⎨ mi zi − ni1 for zi > ni1
sented by the following equations:
D i (zi ) = 0 for ni2 ≤ zi ≤ ni1 (42)
⎩ 
mi zi − ni2 for zi < ni2
wi (t) = H i zi (t), żi (t)
⎧
where ni1 , ni2 are the widths of the dead zone and mi ⎪
⎪ ci (zi (t) − B), if żi (t) > 0 and
is the slope of function. The dead-zone function (42) ⎪
⎪ w(t) = ci (zi (t) − Bi )
⎨
can be depicted as shown in Fig. 1. Note that, if z is = ci (zi (t) − B), if żi (t) < 0 and (45)
given as a vector such as z = [zi ]p×1 , then we have ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ w(t) = ci (zi (t) + Bi )
⎩
D(z) = [D i (zi )]p×1 . wi (t− ) otherwise
Now, let us consider that the input control system in
(5) is exposed to the unknown dead-zone nonlinearity, where zi and wi are the input and output variable, re-
such that spectively, for i = 1, 2, . . . , p and ci and Bi are the
positive constants which represent the slope of the
 
ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + Bη x(t), x t − d(t) lines and the backlash distance, respectively. A suit-
 able approximation of the backlash-like model (45)
+ BD z(t) + Bν(t) (43)
has been proposed by Su et al. [26] which is an dy-
y(t) = Cx(t) namic equation description as shown below
 
where z(t) ∈ R p is the control input variable. The dwi  dzi 

= αi  (ci zi − wi ) + B1i dzi (46)
main task of overall closed-loop system is again to dt dt  dt
track the desired output trajectory constructed by
model reference (12). According to this, let the con- where αi , ci, and B1i are unknown positive constants
trol input, z(t), is given as with ci > B1i . A typical illustration of the backlash-
like hysteresis nonlinearity is shown in Fig. 2, where
z(t) = M̂ −1 u(t) (44) zi (t) = 2.5 sin(2.3t), αi = 1, ci = 1, B1i = 0.9, and
wi (0) = 0.
where M̂ = diag(m̂1 , m̂2 , . . . , m̂p ) is a positive defi- Here, consider, the control input of the system (5)
nite diagonal matrix which is designed later. And u(t) is conditioned by the backlash-like hysteresis model
was also introduced in (18). (46) such that
1344
Fig. 2 Backlash like hysteresis nonlinearity
 
ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + Bη x(t), x t − d(t)
 posed methods concerning with the forcing the un-
+ BH z(t), ż(t) + Bν(t)
y(t) = Cx(t)
where z(t) ∈ R p is the control input and H (z(t), ż(t))
= [H i (zi (t), żi (t))]p×1 . To perform the perfect track-
ing procedure, the following controller is assigned:
z(t) = Ĉ −1 u(t)
where Ĉ = diag(ĉ1 , ĉ2 , . . . , ĉp ) is a positive definite
diagonal matrix and u(t) is (18).
Theorem 3 Consider the time-delayed chaotic system
(47) with assumptions A1–A6. By applying the adap-
tive controller (48) and utilizing the observer system
(15) and updating laws (19) and (20), it can be shown
that the closed-loop system is stable and, therefore, the
estimation error and the tracking error will converge
to zero in spite of the unknown input hysteresis nonlin-
earity.
Proof The proof is given in the Appendix B.
Remark 4 As it is shown, the proposed approaches
solved the problem of tracking procedure of the un-
known time-delay chaotic systems which are exposed
to the nonlinearity effects and disturbances. However,
there are a few works around the chaos control prob-
lem for the chaotic systems restricted by the nonlin-
earity effects. Noroozi et al. [23] proposed a variable-
structure control approach for a large class of chaotic
system while the time-delay is not considered. Also,
Roopaei et al. [24] proposed a new adaptive chaos con-
trol approach using sliding mode control method. In
H. Adloo et al.
that paper, only dead-zone nonlinearity is considered
without any time-delay consideration.
Remark 5 Note that, in order to remove the dis-
continuous’ effect due to the sign function, sgn(w),
in the proposed methods, experimentally, instead of
sign function, one can use the saturation function,
sat(w/ε), which is a good approximation of sign func-
tion, if ε is sufficiently assigned small.
5 Simulation results
To show the capability and the applicability of the pro-
(47) known time-delayed chaotic system to track the de-
sired trajectory while removing the input nonlinearity
effects and disturbances, three numerical examples are
presented. In the first example, a MIMO 3D chaotic
system has been presented and two others are SISO
first-order delayed-chaotic systems.
(48)
5.1 Chua circuit system
As the first example, a 3D Chua circuit system is con-
sidered with the following dynamic equation [9]:

ẋ1 (t) = σ1 −x1 + x2 − f (x1 ) − cx1 (t − τ )

+ (1 + sin 3t) x1 (t − τ )
+ N (z1 ) + d(t)
(49)
ẋ2 (t) = x1 − x2 + x3 + cx2 (t − τ ) + N (z2 )

ẋ3 (t) = −σ2 x2 + c 2x1 (t − τ )
+ x3 (t − τ ) + N (z3 )

where σ1 = 10, σ2 = 15, f (x1 ) = bx1 + 0.5(a −
b)(|x1 + 1| − |x1 − 1|), a = −1.28, b = −0.69, and
c = 0.1. Also, d(t) denotes the disturbance that is
d(t) = (0.8 sin 2t)x1 + (1 + 0.3 sin 2t)x2
+ (−1 + 0.5 cos t)x3 (50)
Also, N (zi ) denotes the input nonlinearity. In this sim-
ulation, the unknown time delay τ = 1 and the state
values of the Chua circuit system for t ∈ [−1, 0] is
X = [x1 x2 x3 ]T = [−1 −1 −1]T while the ini-
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems 1345

Fig. 3 States of the Chua circuit (solid line), observer system (dash line) and reference model system (dotted line) in case 1

tial condition of the observer system is chosen as 2, m2 = 1, and m2 = 0.5. In the numerical simulation,
[−0.5 − 0.5 − 0.5]T . Moreover, we used following matrix in the controller (44):
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
−8.1 10 0 1 0 0 1.5 0 0
F =⎣ 1 1 1⎦, L = ⎣0 1 0⎦ M̂ = ⎣ 0 0.8 0 ⎦
0 −15 3 0 0 1 0 0 0.35

and the desired trajectories are selected as The simulation results have been shown in Figs. 3–5.
⎧ Figure 3 depicts the state variables of the Chua cir-
⎪ πt −0.5t
⎪
⎪ r1 (t) = e cuit system, observer, and reference model systems.
⎪
⎪ 2 
⎪
⎨ In Figs. 4, and 5, the control input and the adaptation
1 πt
r2 (t) = cos parameters through the time are demonstrated, respec-
⎪
⎪ 2 4
⎪
⎪ tively.
⎪
⎪ 1
⎩ r3 (t) = cos(2πt)
2
Case 2: (Backlash-like hysteresis) In this case, the
Case 1: (Dead-zone) In this case, the adaptation backlash-like hysteresis model (46) has been consid-
gains are k1 = 5 and k2 = 20. Also, the dead-zone ered with αi = 1, and Bi1 = 0.5 for i = 1, 2, and 3.
parameters for all inputs, z1 (t), z2 (t), and z3 (t), are Moreover, c1 = 0.1, c2 = 0.2, and c3 = 0.5. In the sim-
ni1 = 1, ni2 = −1 for i = 1, 2, and 3. Moreover, m1 = ulation, we assigned k1 = 5 and k2 = 15. The initial
1346 H. Adloo et al.

Fig. 4 Inputs of the Chua circuit system, in case 1

The simulation results of this numerical example have

been shown in Figs. 6–8.

5.2 Mackey–Glass model

The Mackey–Glass model [27] is a first-order time-

delayed chaotic system which represents some physi-
ological systems behavior. The general dynamic equa-
tion of the Mackey–Glass model with input nonlinear-
ity is described as

x(t − τ )
ẋ(t) = −x(t) + 2
Fig. 5 Estimation parameters, θ (solid line), μ (dash line), in 1 + |x(t − τ )|w
case 1 
+ N z(t) + Bv(t), w > 1 (51)

conditions are selected to be same as the previous ex- Here, we consider w = 10 and τ = 0.8. Also, the dis-
ample. In addition, turbance is v(t) = 0.5 cos(t) and F = 1 and L = 1.
⎡ ⎤ The reference input is also r(t) = sin(πt/2). The state
0.05 0 0 response for the Mackey–Glass model is considered as
Ĉ = ⎣ 0 0.1 0 ⎦ x(t) = 1 − 0.2 sin(t) for t ∈ [−0.8, 0]. In addition, the
0 0 0.3 initial condition of the observer system is x̂0 = −0.5.
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems
Fig. 6 States of the Chua circuit system (solid line), observer system (dash line) and reference model system (dotted line) in case 2
Case 3: (Dead-zone nonlinearity) Dead-zone non-
linearity’s parameters are n1 = n2 = 1 and m = 1.5.
The simulation results of this example for k1 = 1, k2 =
1.5, and m̂ = 0.7 are illustrated in Fig. 9.
Case 4: (Backlash-like hysteresis) In this example,
the parameters of the backlash model are α = 0.3,
B1 = 0.5, and c = 2. The simulation results for k1 =
1, k2 = 1.5, and ĉ = 1 are shown in Fig. 10.
Ikeda model The Ikeda model is another first-order
chaotic system with time delay that its dynamic equa-
tion is [28]:
 
ẋ(t) = −3x(t) + 24 sin x(t − τ ) + N z(t) + Bv(t)
The time delay is τ = 0.4 and v(t) = 0.1 cos(t). It is
also assumed that the reference signal is r(t) = sin(3t)
and F = −2 and L = 1. The state response is x(t) =
1 − 0.1 sin(t) for t ∈ [−0.8, 0].
1347
Case 5: (Dead-zone) The dead-zone nonlinearity’s
parameters are n1 = n2 = 1 and m = 2. Moreover,
k1 = 2.5 and k2 = 10. The simulation results for m̂ =
1.2 are illustrated in Fig. 11.
Case 6: (Backlash-like hysteresis) The backlash-like
hysteresis’ parameters are α = 0.3, B1 = 1, and c = 1.
By selecting k1 = 6 and k2 = 0.6 and ĉ = 0.05, the
simulation results are obtained as shown in Fig. 12.
6 Conclusion
The main results of this article was concerning the
chaos MRAC of a nonlinear unknown time-delay sys-
tem with the input nonlinearities. Using the observer-
based adaptive control approach, it was shown that the
output system tracks a desired trajectory. Finally, the
effectiveness of the proposed method was evaluated
via simulation results.
1348 H. Adloo et al.

Fig. 7 Inputs of the Chua circuit system, in case 2

 
˙ = Aê(t) + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)
ê(t)
 
+ B D z(t) − u(t)
θ̂ 
+ Bν(t) − B y(t) − C x̂(t)
2
μ̂ 
− Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (A.1)
2
Note that the model of the dead-zone nonlinearity (42)
can be reformulated as
 
Fig. 8 Estimation parameters, θ (solid line), μ (dash line), in D z(t) = M̄z(t) + ζ z(t) (A.2)
case 2
where M̄ = diag(m1 , m2 , . . . , mp ) and ζ (z(t)) =
[ζi (zi (t))]1×p where ζi (zi (t)) for i = 1, . . . , p are
Appendix A: Robustness to dead-zone evaluated as follows:
nonlinearity ⎧m n
⎪ i 1i for zi ≥ n1i ,
 ⎨ −mi zi for 0 ≤ zi < n1i ,
ζi zi (t) = (A.3)
Regarding system (43) and observer system (15), the ⎩ −mi zi for −n2i < zi < 0,
⎪
estimation error dynamic is mi n2i for zi ≤ −n2i
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems 1349

Fig. 9 a State of Mackey model (solid line), observer system (dash line) and reference model (dotted line), b Control input, c Estima-
tion parameters, θ (solid line), μ (dash line), in case 3

It is clear that ζi (zi (t)) for i = 1, . . . , p are bounded, μ̂ 

− Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (A.5)
and satisfy |ζi (zi (t))| ≤ ρi where ρi are the pos- 2
itive numbers. Therefore, it can be assumed that Then, by applying the control input (44), we have
ζ (z) ≤ E. It is also assumed that mi , ni1 , and ni2
 
for i = 1, . . . , p are unknown and only it is known ˙ = Aê(t) + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)
ê(t)
that there are two positive definite matrices, M1 and  
M2 , such that + B M̄ M̂ −1 − I u(t) + B ν(t) + ζ (t)
θ̂ 
M1 < M̄ < M2 (A.4) − B y(t) − C x̂(t)
2
By applying these, we can write μ̂ 
− Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (A.6)
2
 
˙ = Aê(t) + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)
ê(t)
 Now, define M̃ = M̄ − M̂, so we have
+ B M̄z(t) − u(t)  
˙ = Aê(t) + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t)
ê(t)
 θ̂  
+ B ν(t) + ζ (t) − B y(t) − C x̂(t) + B M̃ M̂ −1 u(t) + B ν(t) + ζ (t)
2
1350 H. Adloo et al.

Fig. 10 a State of Mackey model (solid line), observer system (dash line) and reference model (dotted line), b Control input, c Esti-
mation parameters, θ (solid line), μ (dash line), in case 4


θ̂  + M̃ M̂ −1 Ke(t)
− B y(t) − C x̂(t)
2  
+ 2êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 F xm (t) + Lr(t)
μ̂  
− Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (A.7) + ν(t) + ζ (t)
2

On the other hand, noting (15), (18), and (12), the − θ̂ êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t)
tracking error dynamic is 
− μ̂êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t)
ė(t) = (A + BK)e(t) (A.8) + 2eT (t)S(A + BK)e(t)
λ 




Here, assume that the Lyapunov function (25) is also +
ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2
considered. Thus, according to (18), (A.3), and (A.4), 1 − τ2


2

2
and with some simplification, the derivation of the − λ
ê t − τ (t)
+
e t − τ (t)

Lyapunov function is
1 ˙ 1 ˙
+ θ̃ θ̃ + μ̃ μ̃ (A.9)
V̇ (t) = 2êT (t)P Aê(t) k1 k2
  
+ 2êT (t)P B η x(t), x t − τ (t) Noting A4, we have
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems 1351

Fig. 11 a State of Ikeda model (solid line), observer system (dash line) and reference model (dotted line), b Control input, c Estimation
parameters, θ (solid line), μ (dash line), in case 5

 

2

2
V̇ (t) = êT (t) P (A − MC) + (A − MC)T P ê(t) − λ
ê t − τ (t)
+
e t − τ (t)

+ 2êT (t)P MC ê(t) 1 ˙ 1 ˙

+ θ̃ θ̃ + μ̃ μ̃ (A.10)
   k1 k2
+ 2êT (t)P B η x(t), x t − τ (t)

+ M̃ M̂ −1 Ke(t) Now, regarding (30), we can write the following ex-
 pressions:
+ 2êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 F xm (t) + Lr(t)

+ 2êT (t)P B ν(t) + ζ (t)    
 2êT (t)P B η x(t), x t − τ (t) + M̃ M̂ −1 Ke(t)
− θ̂ êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t)






 ≤ 2
B T P êT
α
ê(t)
+ β
ê t − τ (t)

− μ̂êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t) 



+ (α + ε1 )
e(t)
+ β
e t − τ (t)
+ σ
+ 2eT (t)S(A + BK)e(t)






≤ 2
B T P êT
ᾱ
ê(t)
+ β
ê t − τ (t)

λ 




+
ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2 




1 − τ2 + ᾱ
e(t)
+ β
e t − τ (t)
+ σ
1352 H. Adloo et al.

Fig. 12 a State of Ikeda model (solid line), observer system (dash line) and reference model (dotted line), b Control input, c Estimation
parameters, θ (solid line), μ (dash line), in case 6




where M̃ M̂ −1 K ≤ ε1 and ᾱ = α + ε1 . So, from the ≤

M̃ M̂ −1 F xm (t) + Lr(t)
∞
lemma, it is shown that

+
ν(t)
∞ +
ζ (t)
∞
B T P ê
1
   

2êT (t)P B η x(t), x t − τ (t) + M̃ M̂ −1 Ke(t) ≤ (κ + δ + E)

B T P ê
(A.12)
1
4

2 

2
≤ ᾱ 2 + β 2
B T P ê
+ λ
ê(t)

λ where it is assumed M̃ M̂ −1 (F xm (t) + Lr(t))∞ ≤ κ.


2

2 In addition,
+
ê t − τ (t)
+
e(t)


2


+
e t − τ (t)
+ 2σ
B T P ê
1 (A.11) θ̂ êT P B y(t) − C x̂(t)


2
= θ̂ êT P BB T P ê = θ̂
B T P ê
(A.13)
Also, from A3, it can be shown that
   and
êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 F xm (t) + Lr(t) + ν(t) + ζ (t)

 
≤
M̃ M̂ −1 F xm (t) + Lr(t) + ν(t) μ̂êT P Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t)





+ ζ (t)
∞
B T P ê
1 = μ̂êT P Bsgn B T P ê(t) = μ̂
B T P ê
1 (A.14)
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems 1353

Moreover, and with respect to the fact that adaptations laws, (19)
and (20), are increasing, therefore, choosing positive
1
2êT P MC ê ≤ ϕ êP MM T P ê + êP BB T P ê (A.15) values for initial conditions θ̂0 and μ̂0 leads to θ̂ (t) > 0
ϕ and μ̂(t) > 0. So, it is not difficult to show that
Now, by applying expressions and inequalities (A.10)– 
−θ̂ êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t)
(A.14), we have

1 −μ̂êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t) < 0 (A.19)
V̇ (t) ≤ −êT Qê + ϕ êP MM T P ê + êP BB T P ê
ϕ Finally, by choosing sufficiently large positive values
4

2 

2 for θ̂0 and μ̂0 , and smallest values for ϕ and λ, we
+ ᾱ 2 + β 2
B T P ê
+ λ
ê(t)

λ have V̇ (t) ≤ 0. Therefore, the closed-loop system is


2

2 uniformly bounded and estimation error, ê, and track-
+
ê t − τ (t)
+
e(t)
ing error, e, will be converged to zero.


2

+
e t − τ (t)
+ 2σ
B T P ê
1

+ 2(κ + δ + E)
B T P ê
1 Appendix B: Robustness to hysteresis nonlinearity

− θ̂ êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t) In this case, noting (47) and (15), we can write the
 estimation error dynamics as shown below:
− μ̂êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t)
   


2

ê˙ = Aê + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t) + B H z(t) − u(t)
− θ̂
B T P ê
− μ̂
B T P ê
1
θ̂ 
+ 2e (t)S(A + BK)e(t)
T + Bν − B y(t) − C x̂(t)
2
λ 




+
ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2 μ̂ 
1 − τ2 − Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (B.1)
2


2
− λ
ê t − τ (t)
It is worthy to note that the analytic solution of the


2 1 dynamic equation (49) is
+
e t − τ (t)
+ θ̃˙ θ̃ + μ̃
1 ˙
μ̃ (A.16)
k1 k2 H (z, ż) = C̄z + ξ(z, ż) (B.2)
Then by substituting adaptations laws (19) and (20), it
where H (z(t), ż(t)) = [H i (zi (t), żi (t))]p×1 such that
can be easily shown that
H i (zi , żi ) = ci zi (t) + ξi (zi , żi ) and C̄ =

λ diag (c1 , c2 , . . . , cp ) with
V̇ (t) ≤ −êT (t) Q − ϕP MM T P − λI −
1 − τ2
 ξi (zi , żi )
λ
× ê(t) − eT (t) R − λI − e(t) = (w0i − ci z0i )e−αi (zi −z0i )sgn(żi )
1 − τ2  zi
 −αi zi sgn(żi )
4 2 1
T
2 +e (B1i − ci )eαi λsgn(żi ) dλ (B.3)
+ −θ + ᾱ + β + 2
B P ê
z0i
λ ϕ


where w0i and z0i denote wi (0) and zi (0). It can be
+ −μ + 2σ + 2(κ + δ + E)
B T P ê
1
easily verified that the expression (B.2) is bounded

− θ̂ êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t) such that [26]
  
− μ̂êT (t)P B M̃ M̂ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t) ξi (zi , żi ) ≤ ci − B1i (B.4)
αi
(A.17)
Thus, let us suppose that ξ(z, ż) ≤ Ω where Ω is a
In this expression, clearly if M̂ is chosen, such that positive constant. Moreover, assume that there are two
0 < M̂ ≤ M1 , then we have positive definite matrices, C1 and C2 such that

M̃ > 0 (A.18) C1 < C̄ < C2 (B.5)

1354 H. Adloo et al.







Noting to these, the error estimation dynamic (B.1) is ≤ 2
B T P êT
α
ê(t)
+ β
ê t − τ (t)

   




ê˙ = Aê + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t) + B C̃ Ĉ −1 − I u + (α + ε2 )
e(t)
+ β
e t − τ (t)
+ σ







θ̂  ≤ 2
B T P êT
ᾱ
ê(t)
+ β
ê t − τ (t)

+ Bν − B y(t) − C x̂(t) 




2 + ᾱ
e(t)
+ β
e t − τ (t)
+ σ (B.10)
μ̂ 
− Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (B.6) Thus,
2
   
Define C̃ = C̄ − Ĉ, then êT (t)P B η x(t), x t − τ (t) + C̃ Ĉ −1 Ke(t)
  2 2

2
˙ = Aê(t) + Bη x(t), x t − τ (t) + B C̃ Ĉ −1 u(t)
ê(t) ≤ ᾱ + β 2
B T P ê

λ
 θ̂  

2

2
+ B ν(t) + ξ(t) − B y(t) − C x̂(t) + λ
ê(t)
+
ê t − τ (t)

2


2

2
μ̂  +
e(t)
+
e t − τ (t)

− Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (B.7)

2
+ σ
B T P ê
1 (B.11)
Also, from (15), (12), and (18) it is verified that
where ᾱ = α + ε2 and C̃ Ĉ −1 K ≤ ε2 . Noting A2 it
ė(t) = (A + BK)e(t) (B.8)
is shown that
Let us consider again Lyapunov function (25). Now,   
according to A4, (B.7), and (B.8), we can write êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 F xm (t) + Lr(t) + ν(t) + ζ (t)


V̇ (t) = êT (t) P (A − MC) + (A − MC)T P ê(t) ≤ (ε + δ + Ω)

B T P ê
1 (B.12)

+ 2êT (t)P MC ê(t) where C̃ Ĉ −1 (F xm (t) + Lr(t))∞ ≤ ε. Now, by ap-

   plying expressions and inequalities (B.11) and (B.12),
+ 2êT (t)P B η x(t), x t − τ (t)
 we have
+ M̃ M̂ −1 Ke(t)
1
 V̇ (t) ≤ −êT Qê + ϕ êP MM T P ê + êP BB T P ê
+ 2êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 F xm (t) + Lr(t) ϕ
4

2 

2
+ ν(t) + ζ (t) + ᾱ 2 + β 2
B T P ê
+ λ
ê(t)

 λ
− θ̂ êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t)

2

2
 +
ê t − τ (t)
+
e(t)

− μ̂êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t)


2

 +
e t − τ (t)
+ 2σ
B T P ê
1
− θ̂ êT (t)P B y(t) − C x̂(t)

 + 2(ε + δ + Ω)
B T P ê
1
− μ̂êT (t)P Bsgn y(t) − C x̂(t) 
− θ̂ êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t)
+ 2eT (t)S(A + BK)e(t) 
λ 



− μ̂êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t)
+
ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2

2

1 − τ2 − θ̂
B T P ê
− μ̂
B T P ê



2

2 1
− λ
ê t − τ (t)
+
e t − τ (t)
+ 2e (t)S(A + BK)e(t)
T

1 ˙ 1 ˙ λ 




+ θ̃ θ̃ + μ̃ μ̃ (B.9) +
ê(t)
2 +
e(t)
2
k1 k2 1 − τ2


2

2
Similar to that of the previous proof, it can be shown − λ
ê t − τ (t)
+
e t − τ (t)

that
    1 ˙ 1 ˙
+ θ̃ θ̃ + μ̃ μ̃ (B.13)
êT (t)P B η x(t), x t − τ (t) + C̃ Ĉ −1 Ke(t) k1 k2
Observer-based model reference adaptive control for unknown time-delay chaotic systems 1355

Then by substituting adaptations laws (19) and (20), 6. Harb, A., Harb, B.: Chaos control of a third-order phase
we have locked loop using backstepping nonlinear controller. Chaos
Solitons Fractals 20, 719–723 (2004)


λ 7. Tian, Y.C., Gao, F.: Adaptive control of chaotic continuous-
V̇ (t) ≤ −ê (t) Q − ϕP MM P − λI −
T T
time systems with delay. Physica D 117, 1–12 (1998)
1 − τ2
8. Hua, C., Guan, X.: Robust control of time-delay chaotic


λ systems. Phys. Lett. A 314, 72–80 (2003)
× ê(t) − eT (t) R − λI − e(t) 9. Ting, C.S.: An observer-based approach to controlling
1 − τ2 time-delay chaotic systems via Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy

4 1
T
2 model. Inf. Sci. 177, 4314–4328 (2007)
+ −θ + ᾱ 2 + β 2 +
B P ê
10. Bowong, S., Tewa, J.J.: Unknown inputs’ adaptive observer
λ ϕ

+ −μ + 2σ + 2(ε + δ + Ω)
B T P ê
1 Comput. Model. 48, 1826–1839 (2008)

− θ̂ êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t)

− μ̂êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t) (B.14)
Consider that Ĉ is chosen to be satisfied 0 < Ĉ ≤ C1 ,
then we have
C̃ > 0 (B.15)
and with respect to the fact that adaptations laws, (19)
and (20), are increasing, therefore, choosing positive
values for initial conditions θ̂0 and μ̂0 leads to θ̂ (t) > 0
and μ̂(t) > 0, so, it is not difficult to show that
 17. Liu, Y.J., Wang, W., Tong, S.C., Liu, Y.S.: Robust adap-
−θ̂ êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 y(t) − C x̂(t)
 of fuzzy approximation parameters. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man
−μ̂êT (t)P B C̃ Ĉ −1 sgn y(t) − C x̂(t) < 0 (B.16)
Finally, by choosing sufficiently large positive values
for θ̂0 and μ̂0 , and smallest values for ϕ and λ, we
have V̇ (t) ≤ 0. Therefore, the closed-loop system is
uniformly bounded and estimation error, ê, and track-
ing error, e, will be converged to zero.
References
1. Ott, E., Grebogi, C., Yorke, J.A.: Controlling chaos. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 164, 1196–1199 (1990)
2. Lee, K.W., Singh, S.N.: Robust control of chaos in Chua’s
circuit based on internal model principle. Chaos Solitons
Fractals 31, 1095–1107 (2007)
3. Wang, Y., Chai, T., Zhang, Y.: State observer-based adap-
tive fuzzy output-feedback control for a class of uncertain
nonlinear systems. Inf. Sci. 180, 5029–5040 (2010)
4. Nazzal, J.M., Natsheh, A.N.: Chaos control using sliding-
mode theory. Chaos Solitons Fractals 33, 695–702 (2007)
5. Wang, H., Han, Z.Z., Zhang, W., Xie, Q.Y.: Synchroniza-
tion of unified chaotic systems with uncertain parameters
based on the CLF. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 10,
715–722 (2009)
for a class of chaotic systems with uncertainties. Math.
11. Solak, E., Morgül, Ö., Ersoy, U.: Observer-based control of
a class of chaotic systems. Phys. Lett. A 279, 47–55 (2001)
12. Hua, C., Guan, X., Li, X., Shi, P.: Adaptive observer-based
control for a class of chaotic systems. Chaos Solitons Frac-
tals 22, 103–110 (2004)
13. Boulkroune, A., Saad, M.M., Farza, M.: Adaptive fuzzy
controller for multivariable nonlinear state time-varying de-
lay systems subject to input nonlinearities. Fuzzy Sets Syst.
164(1), 45–65 (2011)
14. Hu, Q., Ma, G., Xie, L.: Robust and adaptive variable-
structure output feedback control of uncertain systems with
input nonlinearity. Automatica 44, 552–559 (2008)
15. Tarbouriech, S., Prieur, C., Queinnec, I.: Stability analy-
sis for linear systems with input backlash through sufficient
LMI conditions. Automatica 46(11), 1911–1915 (2010)
16. Barreiro, A., Baños, A.: Input–output stability of systems
with backlash. Automatica 42, 1017–1024 (2006)
tive tracking control for nonlinear systems based on bounds
Cybern. 40, 170–184 (2010)
18. Liu, Y.J., Wang, W.: Adaptive fuzzy control for a class of
uncertain nonaffine nonlinear systems. Inf. Sci. 177, 3901–
3917 (2007)
19. Liu, Y.J., Zhou, N.: Observer-Based adaptive fuzzy-neural
control for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems with un-
known dead-zone input. ISA Trans. 49, 462–469 (2010)
20. Liu, Y.J., Zheng, Y.Q.: Adaptive robust fuzzy control for
a class of uncertain chaotic systems. Nonlinear Dyn. 57,
431–439 (2009)
21. Zhou, N., Liu, Y.J., Tong, S.C.: Adaptive fuzzy output feed-
back control of uncertain nonlinear systems with nonsym-
metric dead-zone input. Nonlinear Dyn. 63(4), 771–778
(2010)
22. Liu, Y.J., Tong, S.C., Wang, W., Li, Y.M.: Observer-based
direct adaptive fuzzy control of uncertain nonlinear systems
and its applications. Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst. 7, 681–
690 (2009)
23. Noroozi, N., Roopaei, M., Karimaghaee, P., Safavi, A.A.:
Simple adaptive variable-structure control for unknown
chaotic systems. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul.
15, 707–727 (2010)
24. Roopaei, M., Sahraei, B.R., Lin, T.C.: Adaptive sliding
mode control in a novel class of chaotic systems. Commun.
Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 15, 4158–4170 (2010)
25. Khalil, H.K.: Nonlinear Systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs (2003)
1356
26. Su, C.Y., Stepanenko, Y., Svoboda, J., Leung, T.P.: Robust
adaptive control of a class of nonlinear systems with un-
known backlash-like hysteresis. IEEE Trans. Autom. Con-
trol 45, 2427–2432 (2000)
27. Mackey, M.C., Glass, L.: Oscillation and chaos in physio-
logical control systems. Science 197, 287–289 (1977)
H. Adloo et al.
28. Lu, H., He, Z.: Chaotic behaviors in first order autonomous
continuous time systems with delay. IEEE Trans. CAS I 43,
700–702 (1996)
29. Jiang, Z.P., Praly, L.: Design of robust adaptive controllers
for nonlinear systems with dynamic uncertainties. Auto-
matica 32, 1211–1215 (1998)