Transitivity of Commutativity for Linear Time-Varying Analog Systems

Mehmet Emir KOKSAL
Department of Mathematics, Ondokuz Mayis University, 55139 Atakum, Samsun, Turkey
emir_koksal@hotmail.com

Abstract: In this contribution, the transitivity property of commutative first-order linear timevarying systems is investigated with and without initial conditions. It is proven that transitivity
property of first-order systems holds with and without initial conditions. On the base of impulse
response function, transitivity of commutation property is formulated for any triplet of
commutative linear time-varying relaxed systems. Transitivity proves are given for some
special combinations of first and second-order linear time-varying systems which are initially
relaxed.
Keywords: Commutativity, Differential equations, Initial conditions, Time-varying systems,
linear systems, Impulse response.
AMS Subject Classification: 93C05, 93C15, 93A30
1.

Introduction

As the main branches of applied mathematics, differential (and integral) equations arise in
many areas of sciences and engineering including acoustics, electromagnetic, electrodynamics,
fluid dynamics etc. There is a great deal of papers on the theory, technique and applications of
differential equations. Especially, they are used as a major tool in order to achieve many
developments in real engineering problems by modelling, analyzing and solving naturel
problems. For example, an interdisciplinary branch of applied mathematics and electricelectronics engineering, they play a pioneering role in system and control theory, that deal with
the behavior of dynamical systems with inputs, and how their behavior is modified by different
combinations such as cascade and feedback connections which is. When the cascade
connection in system design is considered, the commutativity concept places a prominent role
to improve different system performances.

1

Consider a system 𝐴 described by a linear time-varying differential equation of the form
𝑛𝐴

𝐴: ∑ 𝑎𝑖 (𝑡)
𝑖=0

𝑑𝑖
𝑦 (𝑡) = 𝑥𝐴 (𝑡);
𝑑𝑡 𝑖 𝐴

(1)

(𝑥 − 𝑦) represents input-output pair of the system at any time 𝑡 ∈ 𝑅, 𝑎𝑖 (𝑡) are time-varying
(𝑖)
coefficients with 𝑎𝑛 (𝑡) ≠ 0, 𝑛𝐴 ≥ 0 is the oder of system; and 𝑦𝐴 (𝑡0 ) ∈ 𝑅, 𝑖 = 0, 1, ⋯ , 𝑛𝐴 −

1 are the initial conditions at the initial time 𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅.
When two systems of this type are interconnected sequentially so that the output of the former
feeds the input of the later, it is said that they are connected in cascade [1]. If the order of
connection does not affect the input-output relation of the combined system 𝐴𝐵 or 𝐵𝐴, it is
said that systems 𝐴 and 𝐵 are commutative.

Figure 1: Cascade connection of the differential system 𝐴 and 𝐵
If the combined system has an overall input-output relation invariant with the sequence of
connection, it is said that these systems are commutative [2]. In [2], J. E. Marshall has proven
that “for commutativity, either both systems are time-invariant or both systems are timevarying”. In addition, he has revealed the commutativity conditions of first-order systems.
Later Marshall’s work, a great deal of researches has been done on commutativity. In [3-5],
the necessary and sufficient conditions for commutativity of second-order systems are
presented. Koksal has presented the general commutativity conditions for time-varying
systems of any order and reformulated the previous results obtained for seccond-order systems
in the format of general conditions [6]. In this work, the general conditions are used to show
that any system with constant forward and feedback gains is commutative with the system
itself, which is an important fact for the feedback control theory.
In 1985, Koksal prepared a technical report which is a survey on commutativity [7]. In this
2

report, an iterative formula is derived and an explicit formula is given for the entries of the
coefficient matrix expressing the first set of commutativity conditions and the second set of
commutativity conditions, respectively. Hence, the theorem stating these conditions is
formally proved. Morover, explicit commutativity results for fourth-order systems are
obtained. Finally, commutativity of Euler’s system is proved.
The content of the published but undistributed work [7] can be found in the exhaustive journal
paper of M. Koksal introduced the basic fundamentals of the subject [8]. His paper covers
almost all the previous results except the ones related with initial conditions and sensitivity.
This paper is the first tutorial paper that has appeared in the literature.
More than one decade no publication had been appeared in the literature until the work in 2011
[9]. This reference is the second basic journal publication after the first appeared in 1988 [8].
In [9], another generic paper by the same author has presented explicit commutativity
conditions of fifth-order systems in addition to reviews of commutativity of systems with nonzero initial conditions, commutativity and system disturbance, commutativity of Euler
systems.
Research on commutativity has not confined to analog systems only; there has been some
literature on the subject for discrete-time systems as well [10, 11]. Hence, the research is
continuing on both digital and analog area [12]. In [12], explicit results for finding all the
second order commutative pairs of a first-order linear time-varying system have been given
and the derived theoretical results have been verified by an example. About the commutativity
of continuous time linear time-varying systems, [13] has been the last paper appearing in the
literature; it deals with driving necessary and sufficiently conditions for the decomposition of
a second order linear time-varying system into two cascade connected commutative first-order
linear time-varying subsystems.
After a short introduction of the literature in this section, the transitivity property of
commutativity is introduced in Section 2. Transitivity property of commutative first-order
systems with and without initial conditions is studied in Section 3. In Section 4, transitivity
property of commutativity for relaxed systems of any order is formulated on the base of
impulse response function. Section 5 covers the verification of the general results formulated
in Section 4 on the base of impulse response function for first-order systems. Section 6
illustrates the results presented in Sections 4 and 5. Section 7 includes transitivity proves for
some combinations of first and second-order relaxed linear time-varying systems. Finally, the
paper finishes with conclusions and future work which compose the last section, Section 8.
3

2.

Transitivity Property of Commutativity

Logically or mathematically, transitivity is a property of a binary relation such that whenever
one element is related to a second element, and the second element is related to a third element,
then the first element is also related to the third element.
Let 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 be dynamical systems described by linear time-varying differential equations of the
form (1) with their special input-output variables, orders of complexity, and coefficients. If 𝐴
and 𝐵 are commutative among themselves, further, 𝐵 and 𝐶 are also commutative amoung
themselves, what can it be said about the commutativity of systems 𝐴 and 𝐶. If 𝐴 and 𝐶 are
also commutative among themselves, this property is called transitivity property of
commutativity, in other words commutativity is a transitive relation.
For

commutative

systems

𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶

satisfiying

transitivity,

all

the

triplets

𝐴𝐵𝐶, 𝐴𝐶𝐵, 𝐵𝐴𝐶, 𝐵𝐶𝐴, 𝐶𝐴𝐵, 𝐶𝐵𝐴 yield the same functionally equivalent cascade connected
system and hence the same input-output property. The preference of an individual system
connection depends on its relative performance characteristics such as sensitivity, disturbance,
robustness, and etc., with respect to the others.
It is well-known (or trivial to show) that linear scalar systems, that is systems of order 0, are
always commutative among themselves whether time-invariant or time-varying; and
transitivity always hold for such systems. Further, initially relaxed time-invariant systems are
always commutative. When initial conditions exist, which is valid for non-scalar (1st or higherorder) systems, the commutativity of such systems (even including a scalar system) is not
automatic and requires some conditions. Hence, the following discussions are devoted mainly
to commutativity of systems at least one of them is of order one or higher.
3.

Transitivity for First-order Systems

Let 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 be first-order linear time-varying systems defined by a differential equation of the
form (1). Let 𝑎1 , 𝑎0 ; 𝑏1 , 𝑏0 ; and 𝑐1 , 𝑐0 are time-varying (in general) coefficients of these
systems. Assume also that (𝐴, 𝐵) and (𝐵, 𝐶) are commutative pairs.
The first commutativity conditions [7-9] for (𝐴, 𝐵) and (𝐵, 𝐶) yields
𝑏
𝑎
[ 1] = [ 1
𝑎
𝑏0
0

4

0 𝑘1
] [ ],
1 𝑘0

(2a)

𝑐1
𝑏
[𝑐 ] = [ 1
𝑏0
0

0 ℓ1
] [ ],
1 ℓ0

(2b)

respectively; where 𝑘1 , 𝑘0 , ℓ1 , ℓ0 are some constants.
Inserting the values of 𝑏1 , 𝑏0 as expressed in (2a) into Eq. (2b) and rearranging, we obtain
𝑐1
𝑎
[𝑐 ] = [ 1
𝑎0
0

0
𝑘1 ℓ1
][
].
1 𝑘0 ℓ1 + ℓ0

(2c)

This equation already satisfies the first commutativity condition for Systems 𝐴 and 𝐶; hence,
𝐴 and 𝐶 are commutative pairs under zero initial conditions.
For the case of existence of non-zero initial conditions, the second commutativity condition
[9] for (𝐴, 𝐵) and (𝐵, 𝐶) yields
𝑦𝐴 (𝑡0 ) = 𝑦𝐵 (𝑡0 ) ≠ 0,

(3a)

1 − 𝑎0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − 𝑏0 (𝑡0 )
=
;
𝑎1 (𝑡0 )
𝑏1 (𝑡0 )

(3b)

𝑦𝐵 (𝑡0 ) = 𝑦𝐶 (𝑡0 ) ≠ 0,

(4a)

1 − 𝑏0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − 𝑐0 (𝑡0 )
=
,
𝑏1 (𝑡0 )
𝑐1 (𝑡0 )

(4b)

respectively. Hence, Eqs. (3) and (4) lead to write
𝑦𝐴 (𝑡0 ) = 𝑦𝐶 (𝑡0 ) ≠ 0,

(5a)

1 − 𝑎0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − 𝑐0 (𝑡0 )
=
.
𝑎1 (𝑡0 )
𝑐1 (𝑡0 )

(5b)

The result in Eq. (5) clearly shows the satisfaction of the second commutativity condition for
Subsystems 𝐴 and 𝐶. Hence, 𝐴 and 𝐶 are also commutative when initial conditions exist, and
transitivity property is valid for non-relaxed first-order linear time-varying systems as well.
In fact, Eq. (3b) is not satisfied for all systems 𝐴 and 𝐵 satisfying commutativity conditions
(2a) under relaxed conditions. Using (2a) we see that Eq. (3b) requires
1 − 𝑎0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − 𝑏0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − 𝑘1 𝑎0 (𝑡0 ) − 𝑘0
=
=
=
𝑎1 (𝑡0 )
𝑏1 (𝑡0 )
𝑘1 𝑎1 (𝑡0 )

5

1 − 𝑘0
− 𝑎0 (𝑡0 )
𝑘1
;
𝑎1 (𝑡0 )

(6a)

Or equivalently
𝑘0 = 1 − 𝑘1 .

(6b)

Similarly, using (2b), we see that Eq. (4b) requires
1 − 𝑏0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − 𝑐0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − ℓ1 𝑏0 (𝑡0 ) − ℓ0
=
=
=
𝑏1 (𝑡0 )
𝑐1 (𝑡0 )
ℓ1 𝑏1 (𝑡0 )

1 − ℓ0
− 𝑏0 (𝑡0 )
ℓ1
,
𝑏1 (𝑡0 )

ℓ0 = 1 − ℓ1 .

(7a)
(7b)

Using (2c) with (6b) and (7b), we can easily show that (5b) is satisfied; That is:
1 − 𝑐0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − [𝑘1 ℓ1 𝑎0 (𝑡0 ) + 𝑘0 ℓ1 + ℓ0 ]
=
=
𝑐1 (𝑡0 )
𝑘1 ℓ1 𝑎1 (𝑡0 )

1 − 𝑘0 ℓ1 − ℓ0
− 𝑎0 (𝑡0 )
𝑘1 ℓ1
𝑎1 (𝑡0 )

1 − (1 − 𝑘1 )ℓ1 − (1 − ℓ1 )
− 𝑎0 (𝑡0 ) 1 − 𝑎 (𝑡 )
𝑘1 ℓ1
0 0
=
=
,
𝑎1 (𝑡0 )
𝑎1 (𝑡0 )

(8)

which is exactly Eq. (5b); hence, 𝐴 and 𝐶 are commutative under non-zero conditions as well
if the constants 𝑘1 , ℓ1 , 𝑘0 , , ℓ0 satisfy (6b) and (7b). These are explicit commutativity conditions
under non-zero initial states equivalently replacing by (3b) and (4b) in addition to (2a) and (2b)
which are necessary and sufficient for relaxed case. With these conditions 5b is also satisfied,
so that transitivity is valid.
We state the results obtained so far by two theorems:
Theorem 1: The necessary and sufficient conditions that two first-order linear time-varying
systems 𝐴 and 𝐵 described by differential equations of the form (1) are commutative under
zero initial conditions are that
i.

The coefficients of System 𝐵 must be expressible in terms of the coefficients of those of
𝐴 as in Eq. (2a) where 𝑘1 ≠ 0 and 𝑘0 are arbitrary constants.

ii.

Further, Systems 𝐴 and 𝐵 are commutative under arbitrary non-zero initial conditions
as well if and only if Condition (i) is satisfied with 𝑘0 = 1 − 𝑘1 (that is 𝑘1 ≠ 0 and 𝑘0
cannot be chosen arbitrarily), and their non-zero initial conditions must be equal.

Note that this theorem is the first theorem expressing the commutativity conditions for
unrelaxed systems by using the arbitrary constants relating the coefficients of two systems for
their commutativity in relaxed conditions. Note also that Eqs. (6b) and (7b) are independent of
6

the initial time. So, commutativity does not depend on the initial time 𝑡0 for first-order nonrelaxed systems.
Theorem 2: The transitivity property of commutativity for first-order linear time-varying
systems is always valid for both relaxed and un-relaxed commutative systems that is for
systems with zero and non-zero initial conditions.
4.

Transitivity for High-order Systems

In this section, higher-order linear time-varying systems with zero initial conditions are
considered; scalar (0-order) and first-order systems are also included in the scope. To prove
the transitivity property of commutativity, the impulse response function is used. The results
are general in the sense the subsystems of each commutative pair may have a different order
than its partner.
Let 𝐴 be a liear time-varying initially relaxed system having an impulse response ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏); by
definition this is the response to a unit impulse occurring at time 𝜏 and observed at time 𝑡 ≥ 𝜏
[14]. And the response of 𝐴 for an arbitrary input 𝑢𝐴 (𝑡) is expressed by superposition integral
𝑡

𝑦𝐴 (𝑡) = ∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝛾)𝑢𝐴 (𝛾)𝑑𝛾 .

(9a)

𝑡0

Consider now the cascade connection of 𝐴 and 𝐵 as shown in Fig. 2 and denote this connection
by 𝐴𝐵. Smilar to Eq. (9a), for the output of 𝐵 we write
𝑡

𝑦𝐵 (𝑡) = ∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝛾)𝑢𝐵 (𝛾)𝑑𝛾 .

(9b)

𝑡0

It is obvious form Fig. 1, and using Eq. (9a)
𝜏

𝑢𝐵 (𝜏 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝛾)𝑢(𝛾)𝑑𝛾 .
𝑡0

Figure 2: Cascade connection 𝐴𝐵 of Systems 𝐴 and 𝐵.
7

(9c)

Finally, inserting Eq. (9c) in Eq. (9b), and observing 𝑦𝐵 (𝑡) in Fig. 2, we obtain
𝑡

𝜏

𝑦(𝑡 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏) [ ∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝛾)𝑢(𝛾)𝑑𝛾] 𝑑𝜏 .
𝑡0

(9d)

𝑡0

This is the response of 𝐴𝐵 for any input 𝑢(𝑡) applied for 𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 .To find the impulse response
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) of the connection 𝐴𝐵, we substitute 𝑢(𝑡) = 𝛿(𝑡 − 𝑡0 ) in Eq. (9d) and arrive
𝑡

𝑡

𝜏

ℎ𝐴𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏) [∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝛾)𝛿(𝛾 − 𝑡0 )𝑑𝛾] 𝑑𝜏 = ∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 , (10a)
𝑡0

𝑡0

𝑡0

where the second equality results from the property of impulse function. In a similar result, the
impulse response ℎ𝐵𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏) of the connection 𝐴𝐵 can be written as
𝑡

ℎ𝐵𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 .

(10b)

𝑡0

Since equal impulse responses yield equal input-output pairs, for commutativity of 𝐴 and 𝐵 it
must be true that
ℎ𝐴𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ℎ𝐵𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 );

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅.

(11a)

Using Eqs. (10a, b); (11a) can be written as
𝑡

𝑡

∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 = ∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 ;
𝑡0

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅,

(11b)

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅.

(11c)

𝑡0

or equivalently
𝑡

∫[ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )] 𝑑𝜏 = 0;
𝑡0

In fact, either of Eqs. (11b) or Eq. (11c) express necessary and sufficient conditions in terms
of impulse responses for relaxed systems 𝐴 and 𝐵 to be commutative.
On the other hand, for commutativity of 𝐵 and 𝐶 under zero inintial conditions, the neccessary
and suffifcient condition can be obtained from (11) by changing 𝐴 → 𝐵 and 𝐵 → 𝐶, the result
is

8

ℎ𝐵𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ℎ𝐶𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 );
𝑡

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅,

(12a)

𝑡

∫ ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 = ∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 ;
𝑡0

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅,

(12b)

𝑡0

or equivalently,
𝑡

∫[ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )] 𝑑𝜏 = 0;

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅.

(12c)

𝑡0

For the proof of the commutativity of 𝐶 and 𝐴, that is the transitivity property of commutativity,
it is required to show
ℎ𝐶𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ℎ𝐴𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 );
𝑡

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅, that is,

(13a)

𝑡

∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 = ∫ ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 ;
𝑡0

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅,

(13b)

∀𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 , ∀𝑡0 ∈ 𝑅.

(13c)

𝑡0

or equivalently,
𝑡

∫[ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )] 𝑑𝜏 = 0;
𝑡0

In the light of the presence of equalities in (11b) and (12b), the work left for the proof of
transitivity is to show the validity of (13b); if so then (13a) holds. This process will end with
the proof of transitivity of linear time-varying relaxed systems of higher orders.
It worth’s to remark that Eqs. (10a, b) are first used by J. E. Marshall to prove his assertion
mentioned in Introduction (Eqs. (2, 3) in [2]). Later, they are used by the author for studying
commutativity of Euler systems (Eqs. (34a, b) in [7]).
When we consider a scalar system
𝐴: 𝑎0 (𝑡)𝑦𝐴 (𝑡) = 𝑥𝐴 (𝑡)

(14a)

for which its response ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) to a unit impulse 𝛿(𝑡 − 𝑡0 ) is obviously
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = 𝑦𝐴 (𝑡) =

1
1
𝑥𝐴 (𝑡) =
𝛿(𝑡 − 𝑡0 ).
𝑎0 (𝑡)
𝑎0 (𝑡0 )

9

(14b)

Then, let 𝐵 be a time-varying system of 1st order or higher with impulse response ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ).
Eqs. (10a) and (10b) lead to
𝑡

ℎ𝐴𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)
𝑡0
𝑡

ℎ𝐵𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫
𝑡0

𝛿(𝜏 − 𝑡0 )
ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 )
𝑑𝜏 =
,
𝑎0 (𝑡0 )
𝑎0 (𝑡0 )

𝛿(𝑡 − 𝜏)
ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 )
ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 =
.
𝑎0 (𝜏)
𝑎0 (𝑡)

(15a)

(15b)

From these equations, it is obvious that a scalar system that can be commutative with a 1st or
higher order system must be a time-invariant system; that is 𝑎0 (𝑡) = 𝑎0 (𝑡0 ) = 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 for
all 𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 . In other words, a scalar time-varying system cannot commutative with any order of
higher order (1st, 2nd …) time-varying system. The only commutative pairs of it are the scalar
systems. Though commutativity of a constant gain system (scalar time-invariant system) is
always valid with time-varying system of any order, if the initial conditions exist the
commutativity is possible only if the constant gain is 1; that is System 𝐴 is an identity.
The validation of transitivity using the equivalence of impulse responses ℎ𝐴𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) and
ℎ𝐶𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) for first-order systems are considered in Section 5. But the extension of this result
for systems at least one is 2nd order or higher is not straight forward and appears to be an
unsolved problem. Instead of jumping this problem fully, we consider the special case that
transitivity holds conditionally. Hence, the following discussion is not restricted by order
limitation.
Let 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 be linear time-varying systems with impulse responses ℎ𝐴 , ℎ𝐵 , ℎ𝐶 satisfying
ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 0,

(16a)

ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )−ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 0.

(16b)

Eq. (16a) implies that Eqs. (11a, b, c) are satisfied, hence (𝐴, 𝐵) is a comutative pair. In a
similar manner (16b) implies that (𝐵, 𝐶) is also a commutative pair.
Multiplying (16b) by ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) and inserting the equivalence of ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) as obtained
from (16a), we find
ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 0,

(17𝑎)

ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 0,

(17𝑏)

10

[ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )]ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 0.

(17𝑐)

Since ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) ≢ 0, it follows that
ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 0.

(18𝑎)

This is sufficient to write
𝑡

𝑡

∫ ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 − ∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 = 0.
𝑡0

(18b)

𝑡0

Comparing with Eqs. (10a) and (10b), the first integral in (18b) is the impulse response of 𝐴𝐶
and the second one is that of 𝐶𝐴; hence, (18b) yields
ℎ𝐴𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ℎ𝐴𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ).

(19)

So, that 𝐴 and 𝐶 are commutative. This proves the transitivity proper of higher-order systems
under the set assumptions.
5.

Verifications for first-order systems

This section verifies the transitivity property of first-order linear time-varying systems in their
relaxed modes as presented in Section 3 by using the general results obtained for systems of
any order in Section 4.
Consider a first-order linear time-varying system 𝐴 defined by
𝑎1 (𝑡)

𝑑
𝑦 (𝑡) + 𝑎0 (𝑡)𝑦𝐴 (𝑡) = 𝑥𝐴 (𝑡),
𝑑𝑡 𝐴

(20)

with zero initial conditions. The impulse response ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) of this system to an impulse
𝛿(𝑡 − 𝑡0 ) occurring at 𝑡 = 𝑡0 is obviously expressed as [14, 15]
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) =

𝑡 𝑎 (𝛾)
1
1
∫𝑡 − 0 (𝛾)𝑑𝛾
𝑒 0 𝑎1
=
𝑒 𝑓𝐴(𝑡)− 𝑓𝐴(𝑡0 ) ,
(𝑡
)
(𝑡
)
𝑎1 0
𝑎1 0

(21a)

where
𝑓𝐴 (𝛾) = ∫ −

𝑎0 (𝛾)
𝑑𝛾 ,
𝑎1 (𝛾)

𝑑
𝑎0 (𝛾)
𝑓𝐴 (𝛾) = −
.
𝑑𝛾
𝑎1 (𝛾)
11

(21b)

(21c)

Hence, for Systems 𝐵 and 𝐶 of the same type of 𝐴, it can be written that
ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) =

𝑡 𝑏 (𝛾)
1
1
∫ − 0 𝑑𝛾
𝑒 𝑡0 𝑏1 (𝛾) =
𝑒 𝑓𝐵 (𝑡)− 𝑓𝐵 (𝑡0 ) ,
𝑏1 (𝑡0 )
𝑏1 (𝑡0 )

𝑓𝐵 (𝛾) = ∫ −
𝑑
𝑓 (𝛾)
𝑑𝛾 𝐵
𝑡

𝑏0 (𝛾)
𝑑𝛾 ,
𝑏1 (𝛾)

(22b)

𝑏 (𝛾)

= − 𝑏0 (𝛾) ,

(22c)

1

𝑐 (𝛾)

1
∫𝑡 −𝑐0 (𝛾)𝑑𝛾
0
1
𝑒
1 (𝑡0 )

ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = 𝑐

𝑡

𝑓𝐶 (𝛾) = ∫ −
𝑡0

=𝑐

(22a)

1

1 (𝑡0 )

𝑒 𝑓𝐶 (𝑡)− 𝑓𝐶 (𝑡0 ) ,

𝑐0 (𝛾)
𝑑𝛾 ,
𝑐1 (𝛾)

𝑑
𝐶0 (𝛾)
𝑓𝐶 (𝛾) = −
.
𝑑𝛾
𝐶1 (𝛾)

(23a)

(23b)

(23c)

For commutativity of 𝐴 and 𝐵, consider the verification of Eq. (11a) (or equivalently Eqs. (11b,
c)). Using the relations in Eq. (2a) between the coefficients of 𝐴 and 𝐵 in Eq. (22b) and then
recognizing (21b), we obtain
𝑓𝐵 (𝛾) = ∫ −

𝑏0 (𝛾)
𝑘1 𝑎0 (𝛾) + 𝑘0
𝑎0 (𝛾)
𝑘0
1
𝑑𝛾 = ∫ −
𝑑𝛾 = ∫ −
𝑑𝛾 − ∫
𝑑𝛾
𝑏1 (𝛾)
𝑘1 𝑎1 (𝛾)
𝑎1 (𝛾)
𝑘1 𝑎1 (𝛾)
= 𝑓𝐴 (𝛾) −

𝑘0
1
∫
𝑑𝛾 .
𝑘1 𝑎1 (𝛾)

(24a)

Using this result in Eq. (22a), we obtain
𝑘
𝑘
1
1
1
𝑓𝐴 (𝑡)− 0 ∫
𝑑𝑡−𝑓𝐴 (𝑡0 )+ 0 ∫
𝑑𝑡0
𝑘
(𝑡)
𝑘
(𝑡
𝑎
𝑎
1
1
1
1
0)
ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) =
𝑒
,
𝑘1 𝑎1 (𝑡0 )

=

1
1
1
𝑒 𝑓𝐴(𝑡)− 𝑓𝐴(𝑡0 ) 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 )− 𝑔(𝑡) =
𝑘1 𝑎1 (𝑡0 )
𝑘1

𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 )− 𝑔(𝑡) ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ),

(24b)

where
𝑔(𝑡) =

𝑘0
1
∫
𝑑𝑡 .
𝑘1 𝑎1 (𝑡)

By using (15b) in (7a), we obtain
12

(24c)

𝑡

1 𝑔(𝜏)− 𝑔(𝑡)
𝑒
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 .
𝑘1

ℎ𝐴𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫
𝑡0

(25)

Before proceeding further, we show the transitivity property of ℎ𝐴 (•,•); in fact using (21a)
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) =

=

1
1
𝑒 𝑓𝐴(𝑡)− 𝑓𝐴(𝜏)
𝑒 𝑓𝐴(𝜏)− 𝑓𝐴(𝑡0 )
𝑎1 (𝜏)
𝑎1 (𝑡0 )

1
1
1
𝑒 𝑓𝐴(𝑡)− 𝑓𝐴 (𝑡0 ) =
ℎ (𝑡, 𝑡0 ).
𝑎1 (𝜏) 𝑎1 (𝑡0 )
𝑎1 (𝜏) 𝐴

(26)

Same property holds for the remaining first-order systems 𝐵 and 𝐶 as well. Another relation
we need in the future proves is arrived as follows:
𝑡

∫
𝑡0

𝑡

𝑔(𝜏)

𝑒
𝑑𝜏 = ∫
𝑎1 (𝜏)
𝑡0

𝑘0
1
∫ (𝜏)𝑑𝜏
𝑘
𝑎
1
1
𝑒

𝑎1 (𝜏)

𝑑𝜏 =

𝑘0
1
𝑘1 𝑘1
𝑑𝜏 𝑡
∫
𝑒 𝑎1 (𝜏) |
𝑘0
𝑡0

𝑘1 𝑔(𝜏) 𝑡
𝑘1
𝑒
| = [𝑒 𝑔(𝑡) − 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 ) ].
𝑘0
𝑡0 𝑘0

(27a)

𝑒 −𝑔(𝜏)
𝑘1
∫
𝑑𝜏 = [𝑒 −𝑔(𝑡0 ) − 𝑒 −𝑔(𝑡) ].
𝑎1 (𝜏)
𝑘0

(27b)

=
Similarly, we obtain
𝑡

𝑡0

Using (26) and (27a) in (25), we have
𝑡

𝑡

𝑡0

𝑡0

1 𝑔(𝜏)− 𝑔(𝑡)
1
𝑒 − 𝑔(𝑡)
𝑒 𝑔(𝜏)
ℎ𝐴𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫
𝑒
ℎ (𝑡, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 =
ℎ (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) ∫
𝑑𝜏
𝑘1
𝑎1 (𝜏) 𝐴
𝑘1 𝐴
𝑎1 (𝜏)

=

𝑒 −𝑔(𝑡)
𝑘1

ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 )

𝑘1
𝑘0

1

[𝑒 𝑔(𝑡) − 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 ) ] = 𝑘 ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) [1 − 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 )−𝑔(𝑡) ].
0

Using (24b) in (10b) and using the formula (26) and (27b), we obtain sequentially
𝑡

ℎ𝐵𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)
𝑡0
𝑡

= ∫
𝑡0

1 𝑔(𝑡 )− 𝑔(𝜏)
𝑒 0
ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏
𝑘1

1 𝑔(𝑡 )− 𝑔(𝜏)
1
𝑒 0
ℎ (𝑡, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏
𝑘1
𝑎1 (𝜏) 𝐴
13

(28)

𝑡

𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 )
𝑒 −𝑔(𝜏)
𝑒 𝑔( 𝑡0 )
𝑘1 −𝑔(𝑡 )
0 − 𝑒 −𝑔(𝑡) ]
(𝑡,
)
=
ℎ𝐴 𝑡0 ∫
𝑑𝜏 =
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 )
[𝑒
(𝜏)
𝑘1
𝑎1
𝑘1
𝑘0
𝑡0

1

= 𝑘 ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) [1 − 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 )−𝑔(𝑡) ].

(29)

0

Obviously, 𝐴𝐵 and 𝐵𝐴 have the same impulse response as seen in Eqs. (28) and (29),
respectively; so 𝐴 and 𝐵 are commutative.
Remark 1: Although Eq. (11c), a property of impulse response of the commutative systems 𝐴
and 𝐵, seems to mislead to the conclusion of the integrant being zero; that is,
∆( 𝑡0 , 𝜏, 𝑡) ≜ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 0.

(30)

This is strictly wrong. In fact, using (24b) for ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ), and (26) later, we have
∆( 𝑡0 , 𝜏, 𝑡) =

1 𝑔(𝜏)− 𝑔(𝑡)
1 𝑔(𝑡 )− 𝑔(𝜏)
𝑒
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) − ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)
𝑒 0
ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 0
𝑘1
𝑘1
=

1
ℎ (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) [𝑒 𝑔(𝜏)−𝑔(𝑡) − 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 )−𝑔(𝜏) ]
𝑘1 𝐴

=

[𝑒 𝑔(𝜏)−𝑔(𝑡) − 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 )−𝑔(𝜏) ]
1
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 )
= 0.
𝑘1
𝑎1 (𝜏)

(31a)

Since, ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) ≢ 0 and 𝑎1 (𝜏) ≢ 0, this implies
𝑒 𝑔(𝜏)−𝑔(𝑡) = 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡0 )−𝑔(𝜏) ,

(31b)

or equivalently
1
[𝑔(𝑡) + 𝑔( 𝑡0 )].
2

(31c)

1
1
1
1
𝑑𝜏 = [∫
𝑑𝑡 + ∫
𝑑 𝑡 ],
𝑎1 (𝜏)
2
𝑎1 (𝑡)
𝑎1 (𝑡0 ) 0

(31d)

𝑒 2𝑔(𝜏) = 𝑒 𝑔(𝑡)+𝑔( 𝑡0 ) ; 𝑔(𝜏) =
With (24c), the last equation is equivalent to
∫

which is impossible for an arbitrary function 𝑎1 (•) And for general values of 𝑡0 ≤ 𝜏 ≤ 𝑡.

14

Similar result obtained in Eqs. (25-29) can be obtained for commutative pair (𝐵, 𝐶); either by
the parallel derivations made for (𝐴, 𝐵), or by replacing 𝐴 → 𝐵, 𝐵 → 𝐶, so 𝑎1 → 𝑏1 and 𝑘1 , 𝑘0
by ℓ1 , ℓ0 , respectively.
For the commutativity of 𝐴 and 𝐶, to show that ℎ𝐴𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ℎ𝐶𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ), the replacements 𝐵 →
𝐶, (𝑘1 , 𝑘0 ) → (𝑘1 ℓ1 , 𝑘0 ℓ1 + ℓ0 ) in Eqs. (25-29) complete the verification of transitivity for
initially relaxed first-order linear time- varying systems by using impulse responses.
6.

Example

This example is given for illustration of the results presented in Sections 4 and 5. Consider
system 𝐴 describe by
(𝑡 + 1)𝑦𝐴́ + (𝑡 + 2)𝑦𝐴 = 𝑥𝐴 , −1 < 𝑡0 ≤ 𝑡,

(32)

where 𝑎1 (𝑡) = 𝑡 + 1, 𝑎0 (𝑡) = 𝑡 + 2; 𝑓(𝑡) for 𝐴 is computed by using (21b) as
𝑓𝐴 (𝑡) = ∫ −

𝑡+2
𝑑𝑡 = −𝑡 − ln(𝑡 + 1).
𝑡+1

(33)

Then, by (21a), its impulse response is computed as
𝑡0 +1

𝑒 −𝑡−ln(𝑡+1)+𝑡0 +ln(𝑡0 +1) 𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 +ln 𝑡+1
1
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) =
=
=
𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 .
𝑡0 + 1
𝑡0 + 1
𝑡+1

(34)

Let subsystem 𝐵 be described by
2(𝑡 + 1)𝑦̇ 𝐵 + (2𝑡 + 5)𝑦𝐵 ; −1 < 𝑡0 ≤ 𝑡,

(35)

where 𝑏1 (𝑡) = 2(𝑡 + 1), 𝑏0 (𝑡) = 2𝑡 + 5 which can be obtained from 𝑎1 and 𝑎0 by using Eq.
(2a) with 𝑘1 = 2, 𝑘0 = 1; hence, (𝐴, 𝐵) is a commutative pair. Using (22b), 𝑓(𝑡) for 𝐵 can
be obtained as
𝑓𝐵 (𝑡) = ∫ −

2𝑡 + 5
𝑑𝑡 = −𝑡 − 1.5 ln(𝑡 + 1).
2(𝑡 + 1)

(36)

Then, by (22a), the impulse response of 𝐵 is computed as
𝑡0 +1

𝑒 −𝑡−1.5 ln(𝑡+1)+𝑡0 +1.5 ln(𝑡0 +1) 𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 +1.5 ln 𝑡+1
ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) =
=
2(𝑡0 + 1)
2(𝑡0 + 1)

15

=

(𝑡0 + 1)1.5 (𝑡0 + 1)0.5 −𝑡+𝑡
1
0.
𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
=
𝑒
(𝑡 + 1)1.5
2(𝑡0 + 1)
2(𝑡 + 1)1.5

(37)

For computations of ℎ𝐴𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) and ℎ𝐵𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ), first consider the integrands in Eqs. (10a), (10b)
and (11b).
ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) =

(𝜏 + 1)0.5 −𝑡+𝜏 1
1
𝑒
𝑒 −𝜏+𝑡0 =
𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 , (38a)
1.5
1.5
2(𝑡 + 1)
𝜏+1
2(𝑡 + 1) (𝜏 + 1)0.5
(𝑡 +1)0.5

1

(𝑡 +1)0.5

0
0
ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐵 (𝜏, 𝑡0 ) = 𝑡+1 𝑒 −𝑡+𝜏 2(𝜏+1)
𝑒 −𝜏+𝑡0 = 2(𝑡+1)(𝜏+1)
𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 .
1.5
1.5

(38b)

Obviously, these integrands are not identical and Eq. (30) in connection to Remark 1 is not
satisfied for the general values of 𝑡0 ≤ 𝜏 ≤ 𝑡 ∈ 𝑅. The impulse response of 𝐴𝐵 and 𝐵𝐴 are
computed as in (10a) and (10b), that is the integral of the integrands in (38a) and (38b),
respectively. The results are as follows:
𝑡

𝑡

ℎ𝐴𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐵 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 = ∫
𝑡0

𝑡0

𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
1
𝑑𝜏
1.5
2(𝑡 + 1) (𝜏 + 1)0.5

𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 (𝜏 + 1)0.5 𝑡
=
|
2(𝑡 + 1)1.5
0.5
𝑡0
=

𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
𝑡0 + 1 0.5
0.5
0.5 ]
[(𝑡
(𝑡
+
1)
−
+
1)
=
[1
−
(
) ],
0
(𝑡 + 1)1.5
𝑡+1
𝑡+1
𝑡

ℎ𝐵𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫
𝑡0

=

(39a)

(𝑡0 + 1)0.5 𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
(𝑡0 + 1)0.5 𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 (𝜏 + 1)−0.5 𝑡
1
𝑑𝜏
=
|
(𝜏 + 1)1.5
2(𝑡 + 1)
2(𝑡 + 1)
−0.5
𝑡0

(𝑡0 +1)0.5 𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
(𝑡+1)

[(𝑡

0

1
+1)0.5

1

− (𝑡+1)0.5 ] =

𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
𝑡+1

𝑡 +1 0.5

0
[1 − ( 𝑡+1
)

].

(39b)

Obviously, ℎ𝐴𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) ≡ ℎ𝐵𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ).
When System 𝐶 is obtained from 𝐵 by (2b) with ℓ1 = −0.5, ℓ0 = 3.5, its coefficients are found
as 𝑐1 = −(𝑡 + 1), 𝑐0 = −(2𝑡 + 5)(−0.5) + 3.5 = −𝑡 + 1. Then, 𝑓(𝑡) for 𝐶 is computed from
(23b) as
𝑓𝑐 (𝑡) = ∫ −

−𝑡 + 1
𝑑𝑡 = −𝑡 + 2ln(𝑡 + 1).
−𝑡 − 1

Using (23a), the impulse response of 𝐶 is now obtained as
16

(40a)

ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) =

𝑒 −𝑡+2 ln(𝑡+1)+𝑡0 −2 ln(𝑡0 +1)
1
𝑡+1 2
=−
𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 (
)
−(𝑡0 + 1)
𝑡0 + 1
𝑡0 + 1
=−

(𝑡 + 1)2 −𝑡+𝑡
0.
𝑒
(𝑡0 + 1)3

(40b)

The impulse response of the connection 𝐴𝐶 is computed by Eq. (10a) modified by replacing
𝐵 by 𝐶, and using Eqs. (34) and (40b) for 𝐴 and 𝐶; we obtain
𝑡

𝑡

ℎ𝐴𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐶 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐴 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 = ∫ −
𝑡0

𝑡0
𝑡

= −(𝑡 + 1)2 𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0 ∫
𝑡0

=

(𝑡 + 1)2 −𝑡+𝜏
1
𝑒
𝑒 −𝜏+𝑡0 𝑑𝜏
3
(𝜏 + 1)
𝜏+1

(𝑡 + 1)2 𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
1
1
𝑡
𝑑𝜏
=
|
4
3
(𝜏 + 1)
(𝜏 + 1) 𝑡0
3

(𝑡 + 1)2 𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
1
1
[
−
]
(𝑡 + 1)3 (𝑡0 + 1)3
3
𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
𝑡+1 3
=
[1 − (
) ].
3(𝑡 + 1)
𝑡0 + 1

(41a)

Note that the impulse response of the connection 𝐶𝐴 can be obtained similarly by using Eq.
(10a) by replacing 𝐵 by 𝐶 and using Eqs. (40b) and (34) for 𝐶 and 𝐴; the result is
𝑡

𝑡

ℎ𝐶𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑡0 ) = ∫ ℎ𝐴 (𝑡, 𝜏)ℎ𝐶 (𝜏, 𝑡0 )𝑑𝜏 = − ∫
𝑡0

𝑡0

1
(𝜏 + 1)2 −𝜏+𝑡
−𝑡+𝜏
0 𝑑𝜏
𝑒
𝑒
(𝑡0 + 1)3
𝑡+1

𝑡

𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
𝑡
2
(𝜏 + 1)3 |
=−
∫(𝜏
+
1)
𝑑𝜏
=
−
3
3
(𝑡 + 1)(𝑡0 + 1)
3(𝑡 + 1)(𝑡0 + 1)
𝑡0
𝑡0

=

𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
[(𝑡 + 1)3 − (𝑡 + 1)3 ]
3(𝑡 + 1)(𝑡0 + 1)3 0
=

𝑒 −𝑡+𝑡0
𝑡+1 3
[1 − (
) ].
3(𝑡 + 1)
𝑡0 + 1

(41b)

This is the same impulse response expressed in (41a). Hence, it is verified that (𝐴, 𝐶) is a
commutative pair.
7.

Transitivity for Some 1st and 2nd Order Relaxed Systems

17

Let 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 be linear time-varying systems of orders 2, 1, 1; respectively. Let they be
represented by the general form of (1) with coefficients 𝑎2 , 𝑎1 , 𝑎0 ; 𝑏1 , 𝑏0 ; 𝑐1 , 𝑐0 ; inputs by
𝑥𝐴 , 𝑥𝐵 , 𝑥𝐶 ; output by 𝑦𝐴, 𝑦𝐵 , 𝑦𝐶 . It is true that 𝐴 has 2nd or lower order commutative pairs 𝐵
if and only if [8-10]
−𝑎20.5

𝑑
4𝑎12 + 3𝑎̇ 22 − 8𝑎1 𝑎̇ 2 + 8𝑎̇ 1 𝑎2 − 4𝑎2 𝑎̈ 2
[𝑎0 −
] 𝑘1 = 0,
𝑑𝑡
16𝑎2
𝑎2
𝑏2
𝑎
[ 𝑏1 ] = 1
𝑏0
[𝑎0

0
0
𝑘2
0.5
𝑎2
0
[ 𝑘1 ],
𝑎2−0.5 (2𝑎1 − 𝑎̇ 2 )
1] 𝑘0
4

(42a)

(42b)

where 𝑘2 , 𝑘1 , 𝑘0 are arbitrary constants. We assume that 𝐵 is a finite order commutative pair
of 𝐴; hence 𝑘2 = 0 and
𝑎20.5
0
𝑏1
𝑘
−0.5
[ ] = [𝑎2 (2𝑎1 − 𝑎̇ 2 )
] [ 1 ].
𝑏0
𝑘
0
1
4

(43)

On the other hand, it is true that 𝐵 has 1st or lower order commutative pairs 𝐶, if [8]
𝑐1
𝑏
[𝑐 ]=[ 1
𝑏0
0

0 ℓ1
] [ ],
1 ℓ0

(44)

where ℓ1 and ℓ0 are arbitrary constants. Inserting the values of 𝑏1 and 𝑏0 from Eq. (43),) into
Eq. (44), and rearranging, we obtain
𝑎20.5
𝑐1
[𝑐 ] = [𝑎2−0.5 (2𝑎1 − 𝑎̇ 2 )
0
4

0
𝑘1 ℓ1
][
].
1 𝑘0 ℓ1 + ℓ0

(45)

It is obviously true that this equation is in the form of (43). So 𝐶 is among the first-order
commutative pairs of 𝐴. Hence, it has been proven that if (𝐴, 𝐵) and (𝐵, 𝐶) are commutative
pairs so is (𝐴, 𝐶). Hence, transitivity is valid.
Let’s get one step up and consider transitivity property between two second order and one firstorder systems. Let 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶 be 2nd, 1st, 2nd order systems, respectively, with coefficient
𝑎2 , 𝑎1 , 𝑎0 ; 𝑏1 , 𝑏0 , 𝑐2 , 𝑐1 , 𝑐0 . Assume (𝐴, 𝐵) and (𝐵, 𝐶) are commutative pairs and show (𝐴, 𝐶)
is also commutative. Eq. (43) is valid since (𝐴, 𝐵) is a commutative pair. Similar equation

18

𝑐20.5
0
𝑏1
ℓ
−0.5
[ ] = [𝑐2 (2𝑐1 − 𝑐̇2 )
] [ 1]
𝑏0
ℓ
1 0
4

(46)

is also valid since (𝐵, 𝐶) is a commutative pair. Further, (42a) is valid and the similar equation
for 𝐶 is written as
−𝑐20.5

𝑑
4𝑐12 + 3𝑐̇22 − 8𝑐1 𝑐̇2 + 8𝑐̇1 𝑐2 − 4𝑐2 𝑐̈2
[𝑐 −
] ℓ1 = 0.
𝑑𝑡 0
16𝑐2

(47)

Since 𝐵 is of order 1, 𝑘1 in (43) and ℓ1 in (46) are not zero; hence (42a) and (47) yield
𝑎0 = [𝐴0 +

4𝑎12 + 3𝑎̇ 22 − 8𝑎1 𝑎̇ 2 + 8𝑎̇ 1 𝑎2 − 4𝑎2 𝑎̈ 2
],
16𝑎2

(48a)

4𝑐12 + 3𝑐̇22 − 8𝑐1 𝑐̇2 + 8𝑐̇1 𝑐2 − 4𝑐2 𝑐̈2
],
16𝑐2

(48b)

𝑐0 = [𝐶0 +

respectively, where 𝐴0 and 𝐶0 are arbitrary constants.
From Eq. (43), the first line, we obtain
2(𝑏̇12 + 𝑏1 𝑏̈1 )
𝑎̈ 2 =
.
𝑘12

𝑏12
2𝑏1 𝑏̇1
𝑎2 = 2 → 𝑎̇2 =
,
𝑘1
𝑘12

(49a)

Using these results in Eq. (43), the second line, we obtain
𝑎1 =

𝑏1 (2𝑏0 − 2𝑘0 + 𝑏̇1 )
𝑏̇1 (2𝑏0 − 2𝑘0 + 𝑏̇1 ) + 𝑏1 (2𝑏̇0 + 𝑏̈1 )
→
𝑎̇
=
.
1
𝑘12
𝑘12

(49b)

Inserting the values of 𝑎2 , 𝑎̇ 2 , 𝑎̈ 2 , 𝑎1 , 𝑎̇ 1 in Eq. (49) into Eq. (48a) and simplifying, we obtain
𝑏0 − 𝑘0 2 𝑏1 𝑏̇0
𝑎0 = 𝐴0 + [
] + 2 .
𝑘1
𝑘1

(49c)

Similar results can be obtained starting from (45) and using (48b):
𝑐2 =

𝑐1 =

𝑏12
,
ℓ12

𝑏1 (2𝑏0 −2ℓ0 +𝑏̇1 )
ℓ21

19

(50a)

,

(50b)

𝑐0 = 𝐶0 + [

𝑏0 − ℓ0 2 𝑏1 𝑏̇0
] + 2 .
ℓ1
ℓ1

(50c)

To prove the commutativity of 𝐴 and 𝐶, it is sufficient to show that
𝑎2
𝑐2
𝑎
[ 𝑐1 ] = 1
𝑐0
[𝑎 0

0
0
𝑚2
0.5
𝑎2
0
[ 𝑚1 ],
𝑎2−0.5 (2𝑎1 − 𝑎̇ 2 )
1 ] 𝑚0
4

(51)

which is similar equation to (42b), where 𝑚2 , 𝑚1 , 𝑚0 are some constants. It is true that, the
coefficients of 𝐶 can be expressed as in (51) by proper choice of constants 𝑚2 , 𝑚1 , 𝑚0 ; in fact,
inserting in coefficients 𝑎𝑖 in Eq. (49) and coefficient 𝑐𝑖 in Eq. (50) into Eq. (51), we find that
𝑘12
,
ℓ12

(52a)

2𝑘1 (𝑘0 − ℓ0 )
,
ℓ12

(52b)

𝑚2 =

𝑚1 =

𝑚0 = 𝐶0 − 𝐴0

𝑘12
ℓ21

+[

𝑘0 −ℓ0 2
ℓ1

] ,

(52c)

which are all constants. Hence, Eq. (51) together with Eq. (42) imply that 𝐶 is a second-order
commutative pair of 𝐴, that is 𝐴 and 𝐶 are also commutative. This proves the transitivity
property of (𝐴, 𝐵) and (𝐵, 𝐶) to (𝐴, 𝐶).
We express the result by a theorem:
Theorem 3: The commutativity property between three subsystems of which at most 2 of them
second order and the other(s) are first-order always satisfy the transitivity property under zero
initial conditions.
8.

Conclusions

Transitivity property of commutativity is defined for commutative linear time-varying systems
of any order. The transitivity results are presented for first-order systems with and without
initial conditions. The study is carried on two approaches; one is based on use of impulse
response function and the other depends on use of general conditions set by the author and
others for commutativity of linear time-varying systems.

20

One illustrative example is included to show the validity of the results. However, general
transitivity property of commutative high order systems have not been proved or disproved
and this remains as an unsolved problem yet.

REFERENCES
[1]

R. Boylestad and L. Nashelsky, Electronic Devices and Circuit Theory, Prentice Hall,
New Jersey, 2013.

[2]

E. Marshal, Commutativity of time varying systems, Electronics Letters, 13 (1977)
539-540.

[3]

M. Koksal, Commutativity of second order time-varying systems, International Journal
of Control, 36 (1982) 541-544.

[4]

S. V. Salehi, Comments on ‘Commutativity of second-order time-varying systems’,
International Journal of Control, 37 (1983) 1195-1196.

[5]

M. Koksal, Corrections on ‘Commutativity of second-order time-varying systems’,
International Journal of Control, 38 (1983) 273-274.

[6]

M. Koksal, General conditions for the commutativity of time-varying systems,
IASTED International Conference on Telecommunication and Control (TELCONi84),
1984, pp. 223-225.

[7]

M. Koksal, A Survey on the Commutativity of time-varying systems, METU,
Gaziantep Engineering Faculty, Technical. Report no: GEEE CAS-85/1, 1985.

[8]

M. Koksal, An exhaustive study on the commutativity of time-varying systems,
International Journal of Control, 47 (1988) 1521-1537.

[9]

M. Koksal and M. E. Koksal, Commutativity of linear time-varying differential
systems with non-zero initial conditions: A review and some new extensions,
Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2011 (2011) 1-25.

[10]

M. E. Koksal and M. Koksal, Commutativity of cascade connected discrete time linear
time-varying systems, 2013 Automatic Control National Meeting TOK’2013, (2013)
p.1128-1131.

[11]

M. Koksal and M. E. Koksal, Commutativity of cascade connected discrete-time linear
time-varying systems, Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control, 37
(2015) 615-622.

[12]

M. E. Koksal, The Second order commutative pairs of a first-order linear time-varying
system, Applied Mathematics and Information Sciences, 9 (2015) 1-6.

[13]

M. E. Koksal, Decomposition of a second-order linear time-varying differential system
21

as the series connection of two first-order commutative pairs, Open Mathematics, 14
(2016) 693-704.
[14]

C. A. Desoer, Notes For A Second Course On Linear Systems, Van Nostrand
Rheinhold, New York, 1970.

[15]

Chi-Tsong Chen, Linear System Theory and Design, New York Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 1999.

22

