On the Stability of Nonlinear Receding Horizon Control: A Geometric Perspective
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
%!TEX root = LCSSmainmax.tex The widespread adoption of nonlinear Receding Horizon Control (RHC) strategies by industry has led to more than 30 years of intense research efforts to provide stability guarantees for these methods. However, current theoretical guarantees require that each (generally nonconvex) planning problem can be solved to (approximate) global optimality, which is an unrealistic requirement for the derivative-based local optimization methods generally used in practical implementations of RHC. This paper takes the first step towards understanding stability guarantees for nonlinear RHC when the inner planning problem is solved to first-order stationary points, but not necessarily global optima. Special attention is given to feedback linearizable systems, and a mixture of positive and negative results are provided. We establish that, under certain strong conditions, first-order solutions to RHC exponentially stabilize linearizable systems. Surprisingly, these conditions can hold even in situations where there may be textitspurious local minima. Crucially, this guarantee requires that state costs applied to the planning problems are in a certain sense `compatible' with the global geometry of the system, and a simple counter-example demonstrates the necessity of this condition. These results highlight the need to rethink the role of global geometry in the context of optimization-based control.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2021.
Builds on
8 of 28 references.
References · 8
- 2018Gradient Descent Provably Optimizes Over-parameterized Neural Networkscited by 655
- 2017How to Escape Saddle Points Efficientlycited by 284
- 2015Escaping From Saddle Points --- Online Stochastic Gradient for Tensor Decompositioncited by 241
- 2018Global Convergence of Policy Gradient Methods for the Linear Quadratic Regulatorcited by 211
- 2016Matrix Completion has No Spurious Local Minimumcited by 124
- 2016Gradient Descent Learns Linear Dynamical Systemscited by 78
- 2015Simple, Efficient, and Neural Algorithms for Sparse Codingcited by 37
- 2019Iterative Linearized Control: Stable Algorithms and Complexity Guaranteescited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 1; 2023: 2.
4 papers.
- 2023Provable Guarantees for Generative Behavior Cloning: Bridging Low-Level Stability and High-Level Behaviorcited by 33
- 2023Butterfly Effects of SGD Noise: Error Amplification in Behavior Cloning and Autoregressioncited by 14
- 2022Online Control of Unknown Time-Varying Dynamical Systemscited by 13
- 2021Provable Regret Bounds for Deep Online Learning and Controlcited by 6
- 2023Butterfly Effects of SGD Noise: Error Amplification in Behavior Cloning and Autoregression17 Oct 2023
- 2023Provable Guarantees for Generative Behavior Cloning: Bridging Low-Level Stability and High-Level Behavior27 Jul 2023
- 2022Online Control of Unknown Time-Varying Dynamical Systems16 Feb 2022
- 2021Provable Regret Bounds for Deep Online Learning and Control15 Oct 2021