Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

Feedback Linearization
Peter Al Hokayem and Eduardo Gallestey
May 14, 2015

1 Introduction
Consider a class of single-input-single-output (SISO) nonlinear systems of
the form
ẋ = f (x) + g(x)u (1)
y = h(x) (2)
where x ∈ D ⊂ Rn , u ∈ R1 , f : D → Rn , g : D → Rn , and the domain D
contains the origin. 1
In this lecture, we shall answer the following two (tightly related) ques-
tions:
 
η
1. Does there exist a nonlinear change of variables z = = T (x), and a
ξ
control input u = α(x)+β(x)v that would transform the system (1)-(2)
into the following partially linear form?
η̇ = f0 (η, ξ)
ξ˙ = Aξ + Bv
y = Cξ

2. Does there exist a nonlinear change of variables z = T (x) and a control

input u = α(x) + β(x)v that would transform the system (1) into the
following fully linear form?
ż = Ãz + B̃v
1
This condition is not a limitation to the theory of feedback linearization and the results
can be extended to the multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) cases

Feedback Linearization 1 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

If the answer to question 2. is positive, then we say that the system (1) is
feedback linearizable. If the answer to question 1. is positive, then we say
that the system (1)-(2) is input-output linearizable. Both scenarios are very
attractive from the control design point of view, since in either case we can
rely on linear design techniques to render the closed-loop system stable.
Since we cannot expect every nonlinear system to possess such proper-
ties of feedback linearization, it is interesting to understand the structural
properties that the nonlinear system should possess that render it feedback
linearizable.
Before we dive into the theoretical developments of feedback linearization,
let us first look into two simple examples.
u ẋ = f (x) + g(x)u
v α(x) + β(x)v y
y = h(x)

Figure 1: General idea of feedback linearization

Example 1 Consider the example of the pendulum that we have seen in

previous lectures. The dynamics are given by
ẋ1 = x2
ẋ2 = −a [sin (x1 + δ) − sin δ] − bx2 + cu
If we choose the control
a v
u= [sin (x1 + δ) − sin δ] +
c c
we can cancel the nonlinear term a [sin (x1 + δ) − sin δ]. The resulting linear
system is given by
ẋ1 = x2
ẋ2 = −bx2 + v
As such, the stabilization problem for the nonlinear system has been reduced
to a stabilization problem for a controllable linear system. We can proceed to
design a stabilizing linear state feedback control
v = −k1 x1 − k2 x2

Feedback Linearization 2 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

that renders the closed-loop system

ẋ1 = x2
ẋ2 = −k1 x1 − (k2 + b) x2

asymptotically stable. The overall state feedback control law comprises linear
and nonlinear parts
a 1
u= [sin (x1 + δ) − sin δ] − (k1 x1 + k2 x2 )
c c
Example 2 Consider the system

ẋ1 = a sin x2
ẋ2 = −x21 + u

We cannot simply choose u to cancel the nonlinear term a sin x2 . However,

let us first apply the following change of variables

z1 = x1
z2 = a sin x2 = ẋ1

Then, the new variables z1 and z2 satisfy

ż1 = z2
 z2 

ż2 = a cos x2 .ẋ2 = a cos sin−1 u − z12
a
and the nonlinearities can be canceled by the control
1
u = x21 + v
a cos x2
which is well defined for − π2 < x < π2 . The state equation in the new coordi-
nates can be found by inverting the transformation to express (x1 , x2 ) in the
terms of (z1 , z2 ), that is,

x1 = z1
z 
−1 2
x2 = sin
a

Feedback Linearization 3 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

which is well defined for −a < z2 < a. The transformed state equation is
given by
ż1 = z2
  z 

2
ż2 = a cos sin−1 −z12 + u
a
which is in the required form to use state feedback. Finally, the control input
that we would use is of the following form
1 1
u = x21 + (−k1 z1 − k2 z2 ) = x21 + (−k1 x1 − k2 a sin(x2 ))
a cos x2 a cos x2

2 Input-Output Linearization
Consider the single-input-single-output system (1)-(2), where the vector fields
f : D → Rn and g : D → Rn and the function h : D → R are sufficiently
smooth.
Definition 1 f is called smooth if f ∈ C ∞ , that is, f is continuous and all
its derivatives of all orders are continuous.
The goal is to derive conditions under which the input-output map can be
rendered linear. The idea is to take a sufficient number of derivatives of the
output, until the input appears.
We proceed by taking the derivative of y, which is given by
∂h
ẏ = [f (x) + g (x) u] = Lf h (x) + Lg h (x) u
∂x
where Lf h (x) , ∂h ∂x
f (x) is called the Lie Derivative of h with respect to
(along) f . If Lg h (x) = 0, then ẏ = Lf h (x), independent of u and we repeat
the differentiation process again. Calculating the second derivative of y,
denoted by y (2) , we obtain
∂ (Lf h)
y (2) = [f (x) + g (x) u] = L2f h (x) + Lg Lf h (x) u
∂x
Once again, if Lg Lf h (x) = 0, then y (2) = L2f h (x) is independent of u and we
repeat the process. Actually, we repeat the processes of taking derivatives of
the output until we see that h (x) satisfies
Lg Li−1
f h (x) = 0, i = 1, 2, ..., ρ − 1; Lg Lρ−1
f h (x) 6= 0

Feedback Linearization 4 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

Therefore, u does not appear in the expressions of y, ẏ,. . . ,y (ρ−1) and appears
in the expression of y (ρ) with a nonzero coefficient, i.e.,

y (ρ) = Lρf h (x) + Lg Lρ−1

f h (x) u (3)

We can clearly see from (3), that the system is input-output linearizable,
since the state feedback control
1

u= ρ−1 −Lρf h (x) + v (4)
Lg Lf h (x)

reduces the input-output map (in some domain D0 ⊂ D) to

y (ρ) = v

which is a chain of ρ integrators. In this case, the integer ρ is called the

relative degree of the system.
Definition 2 The nonlinear system (1)-(2) is said to have a relative degree
ρ, 1 ≤ ρ ≤ n, in the region D0 ⊂ D if

Lg Lif h(x) = 0, i = 1, · · · , ρ − 2
(5)
Lg Lρ−1
f h(x) 6= 0

for all x ∈ D0 .

Example 3 Consider the controlled van der Pol equation

ẋ1 = x2


ẋ2 = −x1 + ε 1 − x21 x2 + u
with output y = x1 . Calculating the derivatives of the output, we obtain
ẏ = ẋ1 = x2
ÿ = ẋ2 = −x1 + ε (1 − x21 ) x2 + u

Hence, the system has relative degree two in R2 . For the output y = x1 + x22 ,
we have that 

ẏ = x2 + 2x2 −x1 + ε 1 − x21 x2 + u
and the system has relative degree one in D0 = {x ∈ R2 |x2 6= 0}. As such,
we can see that the procedure of input-output linearization is dependent on
the choice of the output map h(x).

Feedback Linearization 5 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

Continuing with our derivations, we now let

 
φ1 (x)
 .. 
   .     
 φ 
T1 (x)  n−ρ (x)  φ (x) η
 
z = T (x) = − − − ,  − − −  ,  − − −  ,  − − −  (6)
 h (x) 
T2 (x)   ψ (x) ξ
 . 
 .. 
ρ−1
Lf h (x)

where φ1 (x) to φn−ρ (x) are chosen such that

∂φi
g (x) = 0, 1≤i≤n−ρ (7)
∂x
which ensures that the η-dynamics

∂φ ∂φ 
η̇ = [f (x) + g (x) u] = f (x)
∂x ∂x x=T −1 (z)

are independent
  of u. Note also that our definition of T2 (x) in (6) results in
y
 y (1) 
 
ξ =  .. .
 . 
y (ρ−1)
Of course, it is crucial to know at this point if such functions φ exist in
order to define the transformation T ; the next result shows that.
Definition 3 A continuously differentiable transformation T with a contin-
uously differential inverse is a called a diffeomorphism.

Theorem 1 Consider the system (1)-(2), and suppose that it has a relative
degree ρ ≤ n in D. If ρ = n, then for every x0 ∈ D, a neighborhood N of x0
exists such that the map
 
h (x)
 Lf h(x) 
 
T (x) =  .. 
 . 
Ln−1
f h (x)

Feedback Linearization 6 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

restricted to N is a diffeomorphism on N . If ρ < n, then for every x0 ∈ D,

a neighborhood N of x0 and smooth maps φ1 (x), · · · , φn−ρ (x) exist such that
the map such that the map
 
φ1 (x)
 .. 
 . 
 φ 
 n−ρ (x) 
 
T (x) =  − − − 
 h (x) 
 
 . 
 .. 
ρ−1
Lf h (x)

restricted to N , is a diffeomorphism on N .

We can now apply the change of variables (see the Appendix) z = T (x)
to transform the system (1)-(2). into

η̇=f0 (η, ξ) (8)

˙ c ξ + Bc γ (x) [u − α (x)]
ξ=A (9)
y=Cc ξ (10)

where ξ ∈ Rρ , η ∈ <n−ρ , (AC , BC , CC ) is a canonical form representation of

a chain of ρ integrators, i.e.,
 
0 1 0 ··· 0  
0 0 1 · · · 0 0
   ..   
 . . ..  .
Ac =  ... . .  , Bc =   , Cc = 1 0 · · · 0
  0
0 0 1
1
0 ··· 0 0

and

∂φ 
f0 (η, ξ) = f (x) (11)
∂x x=T −1 (z)

γ (x) = Lg Lρ−1
f h (x) (12)
Lρf h (x)
α (x) = − (13)
Lg Lρ−1
f h (x)

Feedback Linearization 7 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

R ξ˙ρ−1 = ξρ R ξ˙ρ−2 = ξρ−1 ξ˙1 = ξ2 R

v = ξ˙ρ y = ξ1

ξ η̇ = f0 (η, ξ)

Figure 2: Transformed system (8)-(10) and the input defined as in (4)

We have kept α and γ expressed in the original coordinates. These two

functions are uniquely determined in terms of f , g, and h and are independent
of the choice of φ. They can be expressed in the new coordinates by setting



α0 (η, ξ) = α T −1 (z) , γ0 (η, ξ) = γ T −1 (z) (14)

but now they are dependent on the choice of the functions φ. Regarding the
definition of the equilibrium point for the transformed system, assume that
x̄ is the open-loop equilibrium of the system (1), then
 T
η̄ = φ(x̄), ξ¯ = h(x̄) 0 · · · 0 (15)

The transformed system (8)-(10) is said to be in the normal form. This

form decomposes the system into an external part ξ and an internal part η.
The external part is linearized by the state feedback control

u = α (x) + β (x) v (16)

where β (x) = γ −1 (x), while the internal part is made unobservable by the
same control (see Figure 2). Setting ξ = 0 in the internal dynamics (8),
results in
η̇ = f0 (η, 0) (17)
which is called the zero dynamics of the system. If the zero dynamics of the
system are (globally) asymptotically stable, the system is called minimum
phase.
Finally, the linearized system may then be stabilized by the choice of an
appropriate state feedback:
v = −Kξ.

Feedback Linearization 8 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

2.1 Relationship to Linear Systems

The notions of relative degree and minimum phase can also be found in linear
systems. Consider a linear system represented by the transfer function

bm sm + bm−1 sm−1 + ... + b0

G (s) = (18)
sn + an−1 sn−1 + ... + a0

where m < n and bm 6= 0. We can realize the transfer function in (18) in

state-space form as
ẋ = Ax + Bu, y = Cx (19)
where
 
0 1 0 ··· 0  
 0 0 1 ··· 0  0
 . .. ..  0
 . .. ..   
 . . . . .   
A= . .. .. , B =  ... 
 .. . .   
  0
 0 0 1 
1
−a0 −a1 · · · −an−1
 
C = b0 b1 ··· bm 0 · · · 0

This linear space model is a special case of

ẋ = f (x) + g (x) u, y = h (x)

where f (x) = Ax, g = B, and h (x) = Cx. We know that the relative degree
of the transfer function is given by n − m. However, let us verify that this is
the case. We take the derivative of the output, i.e.,

ẏ = C ẋ = CAx + CBu (20)

Now, if m = n − 1, then CB = bn−1 6= 0 and the system has relative degree

one. In general we have that

y (n−m) = CA(n−m) x + CA(n−m−1) Bu (21)

and we have the conditions that

CA(i−1) B = 0, ∀i = 1, 2, · · · , n − m − 1, and CA(n−m−1) B = bm 6= 0 (22)

Feedback Linearization 9 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

and the relative degree of the system is n − m, i.e., the difference between the
order of the denominator and the numerator of the transfer function G(s).
Moreover, we know that a minimum phase system means that the zeros
of the transfer function G(s) lie in the open left-half complex plane. We can
show as well that there is a correspondence of the zeros of H(s) and the
normal form zero dynamics.

3 Full State Feedback Linearization

We know from the previous section, that the system (1) is feedback lineariz-
able if we can find a sufficiently smooth function h(x) in a domain D such
that the system (1)-(2) has relative degree n within some region D0 ⊂ D.
This is because the normal form would have no zero dynamics. In fact, we
can show that this result holds as an if and only if statement. As such, it
remains to show that such a function h(x) exists.
We begin with some definitions. For any two vector fields f and g on
D ⊂ Rn , the Lie bracket [f, g] is a third vector field that is defined as
∂g ∂f
[f, g](x) , f (x) − g(x) = Lf g(x) − Lg f (x) (23)
∂x ∂x
Taking Lie brackets can be repeated, as such we define the following notation:
ad0f g(x) = g(x)
adf g(x) = [f, g](x)
adkf g(x) = [f, adk−1
f g](x), k≥1
Example 4 Consider the two vector fields f (x) = Ax and g is constant.
Then, adf g(x) = [f, g](x) = −Ag, ad2f g(x) = [f, adf g](x) = −A(−Ag) =
A2 g, and adkf g = (−1)k Ak g.
Definition 4 (Distribution) Consider the vector fields f1 , · · · , fk on a
domain D ⊂ Rn . The distribution, denoted by
∆ = {f1 , f2 , · · · , fk } (24)
is the collection of all vectors spaces ∆(x) for x ∈ D, where
∆(x) = span{f1 (x), f2 (x), · · · , fk (x)}
is the subspace of Rn spanned by the vectors f1 (x), · · · fk (x).

Feedback Linearization 10 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

Definition 5 A distribution ∆ is called involutive, if

g1 ∈ ∆, and g2 ∈ ∆ ⇒ [g1 , g2 ] ∈ ∆

And now we are ready to state the main result of this section.
Theorem 2 (Feedback Linearization) The SISO system (1) is feedback
linearizable if and only if
1. the matrix M(x) = [g(x), adf g(x), · · · , adn−1
f g(x)] has full rank (= n)
for all x ∈ D0 , and

2. the distribution ∆ = span{g, adf g, · · · , adn−2

f g} is involutive on D0 .

Example 5 Consider the system

   
a sin(x2 ) 0
ẋ = f (x) + gu = + u
−x21 1

We compute the Lie bracket

 
∂f −a cos(x2 )
adf g = [f, g](x) = − g =
∂x 0

Accordingly, the matrix

 
0 −a cos(x2 )
M(x) = [g, adf g] =
1 0

has full rank for any x such that cos(x2 ) 6= 0. Moreover, the distribution
∆ = span{g} is involutive. Therefore, the conditions of Theorem (2) are
satisfied and the system is feedback linearizable in the domain D0 = {x ∈
R2 | cos(x2 ) 6= 0}. Let us now find the function h(x) for which the system
is feedback linearizable. h(x) should satisfy the following conditions
∂h ∂(Lf h)
g = 0, g 6= 0, h(0) = 0
∂x ∂x
∂h ∂h
Now, ∂x
g =∂x2
= 0 which implies that h(x) is independent of x2 . Therefore,
∂h ∂(L h) ∂(L h) ∂h
Lf h(x) = ∂x 1
a sin(x2 ). The condition ∂xf g = ∂xf2 = ∂x 1
a cos(x2 ) 6= 0 is
∂h
satisfied in D0 for any choice of h that satisfies ∂x1 6= 0. There are many
such choices for h, for example, h(x) = x1 or h(x) = x1 + x31 .

Feedback Linearization 11 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

4 Stability
Consider again the input-output linearized system in normal form (8)-(10),
and assume that we have designed the feedback control law

u = α(x) + β(x)v

where β(x) = γ −1 (x), and v = −Kξ, such that (Ac − Bc K) is Hurwitz. The
resulting system reduces to the following dynamics

η̇ = f0 (η, ξ) (25)
ξ˙ = (Ac − Bc K)ξ (26)

Theorem 3 The origin of the system (25)-(25) is asymptotically stable, if

the origin of the zero dynamics η̇ = f0 (η, 0) is asymptotically stable (mini-
mum phase).

Proof: The idea is to construct a special Lyapunov function. Since the

zero dynamics are asymptotically stable, there exists (by converse Lyapunov
theorem) a continuously differentiable function Vη (η) such that
∂Vη
f (η, 0) < −α (kηk)
∂η
in some neighborhood of η = 0, where α is a strictly increasing continuous
function with α(0) = 0. Let P = P T > 0 be the solution of the Lyapunov
equation.
P (Ac − Bc K) + (Ac − Bc K)T P = −I
Consider the function
p
V (η, ξ) = Vη (η) + k ξ T P ξ, k>0 (27)

The derivative of V is given by

∂V1 k
V̇ = f0 (η, ξ) + p ξ T [P (AC − BC K) + (AC − BC K)P ] ξ
∂η 2 ξ Pξ |
T {z }
−I
∂V1 ∂V1 k
= f (η, 0) + (f0 (η, ξ) − f0 (η, 0)) p ξT ξ
∂η ∂η T
2 ξ Pξ
≤ −α3 (kξk) + k1 (kξk) − kk2 (kξk)

Feedback Linearization 12 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

for k1 , k2 > 02 . By choosing k large enough, we guarantee V̇ < 0, and the

result follows.

Remark 1 The result in the last theorem is local and does not extend to
the global setup, even if the zero dynamics are globally asymptotically sta-
ble. In order to make the result global, we have to impose more restrictive
requirements regarding the zero dynamics, namely the notion of input-to-
state stability of the zero dynamics (which is beyond the current scope of the
course).

5 Robustness
Feedback linearization is based on exact cancellation of the nonlinearities
in the system dynamics, which is practically very difficult to achieve. In a
realistic setup, we would have only approximations α̂, β̂ and T̂ (x) of the true
α, β, and T (x). The feedback control law has then the form
u = α̂(x) + β̂(x)v = α̂(x) − β̂(x)Kξ = α̂(x) − β̂(x)K T̂2 (x)
Accordingly, the closed-loop system of the normal form is given by
η̇ = f (η, ξ) (28)
h i
˙ξ = Aξ + Bγ (x) (α̂(x) − α(x)) − β̂(x)K T̂2 (x) (29)

Adding and subtracting BKξ to the ξ˙ equation we obtain

η̇ = f (η, ξ) (30)
ξ˙ = (A − BK) ξ + Bδ (z) (31)
where
h    i

δ (z) = γ(x) (α̂(x) − α(x)) − β̂(x) − β(x) KT − β̂(x)K T̂2 (x) − T (x) 
x=T −1 (z)

Hence, the local closed loop system differs from the nominal one by an ad-
ditive perturbation. Thus, we can show that locally the closed-loop system
remains stable, despite small uncertainties in the feedback linearization maps.
For more details on feedback linearization concepts and extensions, see
[1] and [2, Ch.13]
2
k1 > 0 follows from local continuity and differentiability of the function f0 , and k2 > 0
follows from P

Feedback Linearization 13 of 14
Nonlinear Systems and Control — Spring 2015

References
[1] A. Isidori. Nonlinear control systems. Springer-Verlag, 3rd edition, 1995.

[2] H. K. Khalil. Nonlinear systems. Prentice hall, 3rd edition, 2002.

Appendix
The η-dynamics can be derived as follows
∂φ ∂φ
η̇ = φ̇(x) = ẋ = (f (x) + g(x)u)
∂x ∂x 
∂φ ∂φ 
= f (x) = f (x) , f0 (η, ξ)
∂x ∂x x=T −1 (x)

The ξ-dynamics can be derived as follows

       
ξ˙1 y y (1) ξ2
ξ˙  d  y  y   ... 
 (1)   (2)  
 2 
ξ˙ =  .  =  .
.  =  ..  =  
 ..  dt  .   .   ξρ 
ξ˙ρ y (ρ−1) y (ρ) y (ρ)
" !#
Lρf h(x)
= Ac ξ + Bc y (ρ)
= Ac ξ + Bc (Lg Lρ−1
f h(x)) (u − −
Lg Lρ−1
f h(x)

we can now define

Lρf h(x)
γ(x) , Lg Lρ−1
f h(x), α(x) , −
Lg Lρ−1
f h(x)

Finally, our choice of the transformation T2 (x) yields

y = h(x) = ξ1 = Cc ξ

Feedback Linearization 14 of 14