Dynamic programming

Contents

1 The principle of optimality

2 The
2.1
2.2
2.3

recurrence relation of dynamic programming

Computational procedure. Analytical Results . . . . .
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Computational procedure for computer implementation
2.3.1 Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3.2 Interpolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3.3 The algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

5
8
11
12
12
15
15

1
The principle of optimality

We defined an optimal control of the form:

u = f(x(t), t)
as being a closed-loop or feedback optimal control. The functional relationship f is called the optimal control law, or the optimal policy. Notice that the
optimal control law specifies how to generate the control value at time t from
the state value at time t. The presence of t as an argument of f indicates
that the optimal control law may be time-varying, (Kirk, 2004).
In the method of dynamic programming, an optimal policy is found by
employing the concept called the principle of optimality.
The study of dynamic programming dates from Richard Bellman, who
wrote the first book on the subject (1957) and gave it its name. A very large
number of problems can be treated this way.
The optimal path for a multistage decision process is shown in Figure
1.1a.
b

Jab
Jbe
a

Jab

(a)

Jbce

Jbe
e

(b)

Figure 1.1: (a) Optimal path from a to e. (b) Two possible optimal paths
from b to e, (Kirk, 2004)
Suppose that the first decision (made at a) results in segment a b with
cost Jab and that remaining decisions yield segment b e at a cost Jbe . The
2


minimum cost Jae
from a to e is therefore:

Jae
= Jab + Jbe

If a b e is the optimal path from a to e, then b e is the optimal path

from b to e.
Proof by contradiction: Suppose b c e in Figure 1.1b is the optimal
path from b to e; then
Jbce < Jbe
and

Jab + Jbce < Jab + Jbe = Jae

but this last relation can be satisfied only by violating the condition that
a b e is optimal path from a to e. Thus the assertion is proved.
Bellman has called the above property of an optimal policy the principle
of optimality:
An optimal policy has the property that whatever the initial state and
initial decision are, the remaining decisions must constitute an optimal
policy with regard to the state resulting from the first decision.
In other words, an optimal trajectory has the property that at an intermediate point, no matter how it was reached, the rest of trajectory must
coincide with an optimal trajectory as computed from this intermediate point
as the initial point.
Bellmans principle of optimality serves to limit the number of potentially optimal control strategies that must be investigated.
Rutherford Aris restates the principle in more colloquial terms:
If you dont do the best with what you have happened to have got, you will
never do the best with what you should have had.
The following example illustrates the procedure for making a single optimal decision with the aid of the principle of optimality.
Example 1.1 , from (Weber, 2000).
Consider the problem in which a traveler wishes to minimize the length
of a journey from town A to town J by first traveling to one of B, C or D
and then onwards to one of E, F or G then onwards to one of H or I and the
finally to J. Thus there are 4 stages. The arcs are marked with distances
between towns. Let F (X) be the minimal distance required to reach J from
X. Then clearly:
F (J) = 0; F (H) = 3; F (I) = 4;
3

B
2
4

6
3

C 2

4
6

4
3

Figure 1.2: The road system

F (E) = min{1 + F (H), 4 + F (I)} = min{1 + 3, 4 + 4} = 4
F (F ) = min{6 + F (H), 3 + F (I)} = min{6 + 3, 3 + 4} = 7
F (G) = min{3 + F (H), 3 + F (I)} = min{3 + 3, 3 + 4} = 6
F (B) = min{7 + F (E), 4 + F (F ), 6 + F (G)} = min{11, 11, 12} = 11
F (C) = min{3 + F (E), 2 + F (F ), 4 + F (G)} = min{7, 9, 10} = 7
F (D) = min{4 + F (E), 1 + F (F ), 5 + F (G)} = min{8, 8, 11} = 6
F (A) = min{2 + F (B), 4 + F (C), 3 + F (D)} = min{13, 11, 11} = 11
Recursively, we obtain F (A) = 11 and simultaneously an optimal route, i.e.,
A D F I J (although it is not unique).

2
The recurrence relation of dynamic
programming

An n-th order time invariant system is described by the state equation:

x(t)
= a(x(t), u(t))

(2.1)

It is desired to determine the control law which minimizes the performance

measure:
Z tf
J = h(x(tf )) +
g(x(t), u(t))dt
(2.2)
0

where tf is assumed fixed.

We first approximate the continuous system by a discrete system. This is
accomplished by considering N equally spaced time increments in the interval
0 t tf . From 2.1:
Dt

0
0

tf
2

...

N-1

Figure 2.1: N equally spaced time increments

x(t + t) x(t)
a(x(t), u(t))
t
or
x(t + t) = x(t) + ta(x(t), u(t))
Using the shorthand notation x(kt) = xk :
xk+1 = xk + ta(xk , uk )
5

which we will denote by:

xk+1 = f(xk , uk )

(2.3)

Operating in the same manner, the performance measure becomes:

J = h(xN ) + t

N
1
X

g(xk , uk )

(2.4)

k=0

or
J = h(xN ) +

N
1
X

L(xk , uk )

(2.5)

k=0

By making the problem discrete as we have done, it is now required that the
optimal control law:
u (x0 , 0), u (x1 , 1), ...u (xN 1 , N 1)
be determined for the system given by (2.3) which has the performance measure (2.5).
Begin by defining
JN N (xN ) = h(xN )
JN N is the cost of reaching the final state value xN .
Next define:
JN 1,N (xN 1 , uN 1 ) = L(xN 1 , uN 1 ) + h(xN ) = L(xN 1 , uN 1 ) + JN N (xN )
which is the cost of operation during the interval (N 1)t t Nt.
Observe that JN 1,N is also the cost of a one-stage process with initial
state xN 1 . The value of JN 1,N is dependent only on xN 1 and uN 1 since
xN is related to xN 1 , uN 1 through the state equation (2.3).
The optimal cost is then:
JN 1,N (xN 1 ) = min (L(xN 1 , uN 1 ) + JN N (f(xN 1 , xN 1 )))
uN1

We know that the optimal choice of uN 1 will depend on xN 1 , so we denote

the minimizing control by u (xN 1 , uN 1 ).
Example 2.1 In Figure 2.2 xN 1 is transferred to xN 1 with the control value
u1 and the cost of operation is J1 . It is transferred to xN 2 or xN 3 with the
control value u2 respectively u3 and the cost of operation will be J2 or J3 .
JN 1,N is the minimum cost for transferring from xN 1 to xN (which is one
of the value xN 1 , xN 2 , xN 1 ) given by uN 1 (one of u1 , u2 , u3).
6

xk

xN1

u1
J1
u2

xN-1
u3
J3
N-1

xN2

J2
xN3

Figure 2.2: Example

The cost of operation over the last two intervals is given by:
JN 2,N (xN 2 , uN 2 , uN 1 ) = L(xN 2 , uN 2 ) + L(xN 1 , uN 1 ) + h(xN ) =
= L(xN 2 , uN 2 ) + JN 1,N (xN 1 , uN 1 )
where again we have used the dependence of xN on xN 1 and uN 1 .
JN 2,N is the cost of a two stage process with the initial state xN 2 . The
optimal policy during the last two time intervals is found from:
JN 2,N (xN 2 ) = u min
,u
N1

N2

(L(xN 2 , uN 2 ) + JN 1,N (xN 1 , uN 1 ))

The principle of optimality states that for this two stage process, whatever
the initial state xN 2 and initial decision uN 2 , the remaining decision must
be optimal with respect to the value of xN 1 that results from application of
uN 1 . Therefore:


JN 2,N (xN 2 ) = min L(xN 2 , uN 2 ) + JN 1,N (xN 1 )

uN2

For a stage k, the performance measure over the last k stages is defined as:
Jk,N (xk , uk ) =

N
1
X

L(xi , ui )

i=k

Suppose the optimal cost-to-go from any xk+1 , Jk+1,N

(xk+1 ) and optimal
control sequence (uk+1 , ..., uN 1 ) is already computed. Then the principle
of optimality states that we only need to minimize the cost L(xk , uk )) +

Jk+1,N
(xk+1 ) i.e. uk can be found from :

Jk,N
(xk ) = min L(xk , uk )) + Jk+1,N
(xk+1 )
uk

or
7

(2.6)

Jk,N
(xk ) = min
L(xk , uk )) + Jk+1,N
(f(xk , uk ))
u
k

(2.7)

To begin the process we simply start with a zero stage process and generate
JN N = JN N (the * notation is just a notational convenience here; no choice
of a control is implied). Next the optimal cost can be found for a one-stage
process by using JN N .

2.1

Computational procedure. Analytical Results

Problem Given a discrete system described by the state equation

xk+1 = f(xk , uk ), k = 0, 1, . . . N 1
find an optimal policy u (xk , k), k = 0, N 1 that minimizes the performance measure:
J = h(xN ) +

N
1
X

L(xk , uk )

k=0

Suppose the optimal cost-to-go from any xk+1 ,Jk+1,N

(xk+1 ) and optimal

control sequence (uk+1 . . . uN 1 ) is already computed.

Then the principle of optimality states that we only need to minimize the

cost L(xk , uk ) + Jk+1,N

(xk+1 ) i.e. uk can be found from:

Jk,N
= min L(xk , uk ) + Jk+1,N
(xk+1 ) = min L(xk , uk ) + Jk+1,N
(f (xk , uk ))
uk

uk

This can be used to solve recursively for the optimal control starting from
= h(xN )
The following algorithm may summarize these results:

JN N (xN )

Step 0 JN N (xN ) = h(xN )

JN1,N (xN1 ,uN1 )

}|

Step 1 JN 1,N (xN 1 ) = min {L(xN 1 , uN 1 ) + JN N (f (xN 1 , uN 1 ))}

uN1

We will call the minimizing control signal uN 1 . It is a function of

xN 1 and can be determined from:
JN 1,N (xN 1 , uN 1 )
=0
uN 1
8

Step i JN i,N (xN i ) = min L(xN i , uN i ) + JN i+1 (f (xN i , uN i ))

uNi

The minimizing control signal will be uN i and depends on xN i .

Step N J0N
(x0 ) = min {L(x0 , u0 ) + J1N
(f (x0 , u0 ))}
u0

Example 2.2 Consider a scalar discrete-time dynamical system modeled by:

xk+1 = 2xk 3uk ,

x0 = 4, k = 0, 1, 2 . . . N 1

Find the optimal control policy that minimizes the cost function:
J = (xN 10)2 +

1
1 NX
(x2 + u2k )
2 k=0 k

Let N=2. The cost function is:

J = (x2 10)2 +

1
1X
(x2 + u2k )
2 k=0 k

We use the principle of optimality to find an optimal policy u0 , u1 . There

are no constrains on uk .
Begin with the backward pass. We have:

J22
= (x2 10)2

Then:

J12
(x1 ) = min
J12 (x1 , u1 ) = min
u
u
1

1
= min (x21 + u21 ) + (x2 10)2
u1
2


1 2
2
2
= min
(x + u1 ) + (2x1 3u1 10)
u1
2 1
u1 can be found from

1 2

(x + u21 ) + J22
(x2 ) =
2 1

J12 (x1 , u1 )
=0
u1

J12 (x1 , u1 )
= u1 6(2x1 3u1 10) = 0
u1
u1 =

12x1 60
19
9

(2.8)

and

J12
(x1 )

"

1 2
12x1 60
=
x1 +
2
19
100
27 2 40
=
x1 x1 +
38
19
19

J02
(x0 )

2 #

+ 2x1 3

2

12x1 60
10
19

= min J02 (x0 , u0 ) = min (x20 + u20 ) + J12

(x1 ) =
u0
u0
2


1

= min (x20 + u20 ) + J12

(2x0 3u0 )
u0
2

J02 (x0 , u0 )

=
u0
u0


1 2
27
40
100
x0 + u20 +
(2x0 3u0 )2
(2x0 3u0) +
2
38
19
19
6 27
120
= 2u0
u0 (2x0 3u0 ) +
=0
38
19

81
60
x0
= 0.618x0 0.458
(2.9)
131
131

J02
(x0 ) = J02
(4) = 13.97 the minimum value of the performance measure
for transferring the system from x0 = 4 to x2
u0 =

u0 = 0.618 4 0.458 = 2.015

u0 = 2.015
u1 =

12x1 60

19

x1 = 2x0 3u0 = 1.9541

u1 = 1.923

x2 = 2x1 3u1 = 9.679

The optimal control policy is then:

u0 = 2.015 u1 = 1.923
and the optimal trajectory
x0 = 4,

x1 = 1.9541,

x2 = 9.679

J = J02
= 13.97

Remark. The input sequence may be applied in two ways:

10

 With a known initial state calculate in advance the entire control sequence
u0 , u1 , . . . uN 1
and apply it open loop to bring the plant from the initial state to zero.
Use the variable dependencies of the control value on the states at every
discrete time, as calculated for example in (2.8) and (2.9).
This is closed loop control with a time varying control (depending on
sample number k)
This closed loop control is preferable because open loop control is vulnerable to disturbances and uncertainties in model parameters.
Note also that this computational procedure is not trivial to be applied
for a large number of samples, it may result in very complicated calculations,
thus it is applicable for a limited number of situations.

2.2

Exercises

1. Consider a first-order system:

xk+1 = xk + uk ; k = 0, 1; x0 = 1
Find the optimal control policy u0 , u1 that minimizes the performance
measure:
J = x22 +

1 
X

x2k + 2u2k

k=0

Determine the optimal state trajectory x0 = 1, x1 , x2 .

2. Consider a first-order system:
xk+1 = x2k + uk ; k = 0, 1, ...N 1; x0 = 1, N = 2
Find the optimal control policy u0 , ..., uN 1 that minimizes the performance measure:
J = 4xN +

N
1
X

u2k

k=0

Determine the optimal state trajectory x0 = 1, x1 , ..., xN .

11

2.3

Computational procedure for computer

implementation

The computational procedure that is suitable for computer implementation

will be introduced first by an example.

2.3.1

Example

Consider a scalar plant with the state equation, (Wen, 2002):

xk+1 = xk + uk , k = 0, 1, ..., N 1

(2.10)

Find the optimal control policy u0 , u1 , ..., uN 1 that minimizes the performance measure:
1
1 NX
J = x2N +
u2
(2.11)
2 k=0 k

Let N = 2 and consider that uk is limited to the discrete values: (1, 1/2, 0, 1/2, 1)
an xk is limited to (0, 1/2, 1, 3/2). The computational grid (i.e. all the
admissible values for all time samples) for u and x is presented in Figure 2.3.

u k, x k
3/2
computational
grid for x

1
1/2
0

k
2

-1/2

computational
grid for u

-1

Figure 2.3: Computational grid for u and x

Solution
For N = 2 the performance measure becomes:
J = x22 +

N = 2, J2,2
(x2 ) = x22

12

1
1X
u2
2 k=0 k

(2.12)


x2 J2,2
(x2 ) = x22
0
0
1/2
1/4
1
1
3/2
9/4

N = 1, J1,2
(x1 ) = minu1 (J2,2
(x2 ) + 12 u21 )

x1
0

u1 x2 = x1 + u1
-1
-1
-1/2
-1/2
0
0
1/2
1/2
1
1
1/2 -1
-1/2
-1/2
0
0
1/2
1/2
1
1
3/2
1
-1
0
-1/2
1/2
0
1
1/2
3/2
1
2
3/2 -1
1/2
-1/2
1
0
3/2
1/2
2
1
5/2

J2,2
(x2 ) + 12 u21
optimum
not admissible
not admissible
u1 = 0

0 + 1/2 02 = 0
J1,2
(0) = 0
1/4 + 1/2 1/4 = 3/8
1 + 1/2 12 = 3/2
not admissible
0 + 1/2 1/4 = 1/8
u1 = 1/2

1/4 + 1/2 02 = 1/4

J1,2
(1/2) = 1/8
1 + 1/2 1/4 = 9/8
9/4 + 1/2 12 = 11/4
0 + 1/2 1 = 1/2
1/4 + 1/2 1/4 = 3/8
u1 = 1/2

1 + 1/2 02 = 1
J1,2
(1) = 3/8
9/4 + 1/2 1/4 = 19/8
not admissible
1/4 + 1/2 1 = 3/4
1 + 1/2 1/4 = 9/8
u1 = 1
2

9/4 + 1/2 0 = 9/4

J1,2 (3/2) = 3/4
not admissible
not admissible

N = 0, J0,2
(x0 ) = minu0 (J1,2
(x1 ) + 12 u20 )

13

x0
0

u0 x1 = x0 + u0
-1
-1
-1/2
-1/2
0
0
1/2
1/2
1
1
1/2 -1
-1/2
-1/2
0
0
1/2
1/2
1
1
3/2
1
-1
0
-1/2
1/2
0
1
1/2
3/2
1
2
3/2 -1
1/2
-1/2
1
0
3/2
1/2
2
1
5/2

J1,2
(x1 ) + 12 u20
optimum
not admissible
not admissible
u0 = 0
2

0 + 1/2 0 = 0
J0,2 (0) = 0
1/8 + 1/2 1/4 = 1/4
3/8 + 1/2 12 = 7/8
not admissible
0 + 1/2 1/4 = 1/8 u0 = 1/2 or u0 = 0

1/8 + 1/2 02 = 1/8

J0,2
(1/2) = 1/8
3/8 + 1/2 1/4 = 1/2
3/4 + 1/2 12 = 5/4
0 + 1/2 1 = 1/2
1/8 + 1/2 1/4 = 1/4
u0 = 1/2

3/8 + 1/2 02 = 3/8

J0,2
(1) = 1/4
3/4 + 1/2 1/4 = 7/8
not admissible
1/8 + 1/2 1 = 5/8
3/8 + 1/2 1/4 = 1/2
u0 = 1/2

3/4 + 1/2 02 = 3/4

J0,2
(3/2) = 1/2
not admissible
not admissible

If the initial state is x0 = 1, the last table indicates the value of the
optimal cost from x0 = 1 to the final state x2 :

J0,1
(1) =

1
4

and the optimal control value for the last stage (N = 0): u0 = 1/2 transfers
the system from state x0 = 1 to the state x1 = x0 + u0 = 1/2.
The table calculated for N = 1 gives the optimal control u1 which transfers the system from x1 = 1/2 to x2 = x1 + u1 = 1 + (1/2) = 0.
Thus, the optimal control sequence is:
1 1
u : ,
2 2
and the optimal state trajectory starting from 1:
x : 1,
The minimum cost is:

J0,2
=

14

1
, 0
2
1
4

2.3.2

Interpolation

In the preceding example, all of the trial control values drive the state of
the system either to a computational grid point or to a value outside the
allowable range.
If the numerical values were not carefully selected, this happy situation
would not have been obtained and interpolation would have been required.
J

J2
Ji
J1
x1

xi

x2 x

Figure 2.4: Interpolation

Suppose we have two values of the state x1 , x2 and the values of the
performance measure from that state to the final one J1 , J2 , and suppose x1
and x2 are on the computational grid. In case the value of the next state
calculated from the plant equation is somewhere between x1 and x2 and we
do not have a J calculated for this case we shall approximate it by linear
approximation. Write the equation of the line between the points (x1 , J1 )
and (x2 , J2 ): J = mx + n, where
m=

J1 J2
x1 J2 x2 J1
, n=
x1 x2
x1 x2

The calculate Ji for state value xi (which is not on the computational grid)
from
Ji = mxi + n

2.3.3

The algorithm

A general algorithm for discrete dynamic programming, for a first order system, may be formulated as in Algorithm 1. The procedure may be extrapolated for higher-order systems with a similar procedure (for details see (Kirk,
2004)).

15

Algorithm 1 Discrete dynamic programming algorithm

1. Define the discrete system:
xk+1 = f (xk , uk )
and the performance measure:
J = h(xN ) +

N
1
X

L(xk , uk )

k=0

2. Determine a finite number of admissible control values

umin uj umax ,

j = 1, nru

3. Determine a finite number of admissible state values

xmin xi xmax ,

i = 1, nrx

3. Compute JN = h(xN ) for all possible values of the state.

4. Iterate
for every k = N 1, N 2, ..., 0 do
for every state value xmin xi xmax do
for every control value umin uj umax do
a. Calculate the next state xk+1 = f (xk , uk )
b. Calculate the cost of getting from the next value of the state

to the final state Jk+1,N

, using the values of J obtained at the
previous iteration (or, for the beginning, at Step 3)
c. Calculate the cost of getting from the current state to the final

state with the current control value: Jk,N = Jk+1,N

(xk+1 )+L(xk , uk )
end for
end for
5. For the current state value calculate the minimum cost of getting to

the final state Jk,N

and the control value for which the cost is minimum
end for
6. Given the initial state x(0) = x0 , and the optimal control values calculated at each step k, for each value of the states xj , determine the optimal
control sequence: u0 , u1 , ..., uN 1 and reconstruct the state trajectory X0 ,
x1 , ..., xN .

16

Bibliography

Kirk, D. E. (2004). Optimal Control Theory. An Introduction. Dover Publications, Inc.

Weber, R. (2000).
Optimization
www.statslab.cam.ac.uk.

and

Wen, J. T. (2002).
Optimal control.
fs.rpi.edu/ wenj/ECSE644S12/info.htm.

17

control.

online

at

online at http://cats-