Seite - 149 - in Adaptive and Intelligent Temperature Control of Microwave Heating Systems with Multiple Sources

5.2. ResultsofSystemIdentification 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 5 4 0 4 5 5 0 5 5 6 0 T i m e ( s ) R e a l t e m p e r a t u r e T 1N o n l i n e a r M I S O E K FL i n e a r M I S O R K FL i n e a r M I S O R L SL i n e a r M I M O R K F (a)ValidationofT1. 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 5 4 0 4 5 5 0 5 5 6 0 6 5 T i m e ( s ) R e a l t e m p e r a t u r e T 2N o n l i n e a r M I S O E K FL i n e a r M I S O R K FL i n e a r M I S O R L SL i n e a r M I M O R K F (b)ValidationofT2. 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 00 2 4 6 8 1 0 T i m e ( s ) N o n l i n e a r M I S O E K FL i n e a r M I S O R K FL i n e a r M I S O R L SL i n e a r M I M O R K F (c)Standard deviation (SD) with respect to the true values during the validation. Figure5.14. Validationofeachalgorithmusingdataofanotherexperiment. • In the accuracy aspect, the nonlinear MISO EKF algorithm has the minimum MSE for both the on-line system identification and the validation (see table 5.1). Compared between the other three lin- ear algorithms, both the MISO RKF and MIMO RKF approaches are more accurate than the MISO RLS algorithm, which means the RKF algorithms is more suitable for HEPHAISTOS. On the other side, the MISO RKF is better than the MIMO RKF. The main rea- son is that in the MISO approach, only the diagonal elements of 149