Second-order AAA algorithms for structured data-driven modeling
Authors:
Michael S. Ackermann,
Ion Victor Gosea,
Serkan Gugercin,
Steffen W. R. Werner
Abstract:
The data-driven modeling of dynamical systems has become an essential tool for the construction of accurate computational models from real-world data. In this process, the inherent differential structures underlying the considered physical phenomena are often neglected making the reinterpretation of the learned models in a physically meaningful sense very challenging. In this work, we present thre…
▽ More
The data-driven modeling of dynamical systems has become an essential tool for the construction of accurate computational models from real-world data. In this process, the inherent differential structures underlying the considered physical phenomena are often neglected making the reinterpretation of the learned models in a physically meaningful sense very challenging. In this work, we present three data-driven modeling approaches for the construction of dynamical systems with second-order differential structure directly from frequency domain data. Based on the second-order structured barycentric form, we extend the well-known Adaptive Antoulas-Anderson algorithm to the case of second-order systems. Depending on the available computational resources, we propose variations of the proposed method that prioritize either higher computation speed or greater modeling accuracy, and we present a theoretical analysis for the expected accuracy and performance of the proposed methods. Three numerical examples demonstrate the effectiveness of our new structured approaches in comparison to classical unstructured data-driven modeling.
△ Less
Submitted 2 June, 2025;
originally announced June 2025.
A Taxonomy to Unify Fault Tolerance Regimes for Automotive Systems: Defining Fail-Operational, Fail-Degraded, and Fail-Safe
Authors:
Torben Stolte,
Stefan Ackermann,
Robert Graubohm,
Inga Jatzkowski,
Björn Klamann,
Hermann Winner,
Markus Maurer
Abstract:
This paper presents a taxonomy that allows defining the fault tolerance regimes fail-operational, fail-degraded, and fail-safe in the context of automotive systems. Fault tolerance regimes such as these are widely used in recent publications related to automated driving, yet without definitions. This largely holds true for automotive safety standards, too. We show that fault tolerance regimes defi…
▽ More
This paper presents a taxonomy that allows defining the fault tolerance regimes fail-operational, fail-degraded, and fail-safe in the context of automotive systems. Fault tolerance regimes such as these are widely used in recent publications related to automated driving, yet without definitions. This largely holds true for automotive safety standards, too. We show that fault tolerance regimes defined in scientific publications related to the automotive domain are partially ambiguous as well as taxonomically unrelated. The presented taxonomy is based on terminology stemming from ISO 26262 as well as from systems engineering. It uses four criteria to distinguish fault tolerance regimes. In addition to fail-operational, fail-degraded, and fail-safe, the core terminology consists of operational and fail-unsafe. These terms are supported by definitions of available performance, nominal performance, functionality, and a concise definition of the safe state. For verification, we show by means of two examples from the automotive domain that the taxonomy can be applied to hierarchical systems of different complexity.
△ Less
Submitted 12 July, 2022; v1 submitted 21 June, 2021;
originally announced June 2021.
