Optimal Control with Lyapunov Stability Guarantees for Space Applications

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.08854
• Title: Optimal Control with Lyapunov Stability Guarantees for Space Applications
• Authors: Abhijeet, Mohamed Naveed Gul Mohamed, Aayushman Sharma, Suman Chakravorty (Texas A&M University)
• Classification: math.OC (Optimization and Control), cs.SY (Systems and Control), eess.SY (Systems and Control)
• Publication Date: October 9, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.08854v1

Abstract

This paper investigates the infinite-horizon optimal control problem (OCP) for nonlinear dynamical systems in space applications. The proposed methodology decomposes the problem into two stages: a finite-horizon OCP with regularized terminal cost that guides the system to a terminal set, and an infinite-horizon linear regulation phase within that set. The strategy guarantees global asymptotic stability under specific assumptions. The method preserves the complete nonlinear dynamics of the system before reaching the terminal set, then linearizes the system dynamics within the set. As the terminal set converges to the origin, the resulting optimal cost difference approaches zero, ensuring efficient and stable solutions. The approach is validated through simulations of three problems: spacecraft attitude control, rendezvous maneuvers, and soft landing.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Context

1. Control Challenges in Space Missions: Space exploration requires advanced control strategies to ensure mission success. From precise spacecraft orientation to fine maneuvers for docking and landing, numerous inherent challenges of the space environment must be overcome.
2. Limitations of Traditional Methods:
   • Shooting Method: Effective in attitude control and trajectory optimization, but exhibits poor adaptability and sensitivity to initial guesses
   • Direct Methods (SQP, Interior Point): Can handle constraints but cannot guarantee global asymptotic stability or provide feedback
   • Reinforcement Learning (RL): Highly data-dependent with inconsistent results
3. Long-term Stability Requirements: Space missions require systems to reach specific terminal states from arbitrary initial conditions, making global asymptotic stability particularly valuable for space applications.

Research Motivation

Addressing the limitations of existing methods in solving optimal control problems and the need for long-term stability, this paper reformulates the problem as an infinite-horizon OCP and employs a tractable approach to ensure feedback and guarantee global asymptotic stability.

Core Contributions

1. Proposes a novel infinite-horizon nonlinear optimal control solution framework: Decomposes the infinite-horizon problem into a finite-horizon nonlinear OCP and a linear regulation stage
2. Establishes theoretical guarantees: Proves that the proposed method satisfies the Bellman equation and provides a Control Lyapunov Function (CLF) ensuring global asymptotic stability
3. Develops practical algorithms: Combines a hybrid approach integrating iterative Linear Quadratic Regulator (iLQR) and Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR)
4. Validates method effectiveness: Verifies the approach on three critical space applications: spacecraft attitude control, rendezvous maneuvers, and soft landing
5. Provides convergence analysis: Proves that as the terminal set parameter M→0, the cost of the Auxiliary Construction OCP (AC-OCP) converges to the true infinite-horizon OCP cost

Methodology Details

Problem Formulation

Infinite-horizon optimal control problem is defined as:

J*∞(x) = min{ut} Σ(t=0 to ∞) c(xt, ut); given x0 = x
subject to: xt+1 = f(xt, ut)

where:

• xt ∈ Rn: system state vector
• ut ∈ Rp: control input
• c(xt, ut): incremental cost function

Model Architecture

1. Auxiliary Construction Optimal Control Problem (AC-OCP)

Converts the infinite-horizon problem to:

JM∞(x) = min{ut}(T-1, t=0), T [Σ(t=0 to T-1) c(xt, ut) + max(J̄∞(xT), M)]
subject to: xt+1 = f(xt, ut), xT ∈ ΩM

where ΩM = {x | J̄∞(x) ≤ M} is the terminal set.

2. Two-Stage Solution Strategy

Stage One: Nonlinear Finite-Horizon OCP

• Solves the finite-horizon problem using iLQR:

JT∞(x) = min{ut}(T-1, t=0) [Σ(t=0 to T-1) c(xt, ut) + J̄∞(xT)]

Stage Two: Linear Regulation

• Employs LQR controller within terminal set ΩM
• Linearizes system: J̄∞(x) = xTP∞x, where P∞ is the solution to the steady-state Riccati equation

3. iLQR Algorithm Implementation

Forward Pass:

uk+1_t = uk_t + αkt + Kt(xk+1_t - xk_t)
xk+1_t+1 = f(xk+1_t, uk+1_t)

Backward Pass: Computes Q-function partial derivatives and updates gains:

kt = -Q^(-1)_utut * Qut
Kt = -Q^(-1)_utut * Qutxt

Technical Innovations

1. Free Terminal Time Optimization: Optimizes transfer time T to ensure smooth transition to the terminal set
2. Asymptotic Optimality: Proves that limM→0 JM∞(x) = J*∞(x)
3. Stability Guarantees: The AC-OCP cost function satisfies the Bellman equation and serves as a CLF ensuring global asymptotic stability
4. Hybrid Dynamics Handling: Maintains complete nonlinear dynamics outside the terminal set and linearizes within it

Experimental Setup

Application Scenarios

The paper validates the method on three critical space applications:

1. Spacecraft Attitude Control
2. Rendezvous Maneuvers
3. Soft Landing

System Dynamics

1. Attitude Control

State vector: ψ, θ, φ, ω1, ω2, ω3T

• Euler angle dynamics and angular velocity dynamics
• Inertia matrix: J = diag4500, 2000, 7500
• Time horizon: 200 seconds, discretization step: 0.1 seconds

2. Rendezvous Maneuvers

State includes relative position error er, relative velocity error ev, and mass m

• Elliptical orbit dynamics
• Time horizon: 6000 seconds, discretization step: 2 seconds

3. Soft Landing

Combines attitude and position dynamics

• Martian gravity: gref = 0, 0, -3.7114T
• Includes mass variation and thrust constraints
• Time horizon: 30 seconds, discretization step: 0.2 seconds

Evaluation Metrics

• Total Cost Function: Quadratic cost c(x,u) = ½(xTQx + uTRu)
• Terminal State Error
• Control Input Smoothness
• Convergence Analysis

Experimental Results

Main Results

1. Attitude Control

• Transfer Time Impact: From 10 to 80 seconds, total cost decreases from 6.45×10^5 to 5.20×10^5
• State Convergence:
  • 10-second transfer: terminal error 34.86°, -33.19°, -36.71°, 2.79°/s, 6.02°/s, 0.97°/s
  • 80-second transfer: terminal error -0.77°, -0.15°, 0.55°, -0.05°/s, 0.02°/s, -0.05°/s

2. Rendezvous Maneuvers

• Cost Reduction with Transfer Time: Longer transfer times yield lower costs and smaller errors
• Terminal State Comparison:
  • 600 seconds: position error ~1400 km scale, velocity error ~5000 m/s scale
  • 2400 seconds: position error ~1 m scale, velocity error ~2 m/s scale

3. Soft Landing

• Successful Landing: r3=0 (landing) at 29.9 seconds
• Terminal Precision: position error -0.06 m, -0.03 m, 1.09 m, velocity error -0.007 m/s, -0.008 m/s, -0.99 m/s
• Constraint Handling: Processes altitude constraints through exponential penalty functions

Key Findings

1. Importance of Transfer Time Optimization: Longer transfer times allow the system to linearize closer to the origin, significantly reducing regulation cost
2. Smooth Transition: Appropriate transfer time avoids abrupt changes in control inputs
3. Robustness: The method performs well under different initial conditions and system parameters

Related Work

Main Research Directions

1. Traditional Optimal Control Methods: Shooting method, direct methods (SQP, interior point methods)
2. Modern Approaches: Reinforcement learning, model predictive control
3. Stability Theory: Lyapunov methods, control Lyapunov functions

Advantages of This Work

• Compared to shooting method: Provides feedback control and better robustness
• Compared to direct methods: Guarantees global asymptotic stability
• Compared to reinforcement learning: Theoretical guarantees and deterministic results

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Theoretical Contribution: Establishes a tractable solution framework for infinite-horizon nonlinear OCP
2. Practical Value: Validates method effectiveness on critical space applications
3. Stability Guarantees: Provides theoretical guarantees for global asymptotic stability

Limitations

1. Linearization Constraints: Linearization of certain systems (e.g., nonholonomic systems) may not be controllable
2. Constraint Handling: Hard constraints require conversion to soft constraints (e.g., altitude constraints in soft landing)
3. Computational Complexity: Requires transfer time optimization, increasing computational burden

Future Directions

1. Extension to Complex Constraints: Handle path constraints and hybrid systems
2. Real-time Implementation: Develop fast algorithms suitable for online applications
3. Robustness Enhancement: Consider model uncertainties and external disturbances

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor: Provides a complete mathematical framework with convergence proofs
2. Strong Practicality: Validates the method on three different space applications
3. Innovation: Cleverly combines advantages of finite-horizon and infinite-horizon methods
4. Stability Guarantees: Ensures global asymptotic stability through CLF

Weaknesses

1. Assumption Dependencies: Relies on system controllability and specific cost function properties
2. Parameter Tuning: Lacks clear guidance for selecting terminal set parameter M
3. Computational Efficiency: Transfer time optimization may require multiple iterative solutions

Impact

1. Academic Value: Provides a new theoretical framework for infinite-horizon nonlinear control
2. Engineering Significance: Offers practical design methods for space mission control
3. Extensibility: Method generalizable to other control problems requiring long-term stability

Applicable Scenarios

• Long-duration space missions
• Control systems requiring global stability guarantees
• Complex systems with nonlinear dynamics
• Critical missions with extreme safety requirements

References

The paper cites 23 relevant references covering important works in optimal control theory, spacecraft control, and numerical optimization methods, providing a solid theoretical foundation for the research.

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality paper with significant theoretical and practical contributions. The authors ingeniously convert the infinite-horizon problem into a tractable finite-horizon problem while maintaining stability guarantees. Validation on three important space applications demonstrates the practical value of the method. Despite some limitations, the paper provides valuable theoretical tools and practical methods for the aerospace control field.