Page 292 - Glucose Monitoring Devices
P. 292

Closed-loop glycemic control algorithms  299




                     subject to:
                                                 x 0 ¼ x
                                        x kþ1 ¼ fðx k ; u k Þ;  k˛I 0:N 1
                                                        k˛I 0:N
                                          y k ¼ gðx k ; u k Þ
                                          hðx k ; u k Þ  0;  k˛I 0:N
                                        x k ˛X;   u k ˛U; k˛I 0:N
                  where the objective function JðxÞ is defined by
                                   N
                                  X
                                           sp T       sp         s T       s
                          Jðx; uÞ¼   ðy k   y Þ Q k ðy k   y Þþðu k   u Þ R k ðu k   u Þ
                                  k¼0
                  with Q k as a (possibly varying) positive semidefinite weighting matrix penalizing the
                  deviation of the controlled variables from the target set-point y sp  and R k as a
                  (possibly varying) strictly positive definite weighting matrix to penalize the amount
                                                      s
                  of input actions away from a reference input u . The set X denotes that the state vari-
                  ables are constrained as x min    x   x max , with x min  and x max  as the minimum and
                  maximum values for the state variables. Similarly, the set U denotes that the input
                  variables are constrained as u min    u   u max , with u min  and u max  as the minimum and
                  maximum values for the input. Therefore the maximum allowable insulin infusion
                  can be limited based on the estimated insulin on board or the plasma insulin concen-
                  tration. The optimal insulin infusion sequence fu 0 ; u 1 ; .; u N g is termed feasible for
                  a given initial state x if the insulin infusion sequence and the corresponding optimal
                  state sequence fx 0 ; x 1 ; .; x N g computed by the glucose-insulin dynamic model
                  satisfy the constraints. The mathematical programming problem is solved at each
                  sampling instance and the first value of the optimal solution (u 0 ) is implemented
                  to infuse insulin over the current sampling interval. The MPC computation and in-
                  sulin infusion implementation is repeated at subsequent sampling instances using
                  new glucose measurements and updated state estimates. Extensions to the MPC
                  paradigm include explicit MPC and advanced-step MPC algorithms [54e57].
                  Explicit MPC involves multiparametric programming, where the state of the system
                  is represented as a vector of parameters so that the optimal solution for all possible
                  realizations of the state vector can be precomputed as explicit functions to render the
                  online decisions as expediated function look-ups and evaluations. Advanced-step
                  MPC uses the prediction of the future state to solve the optimization problem within
                  the sampling time, and applies a sensitivity-based update to compute the manipu-
                  lated variable online once the new measurement is available.


                  Zone model predictive control
                  In contrast to controlling the glucose values to the desired set-point in conventional
                  MPC, zone MPC is developed for systems that lack a specific set-point. The
                  controller objective in zone MPC is to keep the controlled glucose concentrations
   287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297