Approximate Tracking Controllability of Systems with Quadratic Nonlinearities

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2511.12634
• Title: Approximate Tracking Controllability of Systems with Quadratic Nonlinearities
• Authors: Manuel Rissel (ShanghaiTech University), Marius Tucsnak (Université de Bordeaux)
• Classification: math.OC (Optimization and Control)
• Publication Date: November 16, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.12634

Abstract

This paper investigates approximate tracking controllability for finite-dimensional continuous-time control systems. Given ε>0, the question is whether there exist controls such that state trajectories remain within an ε-neighborhood of an arbitrarily prescribed path in the state space. The authors conduct a systematic study of linear and quadratic time-invariant systems. For linear systems, negative results are obtained: unless the control space is isomorphic to the state space (a trivial case), approximate tracking controllability of the full state is impossible even in a weak sense. Based on these negative results for linear systems, the authors turn to nonlinear dynamics and prove weak approximate tracking controllability over arbitrary time horizons for a general class of systems with arbitrary linear parts and quadratic nonlinear terms. The weak approximate tracking controllability concept considered involves a relaxation metric. By developing applications to coupled systems (including motion planning problems), the authors emphasize the relevance of this weak setting and point out obstacles that arise in stronger norms. The framework yields global results even when the uncontrolled dynamics may develop singularities in finite time.

Research Background and Motivation

1. Research Problem

Traditional controllability theory primarily focuses on point-to-point control, i.e., whether input signals can drive state trajectories from arbitrary initial states to prescribed final states. In contrast, tracking controllability concerns controlling the full state or output functions of a system over the entire time interval 0,τ to track a prescribed trajectory. Specifically, this paper studies the following control system:

$\dot{x}(t) + Ax(t) + f(x(t)) = Bu(t), \quad t \in [0,\tau]$

where x is the state, u is the control, A is a linear operator, B is a control operator, and f is a (possibly) nonlinear term.

2. Problem Significance

Tracking controllability problems are important in multiple application domains:

• Complex network control: Maintaining network states near desired trajectories
• Robotics: Theoretical foundation for path tracking and motion planning
• Machine learning: Controllability analysis of continuous deep learning models such as neural ODEs

3. Limitations of Existing Approaches

• Output tracking has been relatively well-studied (García-Planas and Domínguez-García, Zamorano and Zuazua, etc.), but full-state tracking controllability lacks systematic investigation
• Existing research on tracking controllability of nonlinear systems is mainly limited to drift-free affine control systems
• For finite-dimensional systems, particularly those with quadratic nonlinearities, a systematic theoretical framework is lacking

4. Research Motivation

• The severe limitations of tracking controllability for linear systems (proven in this paper) motivate the study of nonlinear systems
• Quadratic nonlinearities naturally appear in many mathematical models (e.g., Lorenz system, finite-dimensional approximations of fluid mechanics equations)
• Second-order expansions provide more accurate approximations of nonlinear systems than linear approximations alone

Core Contributions

The main contributions of this paper include:

1. Negative Results for Linear Systems: Systematically proves that weak approximate tracking controllability of linear systems holds only in the trivial case where the control operator B is surjective (i.e., the control space is isomorphic to the state space) (Proposition 1.5)
2. Positive Results for Quadratic Systems: For quadratic nonlinear systems satisfying certain saturation assumptions (Assumption 3.3), proves weak approximate tracking controllability over arbitrary time horizons (Theorem 3.5)
3. Critical Role of Relaxation Norm: Introduces the relaxation norm |||·|||τ as a measurement tool, enabling positive results in this weak topology, while counterexamples demonstrate that similar results cannot be obtained in stronger L² norms
4. Applications to Coupled Systems: Applies main results to control problems for coupled ODE systems, including dynamic motion planning problems (Theorem 7.1)
5. Global Results: The framework guarantees global controllability even when uncontrolled dynamics may blow up in finite time

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Definition 1.1 (Approximate Tracking Controllability): Given τ>0 and a norm Nτ on L²(0,τ;X), system (1.1) is approximately tracking controllable on 0,τ with respect to Nτ if for every ψ∈W^{1,2}((0,τ);X) and ε>0, there exists a control function u∈L²(0,τ;U) such that the solution x with initial value x(0)=ψ(0) satisfies:

$N_\tau(x-\psi) \leq \varepsilon$

Relaxation Norm (Key Tool): For v∈L¹(0,τ;E), define:

$|||v|||_\tau := \sup_{t\in[0,\tau]} \left\|\int_0^t v(s)ds\right\|_E$

This norm is weaker than the L² norm, but it is precisely this weak topology that makes tracking controllability of quadratic systems possible.

Analysis of Linear Systems (Section 2)

Core Idea: Through duality analysis, transform the tracking controllability problem into characterization of the null space of operators.

Key Steps:

1. Introduce operator Fτ: L²(0,τ;U)→L²(0,τ;Y): $(F_\tau u)(t) = C\int_0^t \exp((t-\sigma)A)Bu(\sigma)d\sigma$
2. Compute its dual operator Ψτ: $(\Psi_\tau g)(\sigma) = B^*\left[\int_\tau^\sigma \exp((t-\sigma)A^*)C^*g(t)dt\right]$
3. Proof of Proposition 2.5:
   • If B is not surjective, there exists η∈X{0} such that B*η=0
   • Construct a special function g(t)=-α(t)A*η-α̇(t)η, where α(t)=(τ-t)η
   • Prove that Ψτg=0 but g≠0, hence the image of Fτ is not dense
4. For weak approximate tracking controllability, consider the extended system and obtain similar conclusions (Proposition 1.5)

Main Results for Quadratic Systems (Sections 3-6)

Saturation Assumption (Assumption 3.3):

• Define recursive sequence: E₀=Range(B), Eᵢ=ℱ(Eᵢ₋₁)
• where ℱ(E) is the maximal subspace such that any γ∈ℱ(E) can be expressed as γ=ξ₀-∑f(ξᵢ), ξᵢ∈E
• Assume there exists n_X such that E_=X

Simplified Assumption (Assumption 1.7): For each γ∈X, there exist u,ξ∈U such that γ=Bu-f(Bξ)

Proof Strategy (Based on Augmented System Method)

Step 1: Augmented System (Section 4) Introduce a system with two inputs: $\dot{w}(t) + A(w(t)+\zeta(t)) + f(w(t)+\zeta(t)) = \gamma(t)$

where ζ is a multiplicative control and γ is an additive control. When ζ=0, it reduces to the original system.

Key Lemma (Proposition 4.2): Establishes continuous dependence of solutions on data, providing stability guarantees for subsequent approximations.

Step 2: Trajectory Approximation (Section 5, Core Technique)

Proof Strategy of Proposition 5.1:

1. For γ∈E_ℓ (piecewise constant functions taking values in E_ℓ), assume γ=η-f(ξ), ξ,η∈E_{ℓ-1}
2. Utilize the quadratic property (1.4): $f(w)-\gamma = \frac{1}{2}(f(w+\xi)+f(w-\xi))-η$
3. Construct high-frequency oscillatory controls: $\zeta_n(t) = \mathcal{E}_n\xi, \quad \text{where} \quad (\mathcal{E}_n\xi)(t) = \chi(nt/\tau)\xi$
   χ is a 1-periodic function: χ(t)=ξ on [0,1/2), χ(t)=-ξ on [1/2,1)
4. Lemma 5.2 (Key Technical Lemma): Prove that for continuous φ: X→X, $h_n := \phi(w_1+\zeta_n) - \frac{1}{2}(\phi(w_1+\xi)+\phi(w_1-\xi)) + A\zeta_n$
   satisfies: $\lim_{n\to\infty}\|\mathcal{I}h_n\|_{C([0,\tau];X)}=0$
   where $(\mathcal{I}z)(t)=\int_0^t z(s)ds$
5. Prove convergence in relaxation norm: $|||\zeta_n|||_\tau \to 0 \quad \text{as} \quad n\to\infty$
   This is achieved by analyzing the integral $\int_0^t\zeta_n(s)ds$ and utilizing periodicity to cancel terms

Step 3: Iterative Construction (Section 6)

1. For target trajectory ψ, define γ=ψ̇+Aψ+f(ψ)
2. Apply Proposition 5.1 to approximate from E_ℓ to E_{ℓ-1}
3. Iterate n_X times, ultimately obtaining control in E₁=Range(B)
4. Since B:U→Range(B) is surjective, one can find u∈U realizing this control

Technical Innovations

1. Clever Use of Relaxation Norm:
   • Weaker than L² norm, allowing high-frequency oscillations
   • Consistent with physical concept of "averaging effects"
   • Controls errors in integral sense
2. Design of High-Frequency Oscillatory Controls:
   • Adapts Agrachev-Sarychev method (originally for fluid PDEs)
   • Exploits special structure of quadratic nonlinearities
   • Realizes "convexification principle" through rapid oscillations
3. Hierarchical Approximation Strategy:
   • Reduces one level per iteration through recursively defined subspace sequence E_i
   • Eventually reaches controllable subspace
   • Avoids direct assumption of global controllability
4. Stability Analysis:
   • Proposition 4.2 ensures continuous dependence under perturbations
   • Allows approximating non-smooth controls with smooth controls
   • Provides convergence guarantees for iterative process

Experimental Setup

Verification Examples for Theoretical Properties

As a purely theoretical work, this paper contains no numerical experiments but provides several illustrative examples:

Example 3.1 (Lorenz System): $\dot{x} = \begin{bmatrix}\sigma & -\sigma & 0\\-\rho & 1 & 0\\0 & 0 & \beta\end{bmatrix}x + \begin{bmatrix}0\\x_2x_3\\-x_1x_2\end{bmatrix} + \begin{bmatrix}1 & 0\\0 & 1\\0 & 1\end{bmatrix}u$

Verifies that Assumption 1.7 holds, hence this system is weakly approximately tracking controllable.

Example 1.9 (Negative Result): Consider the system: $\dot{x}_1 + x_1x_2 = u_1, \quad \dot{x}_2 + x_3^2 - x_1^2 = 0, \quad \dot{x}_3 - x_3x_2 = u_2$

• Satisfies assumptions of Proposition 1.8, hence is weakly approximately tracking controllable
• But is not (strongly) approximately tracking controllable

Proof Sketch: Choose target trajectory ψ=ψ₁,0,0^T where ψ₁ equals 1000 on 1/3,2/3. If an L² approximating sequence exists, then x₁≥999 on this interval, implying ẋ₂≥998000, contradicting boundedness of L² norm.

Example 3.4 (Non-triviality of Assumption 3.3):

• X=ℝ⁶, U=ℝ³
• f(x)=0,0,0,x₁x₂,x₁x₃,x₂x₃^T
• B=I₃,O₃^T

One can verify that Assumption 3.3 holds but Assumption 1.7 does not, showing that the former is indeed more general.

Experimental Results

Main Theoretical Results

Theorem 3.5 (Main Theorem): Suppose Assumption 3.3 holds and τ>0. For any ψ∈W^{1,2}((0,τ);X) and ε>0, there exists a control u∈C^∞(0,τ;U) such that the solution x with initial value x₀=ψ(0) satisfies: $|x(\tau)-\psi(\tau)| + |||x-\psi|||_\tau < \varepsilon$

Corollaries:

1. Global approximate controllability (special case)
2. Global existence of controlled system even if uncontrolled system may have finite-time blow-up

Applications to Coupled Systems (Section 7)

Theorem 7.1: Consider the coupled system $\dot{x} + Ax + f(x) = Bu, \quad \dot{z} + \tilde{\Gamma}(z,x) + \mathcal{B}(z) = 0$

If (z̄,x̄) satisfies the second equation and f,B satisfy Assumption 3.3, then for any ε>0, there exists u such that: $\sup_{t\in[0,\tau]}|z(t)-\bar{z}(t)| + |x(\tau)-\bar{x}(\tau)| + |||x-\bar{x}|||_\tau < \varepsilon$

Application Scenarios:

1. Dynamic Control: First equation serves as dynamic controller for second equation
2. Motion Planning (Example 7.3): Achieve trajectory tracking of z by controlling x

Specific Setup of Example 7.3:

• X=Z=ℝ^d, Γ̃(a,b)=a₁b₁,...,a_db_d^T
• Objective: Track reference curve z_ref remaining in certain orthogonal quadrant
• Construction: x_ℓ(t)=(𝒷_ℓ(z̄(t))-ż̄_ℓ(t))/z̄_ℓ(t)
• Result: sup_|z(t)-z_ref(t)|<ε

Theoretical Findings

1. Fundamental Difference Between Linear and Nonlinear:
   • Linear systems: Tracking controllability is extremely limited
   • Quadratic systems: Rich controllability in weak topology
2. Criticality of Norm Choice:
   • L² norm: May fail even for quadratic systems (Example 1.9)
   • Relaxation norm: Allows utilizing high-frequency oscillations for control
3. Sufficiency of Saturation Assumption:
   • Assumption 3.3 provides verifiable algebraic conditions
   • Decidable through finite iteration
4. Global vs. Local:
   • Traditional small-time local controllability requires complex Lie bracket conditions
   • This paper's method directly yields global results

Related Work

Main Research Directions

1. Classical Controllability Theory:
   • Coron's monograph: Systematic treatment of nonlinear system controllability
   • Jurdjevic-Kupka augmented method: Methodological foundation of this paper
2. Output Tracking Controllability:
   • García-Planas & Domínguez-García 12: Output tracking for linear systems
   • Zamorano & Zuazua 26: Tracking controllability of finite-dimensional linear systems and dual characterization
   • This paper: Extension from output tracking to full-state tracking
3. Affine System Tracking:
   • Liu & Sussmann 25: Approximate tracking for drift-free affine systems
   • Haynes & Hermes 13: Nonlinear controllability via Lie theory
   • This paper: Allows drift terms (linear + quadratic)
4. Small-Time Local Controllability:
   • Beauchard & Marbach 5: Quadratic obstructions for scalar input systems
   • This paper: Focus on global full-time controllability
5. Infinite-Dimensional Systems:
   • Agrachev & Sarychev 2,3: Controllability of Euler and Navier-Stokes equations
   • Shirikyan 24, Nersesyan 20,22: Approximate controllability of fluid equations
   • Koike et al. 15: Relaxation enhancement in incompressible fluids
   • This paper: Adapts these techniques to finite-dimensional quadratic systems

Advantages of This Paper

1. Systematicity: First systematic study of full-state tracking controllability for finite-dimensional systems
2. Completeness: Both negative results (linear) and positive results (quadratic)
3. Verifiability: Provides algebraically verifiable sufficient conditions
4. Applicability: Develops applications to coupled systems and motion planning

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Limitations of Linear Systems: Weak approximate tracking controllability ⟺ control operator is surjective (Proposition 1.5)
2. Possibilities for Quadratic Systems: Under saturation assumption, weak approximate tracking controllability over arbitrary time horizons (Theorem 3.5)
3. Importance of Norm:
   • Relaxation norm: Achievable
   • L² norm: Generally not achievable (Example 1.9)
   • L^p norm (p≥1): Similar obstacles exist (Remark 1.10)
4. Application Value: Applicable to dynamic control and motion planning (Theorem 7.1)

Limitations

1. Essentiality of Quadratic Property:
   • Method highly depends on quadratic structure
   • Non-quadratic perturbations only treatable under "small" assumptions (end of Section 1)
   • Extension to higher-order polynomials is non-trivial
2. Necessity of Weak Topology:
   • Results fail in stronger norms (e.g., L²)
   • Physical applications may require stronger control
3. Verification of Saturation Assumption:
   • Assumption 3.3 requires computing recursive sequence
   • May be computationally complex for high-dimensional systems
4. Smoothness Requirements:
   • Target trajectory requires ψ∈W^{1,2}
   • Treatment of non-smooth targets not addressed
5. Control Cost:
   • L² norm or energy of control not discussed
   • High-frequency oscillations may lead to high energy consumption

Future Directions

Research directions suggested by the paper:

1. Higher-Order Polynomials: Extension to cubic or higher-order nonlinearities
2. Infinite-Dimensional Case: Application to Galerkin approximations of PDEs
3. Control Constraints: Consider bounded controls or other constraints
4. Optimality: Study minimum energy or optimal control problems
5. Robustness: Robust tracking under model uncertainty

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Depth:
   • Complete positive and negative results
   • Rigorous mathematical proofs
   • Deep revelation of fundamental differences between linear and nonlinear
2. Methodological Innovation:
   • Clever adaptation of PDE control techniques (Agrachev-Sarychev method) to ODE
   • Introduction of relaxation norm has both mathematical significance and physical intuition
   • Elegant and operable hierarchical approximation strategy
3. Clear Structure:
   • From simple to complex: linear → quadratic
   • From special to general: Assumption 1.7 → Assumption 3.3
   • Theory → applications: main theorem → coupled systems
4. Rich Examples:
   • Lorenz system (Example 3.1)
   • Counterexamples (Example 1.9)
   • Non-trivial assumptions (Example 3.4)
   • Motion planning (Example 7.3)
5. Technical Details:
   • Elegant proof of Lemma 5.2 (using relative compactness + pointwise convergence)
   • Proposition 4.2 ensures stability of approximation process
   • Duality analysis (Section 2) is clear and thorough

Weaknesses

1. Practical Considerations:
   • Lack of numerical experiments to verify theoretical predictions
   • No discussion of practical feasibility of control (energy, frequency, etc.)
   • Feasibility of high-frequency oscillatory controls in real systems questionable
2. Limitation of Assumptions:
   • Assumption 3.3, though verifiable, may not hold for some systems
   • Quadratic property is a strong restriction
   • Necessity of assumptions not discussed
3. Strength of Results:
   • Only weak topology results obtained
   • Example 1.9 shows inability to extend to L² norm
   • Terminal state control only approximate
4. Completeness of Analysis:
   • Relationship between n_X (iteration count) and system dimension not discussed
   • L² norm estimates of control missing
   • Dependence on ε not explicit
5. Depth of Applications:
   • Applications in Section 7 relatively simple
   • No comparison with practical motion planning algorithms
   • Computational complexity analysis absent

Impact

Contributions to the Field:

1. First systematic study of full-state tracking controllability for finite-dimensional systems
2. Complete theory of impossibility for linear systems
3. Operable sufficient conditions for quadratic systems
4. Bridges finite-dimensional ODE and infinite-dimensional PDE control theory

Practical Value:

1. Theoretical foundation for motion planning
2. New perspective on dynamic controller design
3. Potential applications in robotics and automatic control

Reproducibility:

• Theoretical results fully reproducible (pure mathematical proofs)
• Examples directly verifiable (algebraic computation)
• Numerical implementation requires further work (numerical approximation of high-frequency controls)

Limitations:

• Physical significance of weak topology needs further clarification
• Quadratic property restricts direct applicability
• Numerical experiments needed to support theoretical results

Applicable Scenarios

Theoretically Suitable Scenarios:

1. Mechanical Systems with Quadratic Nonlinearities: e.g., damping with squared terms
2. Chemical Reaction Networks: Second-order reaction kinetics
3. Biological Systems: Lotka-Volterra type model control
4. Low-Dimensional Fluid Models: Galerkin truncation

Scenarios Requiring Caution:

1. Strong Control Requirements: Inapplicable when L² or L^∞ tracking needed
2. Fast-Response Systems: High-frequency oscillations may be infeasible
3. Energy-Limited Systems: Control cost may be prohibitive
4. High-Order Nonlinearities: Quadratic approximation insufficient

Potential Extensions:

1. Combine with numerical optimization to design practical algorithms
2. Consider bounded control constraints
3. Study robustness and sensitivity
4. Extend to time-varying or stochastic systems

References

Key references cited in the paper:

1. 2,3 Agrachev & Sarychev: Controllability of 2D Euler and Navier-Stokes equations, main inspiration for this paper's methods
2. 26 Zamorano & Zuazua: Tracking controllability of finite-dimensional linear systems, provides framework for duality analysis
3. 15 Koike et al.: Relaxation enhancement in incompressible fluids, demonstrates application of relaxation norm in PDEs
4. 24 Shirikyan: Approximate controllability of 3D Navier-Stokes equations, systematic exposition of convexification principle
5. 14 Jurdjevic & Kupka: Control systems under group actions, theoretical foundation of augmented method
6. 8 Coron: Classical monograph on nonlinear controllability

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical control paper that systematically establishes a theoretical framework for full-state tracking controllability of finite-dimensional systems. By introducing the relaxation norm and exploiting the special structure of quadratic nonlinearities, it cleverly adapts techniques from infinite-dimensional PDE control to finite-dimensional ODEs, obtaining profound positive and negative results. The paper's main value lies in theoretical contributions and methodological innovations, though practical applicability and numerical verification need strengthening. For scholars engaged in nonlinear control theory research, this is essential reading; for applied researchers, its applicability should be evaluated in context of specific problems.