2002 American Control Conference Program Chair -- Final Report

May 23, 2003 Eduardo A. Misawa

Summary

This was the first ACC to take place in May and the first one outside the continental USA. Although there was some concern regarding the number of paper submissions, it was an average number for ACC. There were 153 technical sessions – 6 sessions less than the number of sessions at the 2000 and 2001 ACC in Chicago and Arlington. The limitation was due to the size of convention center, which limited the conference to having a maximum of 17 parallel sessions during the 3 days. In addition to the submitted papers there were three plenary talks given by Professor Roger Brockett (Minimal Attention Control), Professor Dawn Tilbury (Reconfigurable Logic Control for High Volume manufacturing Systems) and Mr. Paul Studebaker (Perceptions and Problems: A Users’ View of Advanced Control). The conference also included two special sessions for students and young professionals, both organized by Professor May-Win L. Thein, the vice-chair for students’ affairs. The first special session, titled “Tomorrow’s Journey Starts Today – Professional Growth and Getting the Job You Want,” featured 3 speakers: Frankie Wood-Black from Phillips Petroleum Co. (Navigating Uncharted Waters and Jungle Roads – Successful Job Hunting and Interviewing), Philip J. Carlberg from Dow Chemical Co. (How to do Everything Right on the Resume) and James C. Spall from Johns Hopkins University (Technical Presentations: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly). The second special session, titled “Writing a Winning NSF CAREER Proposal,” featured 2 speakers and 5 panelists. The speakers were Dr. Kishan Baheti and Dr. Alison Flatau, both from National Science Foundation. The panelists were Andrew Alleyne (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Prabhakar Pagilla (Oklahoma State University), Lucy Pao (University of Colorado at Boulder), Dawn Tilbury (University of Michigan), and Bin Yao (Purdue University). All papers submitted for the 2002 ACC were electronically submitted with many participating societies taking advantage of it to facilitate the review process. The electronic submission process was managed by Dr. J. Jim Zhu and worked quite well, in handling the large number of papers distributed among multiple societies. The process was very helpful in assembling the final program at the Technical Program Committee meeting and in the conflict resolution phase that followed the TPC meeting. There were a number of volunteers involved in putting the conference program together. These activities are summarized below. The short papers submitted were handled by the Vice-Chair for Contributed Papers, the invited sessions were handled by the Vice-Chair for Invited Sessions, and the special tutorial sessions were handled by the Vice-Chair for Industry and Applications. Regular contributed papers were handled by the Society Review Chairs. The program-at-a-glance is shown in Attachment 1, with paper statistics shown in Attachment 2.

Papers/Sessions Submitted and Accepted

This ACC had a completely electronic submission and review process; this web-based process was developed by Jim and Yan Zhu as part of their CEB activities. The original deadline for paper/session proposal submission was 15 Sept 01. Each Society Review Chair and Program Vice-Chair had login access to their papers in .ps or .pdf form. Regular papers were handled by the individual societies, each with their own reviewers or editorial board. Instructions for each Society Review Chair are given in Attachment 3, and the list of Society Review Chairs is provided in Attachment 4. Short papers were handled by Vice Chair for Contributed Papers (James Spall); at least 2 reviewers for each paper were from the PC. Instructions for Prof. Spall are given in Attachment 5. Invited sessions were handled by the Vice Chair for Invited Sessions (Jordan Berg); at least 2 reviewers for each invited session proposal were from the PC. Instructions for Prof. Berg are given in Attachment 6. Tutorial sessions were handled by the Vice Chair for Industrial Applications (J. Christian Gerdes). The Vice-Chair for Student Affairs (May-Win Thein) handled special sessions of interest to the students, as well as the travel support grant. All vice chair reports are included below. Overall 1173 papers were submitted. The submissions were as follows:

• 920 Regular and Short contributed papers were submitted. The submission pattern is as follows: AIAA: 72 submissions, AIChE: 41, AISE: 2, ASCE: 3, ASME: 121, IEEE: 556, ISA: 19, SCS: 16, Short papers: 90.

• 34 Invited Session proposals submitted and 30 were accepted • 7 Tutorial Session pre-proposals (5 proposals) submitted and 4 were accepted

The final program had 905 papers (77% acceptance rate), distributed as follows:

AIAA: 60 6.63% IEEE 428 47.29% AIChE: 38 4.20% Invited 176 19.45%

AISE 1 0.11% Tutorial: 14 1.55% ASCE 2 0.22% ISA: 11 1.22% ASME 104 11.49% SCS: 13 1.44%

Short: 58 6.41% TOTAL: 905 100%

Report of the Vice Chair for Contributed Papers (James C. Spall) James Spall, the Vice Chair for Contributed (short) papers, provided the following report.

The Vice Chair for Contributed Papers (VCCP) is responsible for handling the short papers submitted to the conference. Submission and review procedures this year were almost fully electronic (the only exceptions being a few reviews received via fax and regular mail). Authors submitted their papers electronically to Prof. Jim Zhu’s office, and the short papers from within the full set of submitted papers were posted on a special “hidden” web site for access by the VCCP. I found the procedure to work very smoothly. This was the second conference in a row in which I worked with Jim Zhu’s office (the other being the 2001 CDC, where I was the Vice Chair for Invited Sessions), and I think the process was even smoother this time as a result of my prior interaction. Nevertheless, despite the relative smoothness, there were a few unique challenges. There were delays in receiving the papers as a consequence of the 11 September terrorist incident (and resulting extended submission deadline) and from a virus that infected the server receiving the e-submissions in Jim Zhu’s office. Despite these extraordinary circumstances, Yan Zhu did an excellent job in turning the papers around quickly and getting them to me. There were 90 short papers submitted. I sent each of the papers to three reviewers, drawn from the conference program committee and from selected others in the technical community. In the vast majority of cases, I had three reviews from which to make a decision, and in all cases, I had at least two reviews. Generally, reviewers were conscientious about providing their reviews on a timely basis. Reviewers were asked to submit their reports by fax or email to Ms. Marilyn Henderson at JHU/APL. She provided invaluable assistance in collating the comments, putting the review data in a spreadsheet, and contacting reviewers who were delinquent in providing their reviews. In rating the papers, the “standard” 1.0 − 5.0 scale was used (with 5.0 the highest rating). Each reviewer provided his/her ranking according to this scale. I took the reviewers’ ratings and comments and assigned a “final” score having one of the values 1.0, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 4.0, or 5.0 (these are the values recognized in Jim Zhu’s database). In most cases, the final score was approximately the average of the reviewer scores, but in a number of cases, the reviewers’ inputs were not weighted equally and/or other factors were combined with the reviewers’ rankings to come up with a final score. The table below shows the final distribution of scores for the 90 papers. Under “status,” the table provides the disposition of the papers as decided at the Program Committee meeting in Orlando at the CDC (December 2001).

Rating No. of papers % of papers Status 1.0 2 2.2 Rejected 2.0 9 10.0 Rejected 2.5 8 8.9 Rejected 3.0 32 35.6 Some accepted 4.0 39 43.3 Accepted 5.0 0 0 Accepted

It has been a pleasure carrying out the duties of Vice Chair under the direction of the General Chair, Russ Rhinehart, and Program Chair, Eduardo Misawa. I would also like to single out Ms.

Henderson mentioned above for taking care of so many aspects of the review and decision process without me even having to ask. Her apparent telepathic powers are quite impressive. I would also like to acknowledge the support of JHU/APL in providing for the time needed to carry out the tasks above.

Report of the Vice Chair for Invited Sessions (VCIS) (Jordan M. Berg) Jordan Berg, the Vice Chair for Invited Sessions, provided the following report. Summary The major tasks faced by the VCIS were, in chronological order, 1) Identifying missing abstracts and session proposals, notifying organizers and authors, and

processing those outside the normal CEB system. 2) Screening submissions for electronic formatting errors and obtaining corrected files. These

also had to be processed outside the normal CEB system. 3) Selection of reviewers and dissemination of review materials. 4) Collection of reviews and classification of sessions into accepted, rejected and marginal. 5) Supervision of Technical Program Committee review of marginal sessions at the Program

Committee meeting. 6) Notification of session organizers of the outcome of the review process. Preparation The VCIS did little in the way of pre-conference session solicitations. Several inquiries were received from potential session organizers. These individuals were strongly encouraged to submit session proposals. One session organizer asked the VCIS to pre-screen his session proposal (including extended abstracts). The VCIS complied, though it would be difficult to accommodate more than a few such requests. Furthermore the opinions of the VCIS are not necessarily representative of those of the eventual reviewers. Call for Papers The General Chair, Program Chair and Vice Chair for Invited Sessions, in consultation with the Governing Board of the AACC, determined prior to issuing the CFP that the overall quality of ACC Invited Sessions had become a cause for concern. In particular it was felt that some authors were submitting substandard or incomplete work to Invited Sessions, thereby bypassing the rigorous review process applied to regular papers. It was decided to address this problem by clearly articulating an increase in the quality standard for extended abstracts, and by making clear to reviewers that this standard was to be strictly enforced. The specific issues to be addressed were extended abstracts that were insufficiently detailed for reasonable evaluation by the reviewers, and extended abstracts that described planned work rather than actual results. It was decided to severely limit exceptions to the 1000 word minimum on Extended Abstracts. The invited session portion of the Call for Papers was phrased to reflect this decision, including the following item: “A proposal must contain a Summary Statement describing the motivation and relevance of the proposed Session, accompanied by an Extended Abstract of at least 1000 words for each invited paper. The abstracts should report existing results rather than propose new research.”

It was also recognized that implementing this policy might require more management of individual papers within invited sessions by the Technical Program Committee than at past ACCs, and hence this possibility was explicitly laid out in the CFP: “Please note that at the discretion of the Technical Program Committee, individual papers may be removed from proposed sessions and replaced by an appropriate contributed paper.” Letter to TPC Members TPC members received a letter in August summarizing their anticipated workload, and providing contact information. In this letter they were told to expect three to five invited sessions to review. Submission Submission of Invited Sessions and their component papers was electronic only, through the conference website. Both PDF and PostScript formats were accepted. PostScript files were converted to PDF by the CEB before being transmitted to the VCIS. A total of thirty-five session proposals were submitted. Of these, two consisted of five papers, the rest included the full complement of six papers. Thus 208 papers or extended abstracts were expected. Missing and late submissions Of the 208 expected papers or abstracts, 25 had not been received by the final submission deadline, when the website was shut down. Additionally, two session proposals had not been received by that time. Organizers of sessions with missing papers or abstracts were contacted, and informed of the problem. All organizers were responsive, and typically provided a status report within two days. All missing papers fell into one of two categories. These were 1) papers that had not been submitted, and 2) papers that were submitted, but were not able to be recognized or processed properly by the website software. At least two authors reported that they had successfully uploaded abstracts as plain text files. These files would not have been successfully translated, and hence were not entered into the system. Tracking down missing submissions is a major task for the VCIS. In the event that the submitted PostScript or PDF is unreadable, or if they mistakenly use a different file format, the papers are never entered into the database, but the authors receive no indication that anything has gone wrong with the process. It is left up to the VCIS to discover the missing papers and notify the session organizers. Two improvements would be desirable here. The first is that abstracts not requiring equations or formatting should be acceptable as plain text. The second is to notify authors, organizers, and the VCIS should submitted files fail to process properly. Four of the missing papers had to be withdrawn. The rest were eventually received. Session organizers were originally told that all submissions would have to be through the conference website to allow proper logging and tracking. Thus the procedure laid out for papers not received by the time the website closed was to wait for notification from the VCIS or IEEE CEB that the website had been temporarily reactivated, and to log in and submit at that time. Unfortunately, the CEB was experiencing multiple computer problems at this time, and was unresponsive to requests. Hence the missing papers were handled via e-mail, and the CEB informed as they were received. It would have been preferable to have these late entries processed through the CEB system. One session was withdrawn because two of its papers were withdrawn. Two of the remaining manuscripts were extended abstracts, the other two full papers. The authors of the extended abstracts were informed that their submissions could not be reviewed. It was decided to place the two full papers in the general pool of contributed papers. Unfortunately, the CEB system is not set up for this level of flexibility, and the two papers ended up being reviewed on the fly at the TPC meeting. It would be desirable for the electronic system to handle this sort of category transfer more gracefully.

Contributor problems with submission Some contributors experienced problems with the electronic submission process. These included five authors and three session organizers who had difficulty navigating the two-step process of registration followed by submission, two organizers who entered incorrect PINs for an author, and two organizers who changed the number of papers in their sessions from five to six. All these problems required action from the CEB, and Yan Zhu cleared them up as soon as they were brought to her attention. As mentioned above, however, abstracts received after the close of the website had to be processed separately by the VCIS. This was not a major area of effort for the VCIS, as the CEB handled the problems effectively. Corrupted submissions Some papers that were successfully received by the system were nonetheless electronically corrupted to the point that the PDF versions were seriously compromised. Every paper transmitted from the CEB was checked for problems upon receipt. Ten papers were identified as containing serious electronic errors. The organizers of the sessions containing those papers were contacted, and informed of the problem. Again, session organizers were extremely responsive, and organizers or authors typically took remedial action within two or three days. The corrected papers had to be processed outside the CEB database by the VCIS. This is a significant task for the VCIS. Every submitted manuscript must be read through to screen for font problems and other PDF issues. Of course the VCIS must read through the sessions anyway, in order to pick appropriate reviewers, but this pre-screening was in itself quite time-consuming. It would also have been desirable to get the corrected manuscripts into the CEB system. Final tally One session was withdrawn prior to review due to the withdrawal of two of its constituent papers. Two papers from that session were released into the general pool of contributed papers, the remaining two were extended abstracts and were withdrawn. Two papers were withdrawn from the remaining sessions, and two sessions were submitted with only five papers. Hence 34 invited sessions containing 200 individual submissions were ultimately sent out for review. Review Selection of Reviewers The combination of the extended submission deadline due to the September 11 terrorist attacks and the early conference date mandated a very rapid turnaround time of less than a month. The VCIS felt that it was unrealistic to expect external reviewers to respond this quickly. Hence all reviewers were selected from the TPC using the database of technical interests. Three reviewers were selected for each session. The imbalance between TPC experts and session topics was greatest in Process Control, which attracted five session proposals, with only five TPC members listing this as a technical interest. There was also overlap between these TPC members and the session organizers and contributors. Perhaps this area should be more heavily represented in future TPCs. Most reviewers select a reasonable spectrum of technical interests. Five members of the 2002 TPC checked off more than half the possible topics. While selecting reviewers this seemed like a godsend, however the result, as it turned out, was that some reviewers received up to four sessions in areas they were only marginally familiar with. This led to some sketchy, tentative (and late) reviews, and to unhappy reviewers. I would suggest that TPC members in the future be urged to restrict their Technical Interest Profiles to, say, ten areas. Alternatively they could rate their interest in a particular area as a 1, 2 or 3.

Ultimately, of the 45 TPC members, none got more than four sessions to review. Nine members handled four sessions, twelve handled three sessions, eight handled two, twelve one and four none. Instructions to reviewers and review forms Two paragraphs in the review guidelines addressed the desire of the Operating Committee to more strictly enforce standards for submissions to invited sessions. The first set forth length and content guidelines for manuscripts, the second reminded reviewers that they had the choice of rejecting specific papers while accepting the session, and vice versa. These were as follows: “We have asked Session Organizers to submit proposals containing a substantial amount of completed work, rather than a description of anticipated results. To judge whether they have complied, we have requested from each author Extended Abstracts of at least 1000 words. At your discretion you may penalize proposals with significantly shorter abstracts. Authors have been given the option of supplying their full manuscript, however you may choose to review individual submissions substantially exceeding fifteen double-spaced pages somewhat more superficially than those which respect this suggested length limit. Although sessions with only five papers may be accepted, those with the full complement of six papers are preferred. Thus you may, at your discretion, penalize a session for having fewer than six papers. Note that you may recommend that a specific paper be removed from the session. If a Session has—for whatever reason—fewer than six papers, the TPC may complete it at the Program Committee meeting from the pool of contributed papers.” The review form was essentially that of the 2001 ACC. The numerical scoring was off by one from that for contributed papers (a modification of the 2002 VCIS). This was ultimately confusing and annoying, and had the potential to do real damage for full papers released into the general pool from rejected sessions. The numerical scoring for invited sessions should agree with the standard review form for contributed papers. One reviewer was offended that “debatable” described a higher score than “minor.” Perhaps this terminology could be reconsidered. Dissemination of review materials The 2001 ACC VCIS implemented a central website from which reviewers could download the session proposals, papers and review forms. Unfortunately the 2002 VCIS lacked the technical savvy and infrastructure to go this route. Instead, session proposals, review form and the cover letter containing the deadlines and review guidelines were sent as e-mail attachments. The cover letter and review form were sent in both pdf and MS Word formats. While most reviewers received the review materials without problems, a significant fraction found that the attachments were missing. The problem was eventually found to be the MS Word version of the cover letter, which was written on the official conference stationery. The stationery was a fairly complex document, which apparently caused difficulty on some e-mail systems. In several cases anti-virus software erroneously reported that a virus was present, causing at least one reviewer to become irate. The problem was rectified for all but one case by removing this file from the e-mail. For the last problematic mailing the files had to be WINZIPed first. For e-mail dissemination it seems highly preferable to use pdf files. If other formats are used the documents should be made as simple as possible. However a central website would have been a major timesaver. I would recommend that future ACCs consider adding a central website for reviewers to the standard electronic infrastructure.

Non-responsive reviewers TPC members were extremely responsive. Only two reviewers ultimately did not respond at all (although several needed repeated reminders). Unfortunately one of these had indicated 30 of the 51 areas as technical interests, and as a result had four sessions to review. Two of these sessions had critical reviews and marginal scores, and the additional input would have been welcome. I would appreciate a mechanism to identify non-responsive reviewers, similar to that used for conference no-shows, so that they could be avoided in future conferences. Compilation of results and recommendations to the Program Chair After compiling the review results, 23 of the 34 sessions were recommended for acceptance. Only one was recommended for rejection. Ten were considered marginal, and were brought to the Program Committee meeting to determine their final dispensation. Selection Twenty-three sessions were accepted, and one rejected, prior to the Program Committee meeting. That left ten marginal or problematic sessions to be evaluated by the TPC. Of these, three were rejected and seven accepted, though several papers from the rejected sessions were accepted into the program, and several accepted sessions had papers rejected and replaced. Because of equity issues when comparing full papers to extended abstracts, only full papers from rejected invited sessions were considered for inclusion in the program. TPC Review of Marginal Sessions The point of bringing marginal sessions to the Program Committee meeting was to measure them against the general level of contributed paper, and decide whether the conference would be better served by those invited sessions, or by sessions composed of contributed papers. Also, the VCIS in the interest of fairness brought those invited sessions with incomplete or contradictory reviews to be more carefully considered by TPC experts. In the event, however, at the Program Committee meeting the TPC is already fully occupied with the main task of constructing the conference program. There is not time for careful reconsideration of reviewers’ recommendations, and no guarantee that the appropriate experts will be on hand. It is also difficult for the VCIS to monitor several simultaneous re-reviews to ensure consistency. In retrospect, it would have been preferable for the VCIS to make the decision on marginal sessions beforehand when possible, in consultation with other Program Committee members or outside reviewers as necessary. Problematic Sessions There were few problem sessions. Those that arose fell into three types: 1) sessions addressing topics outside the usual range of ACC topics, 2) multiple sessions by the same organizers addressing related topics, and 3) sessions with extremely short abstracts, often by highly reputable authors. Reviewers worked hard to evaluate the first type of session, despite a lack of familiarity with the issues. Both the reviewers and the VCIS tried to accommodate these sessions, both to broaden the target ACC audience and to expose traditional ACC-goers to potential new applications of control. Where organizers submitted multiple closely related sessions, every effort was made to have the same reviewers evaluate them all. One two-session series was combined; in another case a three session series was considered for consolidation, but ultimately not condensed. Notification Organizers of invited sessions were notified of the review outcome by the VCIS. Individual authors received the usual letter from the CEB. The main reason that the VCIS must contact session organizers as soon as possible is to give their authors extra time to convert extended

abstracts into final papers. Three types of letters were sent by the VCIS to session organizers. The first, for highly rated sessions with few or no critical remarks, simply informed the organizer that the session had been accepted. The second, for sessions which were accepted but had papers replaced, was intended to be somewhat more conciliatory. The third was for rejected sessions, and hopefully combined regret that the session could not be accommodated with encouragement for submission to future ACCs. Letters were not just forms however, since organizers in the second category needed to be informed which papers had been replaced, and organizers in the third category needed to be informed if individual papers from their session had been accepted. This last event is of some concern, since organizers of rejected sessions have little incentive to continue to act as liaisons to their authors. Because only full papers were accepted from rejected sessions, there is less urgency in notifying these authors of acceptance ahead of the usual notice from the CEB. Notification is a fairly straightforward task. It would be simple to automate, though the 2002 VCIS did not. Follow-up e-mails were sent to authors of accepted papers in invited sessions, informing them that their papers were accepted, urging them to complete the final manuscript as soon as possible, and encouraging them to contact their session organizer for reviewers’ comments. Organizers of rejected sessions were remarkably gracious. The only notable exception arose from a session containing a number of highly regarded members of the control community. Several abstracts were well below the 1000 word minimum, and the reviewers chose to penalize them. The scores were very low, and the session was rejected. The organizer was extremely upset, and protested that this would be an extremely well attended session. This is very likely true, and it was not an easy decision to reject the session, despite the scores. There seems to be little to do about sessions like these, short of convincing organizers that the 1000 word minimum will really be enforced. We stress again that the choice to enforce was left to the reviewers, who exhibited a wide range of reactions. There are issues of equity here that would be very difficult to address. Anchorage The VCIS was particularly interested in the response to ACC02-IS47, “Control and the Innovation Process,” organized by Peter Wellstead of UMIST and Steven Schooling of University College. The topic of this session was much “softer” than the usual ACC presentation. Even accounting for the unusual subject, reviews were only so-so. However the response to this session, particularly from attendees with industry affiliations seemed very positive. The topic of using ideas from control and systems science to design and operate managerial and organizational structures seemed to strike a chord. As long as strong industrial participation remains a goal of the ACC, I would encourage future VCIS to try to include similar sessions. Report of the Vice-Chair for Industry and Applications (J. Christian Gerdes)

Chris Gerdes, the Vice Chair for Industry and Applications, provided the following report. Summary of 2002 Activities For the 2002 ACC, we accepted four out of five complete tutorial session proposals submitted. In addition to these, two preliminary proposals were rejected for being too

commercial, one partial proposal came in too late to be considered and in two other cases, the session organizers and I came to a mutual agreement not to submit a full proposal due to lack of industrial participation. Efforts to find additional industrial participants were hurt by a lot of travel restrictions in place as a result of the general economic environment in mid-September 2001 and the events of 9/11. Thus while I had been hoping for a six session tutorial track, we only ended up with four sessions. While to a certain extent there were outside factors that influenced this, there were a number of things that I believe I could have done differently to attract a greater number of sessions and generally handle the process in a more organized fashion. I have described these in detail below. More detailed information on the four accepted sessions is attached at the end of this document. This is the form of the information necessary to generate acceptance letters and form the conference program and so must be obtained for all accepted tutorial sessions. One of the suggestions below is to require authors to submit all of this information up front with their proposals. Requiring initial submission of a PIN for each author could considerably reduce the information flow for the Vice-Chair.

Approximate session attendance (my head count while sitting in the sessions during the tutorial part) is listed below for each session. Attendance for talks following the tutorial was in each case slightly less. From the attendance numbers and discussions with attendees and organizers, I think all of the tutorial sessions were successful.

Phase-Locked Loop Tutorial – 50 Multivariate Statistical Analysis – 30 Adaptive Control – 80+ Loopshaping – 45 Suggestions for future OpCom: The following suggestions are based on my experiences organizing the tutorial sessions this year and several conversations with industrial participants. The first two are very easy to implement while the third may require a bit more work.

(1) Standardize tutorial sessions so that all consist of one 1 hour tutorial and three 20 minute presentations. The current wording in the Call for Papers mentions “a series of short presentations” that follow the 1 hour tutorial. While it would seem to be a minor issue to operate tutorial sessions with flexible timing, the fact that all other sessions of the conference run at 20 minute intervals makes this very problematic. The possibility of running at other time intervals makes it more difficult to ensure that there are no conflicts when assembling the program and leads to a number of requests by organizers to have all manner of odd time subdivisions that are hard to keep straight or equitable. This change would not only simplify session organization but also make it easier to switch between sessions at the conference itself.

(2) Give industrial participants the option of submitting a regular paper, a short paper or no paper for their participation in the tutorial session. The option to not submit a paper is one that some industrial participants chose this year and should remain. However, several industrial participants this year were offended by the fact that they were limited to a short paper. If an industrial participant is willing to put together a regular paper, I think it sends the wrong message to tell that author that they must pay

extra page charges if they want to do this as part of a tutorial session. This does not convey the impression that the ACC is interested in what industrial participants have to say. I heard from authors that exceptions were made to this in previous years. We chose as a committee to adhere to the published rules in the interests of fairness, but I feel this inconsistency reflects poorly on the conference. I believe that to encourage industrial participation, the option of a regular paper for industrial participants should be made a permanent part of tutorial sessions.

(3) Allow a variant of the tutorial session where industrial needs are presented, followed by academic solutions. In addition to coming to conferences to learn new techniques, several industrial participants with whom I spoke wanted an opportunity to begin a dialog with academic researchers about the problems they experience. One possibility for doing this is to allow a tutorial session where an industrial participant gives an outline of the major control challenges in their field and three academic participants follow up with possible solutions from their research. The logistical challenge with this is that people most knowledgeable about current industrial control issues may not know enough industrial participants to form a session. One way to handle this is to have a place on the ACC web site where industrial session organizers can give a brief outline of their session and ask interested academic participants to contact them directly.

Suggestions for future VCIA: Some of the “crises” that arose while organizing these sessions could have been avoided had I thought to do a number of things in advance. These are some of the most important things I think the Vice-Chair can do in advance to guarantee good sessions and an easy time with session organization.

(1) Discuss specific expectations for tutorial sessions up front with the Program Chair and General Chair. While what constitutes a tutorial session would seem to be pretty straightforward, there are a number of gray areas and it is helpful to address these issues in advance so proper guidance can be given to prospective session organizers. Some of the questionable areas are:

(a) Technique versus application area. The description of the tutorial sessions states that the one hour tutorial should be based around a particular technique. Yet successful tutorials have been given in the past around a particular industry or application, such as hybrid vehicles or disk drives. Those involved should agree on what they find to be a good tutorial topic.

(b) Commercialization. Some software companies have proposed giving a tutorial talk to be followed by application talks by users of their software. While such tutorial talks are about a technique, not a particular software package, it is questionable whether or not the ACC tutorial sessions are an appropriate venue for this.

(c) Participation by academics in short talks. Some proposals come in with a tutorial being given by someone in academia and some of the follow-up talks also given by academics. I suggest deciding in advance if this is acceptable and, if

not, giving organizers immediate feedback to find industrial participation if they wish to have the session accepted.

(2) Get all organizers to submit a form with the session proposal that includes email and a PIN for each author. While tutorial sessions have a different review process than regular papers, ultimately the same information is needed to send letters out to authors. This information is, unfortunately, needed right around the time that many people are away on winter break. I think the easiest way to collect this is to require all authors to have a PIN before the proposal is considered. This can all be collected in a simple spreadsheet or in a Word document such as the ones following this report. Doing this after the fact over winter break is a huge problem while doing this up front is very simple.

(3) Run proposals by reviewers very early to see if the reviewers have sufficient information to evaluate. For the past couple of years, the Vice-Chair for Industry and Applications, the General Chair and the Program Chair have reviewed the tutorial sessions. This is certainly a good review committee, though it could be changed if the OpCom desires something different. An effective approach is to send the material submitted by the session organizers to the committee immediately and see if there is sufficient information to make a judgment. If not, additional information (for instance, more detail on the tutorial paper contents and style, clarifications that certain industrial talks will be substantive and not simply commercials…) can be sought with sufficient time remaining to incorporate this into the review process.

(4) Cast a broad net in looking for sessions. My predecessor sent out a large mailing to 70 people or more encouraging them to do a tutorial session. The yield on this was rather low, so I thought that a more effective approach would be to contact a few people I knew well and encourage them to work together to put a session together. The problem with this is that I had already tapped my contact list to get some initial session ideas going and could not offer too much help when these activities fell one participant short of a strong session. Thus the place where I spent considerable energy had very little yield for the conference. If the initial invitations go out to a broader group, I believe the Vice-Chair can then help to fill in any gaps and make sure good session proposals do not fall apart simply because the group needs one more participant.

(5) Ask for help. There is a bit of a rush around the September 15 deadline as a number of people with no experience in tutorial sessions contact the Vice-Chair to request information and help finding other participants. This has the potential to be a bit overwhelming. It is a very important time, however, since often finding one more interested person can mean the difference between getting a proposal and not getting a proposal. I think I would have been better off asking for help looking for other participants than trying to shoulder that task alone. I am very willing to help with this process for 2003 if I can be of assistance.

(6) Make industrial sessions clearer in the program. One of the comments I heard at the joint OpCom meeting was that we didn’t have an “industry track” at the conference. In fact, we did – there were a number of sessions organized by industrial participants and containing a high percentage of industrial speakers. However, these were not broken out separately in the program or on the web site. This would be a helpful thing to do in the future, perhaps with lists of sessions by industry or application area.

Information about the tutorial sessions Tutorial: Control of Phase Locked Loops Organizer: Daniel Abramovich (PIN 0020) Affiliation: Agilent Laboratories Contact Info: 3500 Deer Creek Rd., MS: 25U-9

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1392 Phone: (650) 485-3806 FAX: (650) 485-4080 Email: danny@labs.agilent.com

Chair: Daniel Abramovich Affiliation: Agilent Laboratories Co-Chair: N. Eva Wu (PIN 07169) Affiliation: Binghamton University Contact Info: Department of Electrical Engineering Binghamton University P.O. Box 6000

Binghamton, NY 13902-6000 Phone: 607-777-4856 FAX: 607-777-4464

Email: evawu@binghamton.edu

First Talk: “Phase Locked Loops: A Control Centric Tutorial” Author: Daniel Abramovitch Affiliation: Agilent Laboratories Duration: 60 minutes

Second Talk: “Analog Phaselock Loop Design Using Popov Criterion” Author: N. Eva Wu Affiliation: Binghamton University Duration: 20 minutes Third Talk: “Modified Phase-Frequency Detector for Improved Response of PLL Servo Controller” Author 1: Christopher A. Adkins Affiliation: Lexmark International, Inc. Author 2: Michael A. Marra Affiliation: Lexmark International, Inc. Author 3: Bruce L. Walcott Affiliation: University of Kentucky Duration: 20 minutes

Corr. Author: Christopher A. Adkins Contact Info: Awaiting this information Email: cadkins@lexmark.com Fourth Talk: “Frequency Estimation Using Multiple Sources and Multiple Harmonic Components” Author 1: Biqing Wu (PIN 32998) Affiliation: University of Utah Author 2: Marc Bodson (PIN 00652) Affiliation: University of Utah Duration: 20 minutes Corr. Author: Marc Bodson Contact Info: Department of Electrical Engineering

University of Utah 50 S Central Campus Drive Room 3280 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Phone.: (801) 581-8590 FAX: (801) 581 5281 Email: bodson@ee.utah.edu

Tutorial: Adaptive Control Organizer: Guy Dumont Affiliation: University of British Columbia Contact Info: Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

2356 Main Mall Vancouver, BC Canada V6T1Z4 Phone: 1-604-8228564

FAX: 1-604-8228563 Email: guyd@ece.ubc.ca

Co-Organizer:Mihai Huzmezan Affiliation: University of British Columbia Contact Info: Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

2356 Main Mall Vancouver, BC Canada V6T1Z4 Phone: 1-604-8228564

FAX: 1-604-8228563 Email: guyd@ece.ubc.ca

Chair: Guy Dumont Affiliation: University of British Columbia Co-Chair: Mihai Huzmezan Affiliation: University of British Columbia First Talk: “Methods, Techniques and Concepts in Adaptive Control” Author 1: Guy Dumont Affiliation: University of British Columbia Author 2: Mihai Huzmezan Affiliation: University of British Columbia Author 3: Willy Wojsznis Affiliation: Fisher-Rosemount Systems Author 4: Terry Blevins Affiliation: Fisher-Rosemount Systems Duration: 60 minutes Corr. Author: Mihai Huzmezan Second Talk: “Lime Kiln Model Predictive Control with a Residual Carbonate Soft Sensor” Author: Terrance Chmelyk Affiliation: Norpac Controls Ltd. Duration: 15 minutes Contact Info: #4-556 North Nechako Road

Prince George, B.C. Canada V2K 1A1 Phone: +1 (250) 613-8895 FAX: +1 (250) 562-2382 Email: tchmelyk@norpaccontrols.com

Third Talk: “Dual control of paper coating on blade coaters” Author 1: Ahmed Ismail Affiliation: Honeywell IC Author 2: Johan Backstrom Affiliation: Honeywell IC Duration: 15 minutes Corr. Author: Ahmed Ismail Contact Info: Control Engineering Research and Development

Honeywell IC - Vancouver Operations 500 Brooksbank Avenue North Vancouver, BC Canada V7J 3S4 Phone: +1 (604) 980-3421 FAX: +1 (604) 980-0120 Email: aaismail@ppc.ubc.ca

Fourth Talk: “Adaptive Predictive Regulatory Control with Brainwave” Author: William A. Gough Affiliation: Universal Dynamics Technologies, Inc. Duration: 15 minutes Contact Info: Phone: +1 (604) 214-3456

FAX: +1 (604) 214-3457 Email: bgough@brainwave.com

Fifth Talk: “Adaptive Control Applications for Stubborn Industrial Control Problems” Author: Jerry DeMott Affiliation: Johns Manville Duration: 15 minutes Contact Info: Phone: +1 (303) 978-2131

Email: DemottJ@JM.com

Tutorial: Input Shaping and Time Delay Control of Maneuvering Flexible Structures Organizer: Tarunraj Singh Affiliation: SUNY at Buffalo Contact Info: Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

SUNY at Buffalo Buffalo, NY 14260 Phone: (716)-645-2593 x2235

FAX: (716)-645-3668 Email: tsingh@eng.buffalo.edu

Co-Organizer:William Singhose Affiliation: Georgia Institute of Technology Contact Info: The George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering

Georgia Institute of Technology 813 Ferst St. Atlanta, GA 30332-0405 Phone: 404-385-0668 FAX: 404-894-9342 Email: Bill.Singhose@me.gatech.edu

Chair: Tarunraj Singh Affiliation: SUNY at Buffalo Co-Chair: William Singhose Affiliation: Georgia Institute of Technology First Talk: “Input Shaping and Time Delay Control of Maneuvering Flexible Structures” Author1: William Singhose Affiliation: Georgia Institute of Technology Author2: Tarunraj Singh Affiliation: SUNY at Buffalo Duration: 60 minutes Second Talk: “Limited Jerk and Torque Input Shaping For Flexible Stewart Platform MIMO Control” Author 1: Arun Banerjee Affiliation: Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Systems Author 2: Christopher Lages Affiliation: Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Systems Duration: 20 minutes Corr. Author: Arun Banerjee Contact Info: L9-24, Building 250

Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space Advanced Technology Center 3251 Hanover Street Palo Alto, CA 94304-1191 Phone: (650) 424-2624 FAX: (650) 424-3106 Email: arun.banerjee@lmco.com

Third Talk: “Input Shaped Control for Material Handling” Author: Stephen L. Dickerson

Affiliation: CAMotion, Inc. Duration: 20 minutes Contact Info: Georgia Institute of Technology MARC Room 436

813 Ferst Drive, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0560 Phone: (404) 894-3255 FAX: (404) 894-9342 Email: sdickers@sununo.me.gatech.edu

Fourth Talk: “Piezo Nanopositioning using Input Shapers” Author: Neil Singer Affiliation: Convolve, Inc. Duration: 20 minutes Contact Info: Convolve, Inc.

132 Nassau Street, Suite 400 New York, NY 10038 Phone: (212) 267-6775 Email: neil@convolve.com

Tutorial: Multivariate Statistical Analysis for Process Monitoring Organizer: Marc Champagne Affiliation: Tembec Inc. Contact Info: 33, rue Kipawa P.O. Box 3000

Temiscaming, Quebec Canada J0Z 3R0

Phone: (819) 627-4402 Email: mchampag@tembec.ca

Co-Organizer: Mike Dudzic Affiliation: Dofasco Inc. Contact Info: 1330 Burlington Street, East

P.O. Box 2460 Hamilton, Ontario Canada L8N 3J5 Phone: (819) 548-7200 ext 6986 Email: Mike_dudzic@dofasco.ca

Chair: Marc Champagne Affiliation: Tembec Inc. Co-Chair: Michael Dudzic Affiliation: Dofasco, Inc.

First Talk: “A Review of Multivariate Statistical Technologies Applied in Industry” Author1: Marc Champagne Affiliation: Tembec Inc. Author2: Michael Dudzic Affiliation: Dofasco Inc. Duration: 60 minutes

Second Talk: “Continuous Multivariate SPC – Monitoring of a Continuous Steel Caster” Author: Michael Dudzic Affiliation: Dofasco Inc. Duration: 15 minutes Third Talk: “Multigrade Modeling – Paperboard Quality Modeling” Author: Marc Champagne Affiliation: Tembec Inc. Duration: 15 minutes Fourth Talk: “Predictive Modeling Using Adaptive PLS – Desulphurization Reagent

Control System” Author: Michael Dudzic Affiliation: Dofasco Inc. Duration: 15 minutes Fifth Talk: “Batch Multivariate SPC – Monitoring of a Sulfite Pulp Digester” Author: Marc Champagne Affiliation: Tembec Inc. Duration: 15 minutes

Report of the Vice Chair for Student Affairs (May-Win Thein) May-Win Thein, the Vice Chair for Student Affairs, provided the following report. Summary The programs developed by (or involving) the Vice-Chair was as follows: • Student Travel Grant • Special Sessions • Writing a Winning NSF CAREER Proposal • Tomorrow's Journey Starts Today - Professional Growth and Getting the Job You Want • Student Best Paper Award • Roommate Location Service • Recruiting/Exchange Booth • Student/Industry Reception (not implemented in ACC 2002) • Conclusions Student Travel Grant: The ACC 2002 Student Travel Grant was initiated for the first time. Its operation appears similar to that of the Student Travel Grants organized for the IEEE CDC and CCA. During the CDC 2001, several discussions occurred with Kishan Baheti, (NSF Program Director - Control, Networks and Computational Intelligence -- Electrical and Communications Systems Division), Russell Rhinehart (ACC 2002 General Chair), Eduardo Misawa (ACC 2002 Program Chair), Clark Radcliffe (2000-2001 ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Division Chair), and the American Automatic Control Council. Dr. Baheti was to pledge NSF support of $15,000 upon the condition of AACC matching funds of $15,000. As an aside, as a result of the combined promissory grant of $30,000, the Vice-Chair for Student Affairs was able to take this support to the ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Division (DSCD) to leverage additional support of $6,000 (not all monies were used) to initiate the new program of the DSCD ACC/IMECE Student Travel Grants for its student members. To officially obtain these grant monies separate proposals were submitted to NSF, to Program Directors Kishan Baheti and Alison Flatau (Dynamic Systems and Control Division - Civil and Mechanical Systems Division), and to the ASME DSCD Executive Committee. (Both proposals

are attached.) Both proposals were submitted in October/November 2001 and were accepted shortly thereafter. (It should be noted that the NSF proposal submission was written following that of the form of Dr. Gary Yen, IEEE Control Systems Society Chair for Student Activities, who had been responsible for IEEE CSS Student Travel Grants in the past.) Announcements of the ACC 2002 Student Travel Grant were publicized in the Advanced Program. DSCD Student Travel Grants were publicized in the ACC 2002 Advanced Program and via DSCD channels. The following announcement was posted: Student Travel Grants ----------------------------------------------------------------- The 2002 ACC is expecting to receive travel funds from the National Science Foundation (NSF), the American Automatic Control Council (AACC), and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Dynamic Systems and Control Division (DSCD) for students to attend the conference. These funds will be used to partially defray the cost incurred by the student attendees presenting papers at the 2002 American Control Conference. Note that these Student Travel Grants will be in the form of re-imbursements sent only after the completion of the conference and upon receipt of proof of conference attendance and expenditures. As such, students should plan their finances accordingly. The eligibility conditions for funding are as follows: A. At the time of application, students must be enrolled at an institution of higher learning. B. Students must be an author or co-author of a paper accepted for presentation at the 2002 ACC. C. Students must present the paper at the 2002 American Control Conference. D. For ASME DSCD funding, students must also be members of ASME DSCD and attend the ASME DSCD Executive Committee Meeting at the ACC 2002. To apply, please send the following information to the 2002 ACC Vice Chair for Student Affairs, Dr. May-Win Thein via e-mail at: mthein@cisunix.unh.edu. 1. Student's Name (First Name, Middle Initial, and Last Name) 2. Society Affiliation and member number (if any). Note that students applying for the ASME DSCD Travel Grant must explicitly note this in their application, submit their ASME member number, and confirm their DSCD membership. 3. Institutional Address 4. Phone/Fax/E-mail 5. Advisor's Name 6. Advisor's Phone/Fax/E-mail 7. Session identification and Title of the paper 8. A budget for the amount of support requested (Note that the actual support will depend on the number of applicants and funds available.) 9. A letter of justification from you for the request of financial support 10. A letter of certification and support from your academic advisor, stating that you are currently enrolled as a student and are planning to

attend and present a paper at the ACC 2002 The deadline for applications is April 1, 2001. For further details and questions please contact Dr. Thein at mthein@cisunix.unh.edu (preferred) or at the coordinates below: May-Win Thein, Vice Chair for Student Affairs Assistant Professor University of New Hampshire Department of Mechanical Engineering M212 Kingsbury Hall Durham, NH 03824-3591 USA Phone: (603) 862-1158 Fax: (603) 862-1865 In total, seventy-seven students applied for the Student Travel Grant. All students were notified of their award of the travel grant and of their cost re-imbursements upon furnishing receipts from the ACC 2002 expenses. The following e-mail was sent to all seventy-seven students upon return from ACC 2002: Hello, I hope that all of you had a pleasant and productive time at the ACC last week. I was very pleased to have met many of you during the conference and hope that you continue to attend and present at future ACC's. As awardees of the ACC 2002 Travel Grants, here is the procedure that you must follow to obtain your re-imbursements: Send the following documents via POSTAL mail to my mailing address below BY JUNE 3, 2002: (1) ORIGINAL receipts - only original receipts will be accepted (2) A SIGNED letter from your advisor that the receipts that you submit will be re-imbursed by the ACC 2002 Student Travel Grant only and that you will not be using these receipts to obtain a "double re-imbursement" for the same expenses (3) If you are a DSCD Student Travel Award Grantee, you must clearly identify this fact on the outside of your envelop AND in your receipt package (4) Your social security number (for tax auditing purposes only) (5) The mailing address where you would like your re-imbursement sent Special Notes: (1) For those of you who wish to be re-imbursed for your airfare and have e-tickets only and do not have paper tickets, you may use a printout of your e-ticket. Note that your confirmation letter from (2) above applies to this e-ticket receipt as well. (2) For those of you who are also being re-imbursed by other funding, I suggest that you only send me the original receipts of those funds which will NOT be re-imbursed by your advisor/department/university. (3) Only those receipts that apply to transportation, lodging, food, and registration pertaining directly to the ACC 2002 will be eligible for re-imbursement. (4) Please note that the exact amounts being refunded to you (as per the last e-mail that I sent you) can not be exactly determined at this time, due to the fact that some students may opt not to receive this Travel Grant aid. The exact amount will only be determined after all students who choose to receive this aid have turned in their necessary receipts. (5) If I do not receive your receipts package by the June 3 deadline, I will assume that you do not wish

to be awarded any re-imbursements. Please also note that I have not been receiving all of my e-mails from the past 2 weeks. Therefore, if you have sent me e-mail recently, you should assume that I have NOT received it. However, I hope that I have answered any questions regarding the ACC Student Travel Grant in this message. Again, I congratulate all of you on a very successful ACC conference. Your contributions and presence at the ACC added much to the quality of the conference. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Until then, I look forward to seeing you at the next ACC and wish you luck in your future endeavors. Sincere regards, May-Win Thein ACC 2002 Vice Chair for Student Affairs Of these seventy-seven students, sixty-four students submitted receipts for re-imbursements. Their affiliations were as follows: AIAA = 1 AIChe = 9 ASCE = 2 ASME = 18 IEEE = 21 Non-members = 13 Amounts up to $1,000 or the amount to which their receipts showed incurred costs, which ever was less. In addition, a cap was placed on the amount re-imbursed for food, as per dictated by accepted current per diem rates. Costs that were re-imbursed included travel, ACC 2002 registation fees, hotel costs, and food. Items such as movie rentals were not re-imbursed. Suggestions for future student travel grants include admistrative support for processing travel grant applications and re-imbursements, as the process was painstakingly tedious for just one individual. In addition, the PI(s) of the ACC Student Travel Grant proposals should be aware that no "overhead" is to be charged to these proposals. In this case, it was required by the Univerisity of New Hampshire, the home institution of the Vice-Chair of Student Affairs, that Dr. Abe Haddad, Secretary of AACC, provide an expressly written document stating the AACC agreement of providing matching funds and that these funds were not to be charged any overhead expenses. Another suggestion is to inform students a priori that the Student Travel Grants are in the form of re-imbursements. As such, they should be sure to keep any receipts and to be aware that the re-imbursements will be sent only after the ACC takes place. Because of the many details/paperwork involved with the processing, this could take two to three months. And, even more time is necessary if no admistrative assistance is available (which was the case for ACC 2002). In addition, students should be cautioned that cost re-imbursed to them by their home institutions are NOT to be requested to be re-imbursed through the ACC Student Travel Grant. To prevent this "double re-imbursement" possibility, only original receipts were considered for re-imbursement (except in the case of airfare e-tickets). In all cases, all students were to have

their advisors write a statement that the amounts which the students requested for re-imbursement were not and would not be submitted for re-imbursement to any other resource. As the ACC 2002 Student Travel Grants funds were limited, especially with the large number of students applying for the grants, all students were encouraged to minimize costs where possible. For example, after reviewing initial budgets in the student applications, the Vice-Chair for Student Affairs had suggested to individual students that room-sharing be considered and that round-trip air flights should not cost $2,000. In short, the ACC 2002 Student Grant was a great success. All students who submitted receipts for re-imbursement received full monies back (with a maximum cap of $1,000.00). In addition, as a result of this student travel grant a new initiative was fostered within ASME DSCD to support its student members in this and future such conferences with the help of NSF funding. Special Sessions: Two sessions were developed for ACC 2002 by the Vice-Chair for Student Affairs: Writing a Winning NSF CAREER Proposal (for NSF CAREER Proposal Writing) and Tomorrow's Journey Starts Today - Professional Growth and Getting the Job You Want (for job searching and professional development skills). It was decided that these additional sessions should be held without conflicting with the presentations of the general program. As a result, the session Tomorrow's Journey Starts Today - Professional Growth and Getting the Job You Want was held on Wednesday, between 11:30am and 12:30pm. In addition, the session Writing a Winning NSF CAREER Proposal was held on Friday, also between 11:30am and 12:30pm. In this way, conference attendees (and session speakers) would be able to attend all technical sessions as well as have time for lunch on these days. As an aside, none of these sessions were scheduled for Thursday, as the Awards Banquet was to be held at that day and time. Writing a Winning NSF CAREER Proposal The idea of this session was initiated by Dr. Kishan Baheti with the full support of Dr. Alison Flatau. The session speakers were invited/organized in November, 2001. Major details were finalized by February, 2002, and finer details were tended to just prior to the session (during ACC 2002). The Vice-Chair for Student Affairs was listed as the Organizer. The Co-Chairs of the session were Dr. Baheti and Dr. Flatau. The session was divided into three parts. The first part served as an informative talk by both Dr. Baheti and Dr. Flatau on their perspectives/advice as NSF Program Directors. The audience was very receptive to this part of the session. The second part involved a panel of speakers, comprised of past CAREER Awardees. This pane consisted of the following members: Andrew Alleyne Prabhakar Pagilla Lucy Pao Dawn Tilbury Bin Yao

All panel members introduced themselves, described their winning proposal titles/topics, and gave their advice on writing a winning CAREER proposal. The third and final part of the session involved a question/answer period with the audience that involved both NSF Program Directors, as well as the panel of 5 CAREER winners. In addition, past NSF Directors were present (e.g., Dev Garg) and the NSF Director in the Chemical Engineering area were at hand to donate additional information/advice. Overall, this session was extremely popular. The audience turn out was very large (standing room only). In addition, it appeared as if the audience desired a longer session to ask general questions and to talk with individual NSF Program Directors and panel member. The audience feedback was extremely positive and many requests were made to have further such sessions in the future. In short, this session was a large success, to say the least. As a result, the Vice-Chair for Student Affairs and Dr. Baheti are in full support of continuing this very same session in future ACC's. Tomorrow's Journey Starts Today - Professional Growth and Getting the Job You Want The motivation/idea for this session came from Russell Rhinehart, ACC 2002 General Chair. Because of the recent September 11 incident, there had been a rise in frustration/worry among students in obtaining employment after their upcoming graduation. In addition, many comments had been made in past ACC's as to the less than average quality of presentations of some of the technical sessions. As a result, it was suggested by Dr. Rhinehart that a separate session be made to address these issues. In so doing, three different subject areas with different corresponding speakers were presented in this session: "Navigating Uncharted Waters and Jungle Roads - Successful Job Hunting and Interviewing" Frankie Wood-Black, Phillips Petroleum Co 11:30am - 11:50am "How to do Everything Right on the Resume" Philip J. Carlberg, The Dow Chemical Company 11:50am - 12:10pm "Technical Presentations: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" James C. Spall, The Johns Hopkins University 12:10pm - 12:30pm The three speakers were invited, as per ACC Operating Committee suggestions/requests. Major details were finalized in time to publicize the session in the advanced program, including discussions to avoid overlap between talks of this session. Further details were finalized just prior to the ACC. The abstracts, as given by the respective speakers, are as follows: (1) Frankie Wood-Black Technology Services Marketing Manager 918-661-9144 fax 918-661-7353 fwblack@ppco.comFrankie: ------------------------------------------------ "I don't think that there is going to be much over lap -

My talk generally focuses on career paths - i.e. the road signs, how to look for opportunities when to say yes - where to look for business wisdom, and what kinds of things that you need to be aware of - business trends, company culture, how to find a mentor, and the like. About the only thing that I say about resumes - is that you need to have one and keep it up to date. I do give one other piece of resume advice - read the help wanted ads for your area and others to find out what really interests you and what the requirements for the job are -that way you have an idea of what skills you need to be gaining in order to get that job." (2) Philip J. Carlberg Research Scientist Engineering Sciences / Market Development The Dow Chemical Company Freeport, Texas 77541-3257 Phone (979) 238-7975 Fax (979) 238-0401 "My talk starts by explaining what global companies look like, and what we look for in new hires. (technical skills, leadership, excellent communication, poise, maturity). Then I talk about how to make the resume emphasize the areas that companies are looking for. It shows what should be on a resume and some common mistakes to avoid. I've used slides before to also talk about the on-campus interview - but I did not plan to show those." (3) James C. Spall (Vice Chair for Contributed Papers) The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory 11100 Johns Hopkins Road Laurel, Maryland 20723-6099 USA Ph.: 240-228-4960 Fax: 240-228-6661 james.spall@jhuapl.edu "Giving a technical presentation on the job or at a conference such as the ACC presents a great opportunity to communicate your work and help establish connections among people with similar interests. Unfortunately, a technical presentation also offers an opportunity to embarrass yourself and perform a disservice to the quality of the technical work behind the presentation. This brief talk will summarize some basics of giving good technical presentations and discuss some common errors to avoid." The session was very well attended, despite the scheduled time. There was full attendance in a medium/large occupancy room. Originally the scheduled room was a smaller one. However, upon seeing the large number of session attendees just prior at 11:25 of that day, it was decided to move the session to a larger room. There was good feedback and comments regarding this session and requests were made for future such sessions in succeeding ACC's. Student Best Paper Award: Most of the details of the Student Best Paper Award were organized by Eduardo Misawa (ACC 2002 Program Chair). As such, details on this activity should be referred to the Program Committee Section of this report. Special acknowledgment to Dr. Misawa should be given, as

all administrative and organizational details were attended to by Dr. Misawa, without which, the Student Best Paper Award Competition could not exist. The Vice-Chair for Student Affairs did chair the Student Best Paper Award Committee, in which the committee members (three, including the Vice-Chair) evaluated the top contending papers and chose the five finalists from them. This evaluation (with much "hair-pulling", it should be added) was completed during the ACC 2002 Program Committee Meeting held at the 2001 CDC. During the ACC 2002, all three committee members attended the presentations of the five finalists and chose the Best Student Paper, then, solely based upon the quality of presentation. It is advised for future years that the committee be well-versed in a variety of fields of expertise, as all committee members openly voiced their feelings of being unqualified to evaluate particular papers outside of their field of expertise and, therefore, felt "inadequate" in this charge. In addition, it is suggested that the details of the Student Best Paper Award (such as dissemination for review, etc.) be handled by the Program Chair, as was for the ACC 2002 Student Best Paper Award. Roommate Location Service: The Roommate Location Service has been officially initiated into the role of the Vice-Chair for Student Affairs. However, this service has been provided by the 2002 Vice-Chair for Student Affairs for past ACC's as well as past CDC conferences. This service, furthermore, has been extended/sponsored by the IEEE Women in Control (WiC) for the past several years. As with tradition, an e-mail database had been established: one list for male conference attendees and another separate list for female attendees. The Roommate Location Service was publicized through the ACC 2002 Advanced Program and website. The innovation with the Roommate Location was based on Eduardo Misawa's initiative to set up a web-based service, where conference attendees would subscribe to the service via the web. Any announcements, etc., could be automatically sent to members of the respective male/female lists. This innovation was extremely convenient and greatly decreased the required "upkeep" efforts. The only caution is to be weary of non-ACC conference attendees using the website service for unwanted "spamming" This, however, was prevented, as Dr. Misawa enabled appropriate security measures/monitoring to prevent outside individuals from successfully subscribing to the service. It is highly suggested that this web-based service be continued in future ACC's. The following announcement was publicized: Roommate Location Service ---------------------------------------------------------- As Vice Chair of Student Affairs and on behalf of the Women in Control (WiC), Dr. May-Win Thein will be organizing a Roommate Location Service for ACC 2002. If you would like to share a hotel room and need assistance finding a roommate, please subscribe to the Roommate Location Service at the appropriate web site below:

Male - http://poincare.mae.okstate.edu/mailman/listinfo/acc02m Female - http://poincare.mae.okstate.edu/mailman/listinfo/acc02f You will then be asked to post the following information: (1) name (2) e-mail address and other contact information (3) date arriving at the Conference hotel (4) date checking out of the Conference hotel (5) smoking preference (6) any other information you wish to add This information will be compiled into separate lists for male/female respondents and distributed by e-mail. You will be responsible for contacting and screening prospective roommates from the appropriate list and making your own hotel reservations and arrangements. Please note that this service is a resource to merely locate potential roommates, not to match specific individuals together. In so doing, neither the ACC 2002 Operating Committee nor WiC will be held responsible for any situations that arise as a result of room sharing between particular parties. In addition, this service will end after April 5. Therefore, interested individuals should subscribe and post the appropriate information well before this date. The ACC 2002 Operating Committee would also like to thank Eduardo Misawa (ACC 2002 Program Chair) for his help in establishing the Roommate Recruiting/Exchange Booth: Most details of the Exchange Booth were handled by Dan Repperger, ACC 2002 Exhibits Chair. As such, the reader is referred to the Exhibits Section of this report. Dr. Repperger did an excellent job in his development and successful organization of this new endeavor suggested by Russell Rhinehart. Therefore, the ACC 2002 Vice-Chair for Student Affairs acknowledges that most all of the success of the Recruiting/Exchange Booth was due to the unrelenting efforts of Dr. Repperger and that much thanks, on the behalf of the ACC 2002 Operating Committee, the student attendees, and the industry/lab participants, are given to him. Student/Industry Reception: It was suggested by Chair Russell Rhinehart that a Student/Industry Reception be organized to match graduating students with potential employers, especially with the students' growing fear of future unemployment with the current economy. As such, the Vice-Chair for Student Affairs attempted to contact various individuals in industry and government labs to help sponsor this event. This process was extremely tedious and slow. In fact, the number of contacted individuals was far less than what was hoped for. In short, however, because of the failing economy and the recent September 11 attack, very little positive feedback resulted. As a result, this Student/Industry Reception was canceled due to lack of funding and interest. It is hoped that such events will occur, however, in future ACC's. The only caution mentioned is for future Vice-Chairs to be careful in preventing "party crashers" at a "free food" type event and to

prevent such a costly event which would, nevertheless, result in little interaction between students and members of industry/government labs because of lack of individual social initiative on the part of reception attendees. Conclusions: As this Vice-Chair for Student Affairs position is a new position, this ACC 2002 Vice-Chair did her best to establish this role as well-warranted and indispensable for future ACC's. It is sincerely felt that this position is extremely important in protecting and supporting the interest of ACC student attendees, especially since a significant number of attendees are students and that many of them will graduate and continue to become regular participants of these conferences. As such, it is hoped (expected) that this new Vice-Chair position will continue in future ACC Operating Committees. On a personal note, the ACC 2002 Vice-Chair for Student Affairs is grateful for the opportunity to serve on the ACC 2002 Program Committee. Significant exposure to several people in several areas of systems and control resulted. She also wishes to thank all of the members of the ACC 2002 Operating Committee for their support, help, and overall "teamwork" in making these new student initiatives a rave success. It was a rewarding experience and much appreciation is expressed for this unique chance to be involved in the controls community.

Program Committee Meeting The program committee meeting was held in Orlando, Florida, on December 6th 2001, in conjunctions with the CDC. Given the involvement in the PC process for a number of years it is always impressive to see how well the process works. Jim and Yan Zhu do such a good job sorting papers based on subject classification and score that most of the process tends to be done by around noon. Instructions for the Program Committee members are provided in Attachment 7, and the list of PC members is in Attachment 8. A score of 3.0 was considered borderline for acceptance; a substantial number of 3.0 papers had to be rejected. Sessions were formed, often by PC members working in groups of 2 or 3, with an area of common interest. Suggested session chairs and co-chairs were also selected (see Attachments 9 and 10 for chair/co-chair correspondence). A list of volunteers who had agreed to chair sessions was provided. The list was based on invitation and confirmation prior to the program committee meeting. The session “cards” were given to Yan, who scanned or entered them into the database. Only a few people were needed to resolve obvious session conflicts on the conference “grid” of 17 columns by 9 rows (placed on the wall of the committee meeting room). Seventeen parallel oral sessions were allocated three time slots per day. Sessions and papers within sessions were rearranged to make certain that all student best paper presentations would be done on Wednesday, with at least a 20 minute spacing between these papers. Several iterations were needed to reconcile conflicts; this was completed by the end of January, 2002, when the advance program was prepared. It should be noted that it is almost impossible

to avoid conflicts where an author appears in two parallel sessions, when an author is involved with four or more papers, since there are only nine session slots over three days. 905 papers were actually submitted in time to appear on the CD-ROM proceedings. The overall acceptance rate was 77%. The statistics for each society are shown in Attachment 2. Example letters for accepted and non-accepted papers are shown in Attachment 11 and Attachment 12, respectively. Because of numerous travel restrictions following the events of September 11, 2001, several session chairs and co-chairs, who had originally confirmed to serve in these positions, had to cancel their commitments, so significant effort was dedicated to find replacement session chairs. Significant number of changes were made for the final program (and the new session chairs were properly notified), but ads-hoc changes were necessary at the conference, given that many cancellations were received up until the week before the conference. Student Best Paper Award There were 26 submissions for the student best paper award (Attachment 13); 4 copies of each were sent to the Program Chair and three PC members were selected to review each paper. The papers were evaluated and five finalists were selected by a sub-committee of the program committee (Belinda King, Craig Smith and May-Win Thein). At the Program Committee meeting all papers were scheduled to be presented on Wednesday (with at least 1 presentation slot (20 minutes) between them). The subcommittee met on Wednesday after the last technical session to begin deliberations and the best paper was selected. Up to $600 in expenses were provided for each finalist; also, the registration fee was waived for each finalist. An award certificate for each finalist (Attachment 17) and a certificate for the best paper winner (Attachment 18) were presented at the awards luncheon. Finalists. The Student Best Paper Finalists were: Alec Bateman (Professor Zongli Lin, advisor), “An Analysis and Design Method for Linear Systems Under Nested Saturation” Yoshio Ebihara (Professor Tomomichi Hagiwara , advisor), “New Dilated LMI Characterizations for Continuous-Time control Design and Robust Multiobjective Control” Ning Lu (Professor Alan A. Desrochers ), “A Multi-layer Petri Net Model for Deregulated Electric Power Systems” E.F. Mulder (Professor Mayuresh V. Kothare ), “Static Anti-Windup Controller Synthesis Using Simultaneous Convex Design” Vassilis Sakizlis (Professor Efstratios N. Pistikopoulos ), “The Explicit Control Law for Hybrid Systems via Parametric Programming”

Best Paper Winner. The best paper was awarded to: Vassilis Sakizlis, Vivek Dua, John D. Perkins, and Efstratios N. Pistikopoulos, “The Explicit Control Law for Hybrid Systems via Parametric Programming,” Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine). Session Logistics At the speakers breakfast the tables were numbered according to session numbers (1-17), with morning, mid-afternoon, and late-afternoon session participants seated at the same table (an additional table was available for AACC Board members and session overflow). Overhead transparencies of the schedule of presentations for each session, and session evaluation forms (Attachment 19) were given to the session chair or co-chair. If the chairs did not attend the breakfast, we asked a speaker to give the material to the chairs at the session. Explicit instructions were provided to the chairs to keep their sessions on time (20 minutes/paper including questions for the oral sessions), asked them to keep track of session attendance and select the best presentation of their session. In addition, a request was made that they nominate outstanding papers for the Hugo Schuck Award and to return the forms to the conference registration desk immediately after their sessions. The names for session best presentation were posted on a bulletin board near the registration desk in the Hilton hotel and later at the help desk in the convention center. The gift for the best session presentation that were not picked up at the conference were mailed to the presenting author after the conference. Comments The Control Editorial Board (CEB) service provided by Jim and Yan Zhu is indispensable. Their handling of the database is a time-saver and allows the Program committee and the Program Chair to focus on the technical program. There were some problems encountered during the all-electronic submission process. These problems included: (i) errors or corrupted .ps and .pdf files and (ii) some problem papers simply had to be scanned in as .pdf files.

Recommendations 1. Conflict Resolution Although the bulk of the technical program is in place by the end of the PC meeting, there is still the important conflict resolution that must be done within a couple of weeks after the meeting. Yan at CEB provided a list of conflict authors (presenting or chairing in two parallel sessions, for example). The recommendation is to be very careful with the paper/chair switches made during the first round of session conflict resolution. As previously recommended, at the paper submission stage it would be nice to add a field for “intended presenter,” this would be particularly helpful when performing conflict resolution for placement of sessions/papers. Some assumptions were made about the actual presenter to avoid major conflicts.

2. Limit Author Submissions One reason conflict resolution is challenging is that too many authors submit 4 or more papers. With only 9 “rows” of sessions it is almost impossible not to have a session conflict for an author of 4 or more papers. There are not enough “degrees of freedom” available. We should consider having some sort of limit on number of paper submissions, or add the paper presenter to the database at the paper submission stage. An author can then be involved in two simultaneous sessions, as long as a co-author (usually a student) is presenting at least one of the papers. 3. Integration between the CEB’s database and publisher’s database Given that the publisher is responsible for collection the final manuscript to be included in the conference proceedings, it is important that the CEB’s conference system to include “export feature” so that all the information about the accepted papers and the corresponding author information can be transferred to publisher’s database and web interface. For 2002 ACC it was not available, so the publisher built the database from the MS-Excel and MS-Word files that were available.

Attachments

1. Program at a glance 2. ACC statistics 3. Letter to Society Review Chairs 4. List of Society Review Chairs 5. Letter to Program Vice Chair for Contributed Sessions 1. Letter to Program Vice Chair for Invited Sessions 2. Letter to Program Vice Chair for Industry and Applications 3. Letter to Program Vice Chair for Student Affairs 9. Emails to Members of the Technical Program Committee 10. Technical Program Committee Members 11. Email to Proposed Session chairs and co-chairs 12. Letter to Session Chairs and Co-Chairs 13. Letter to Corresponding Author of Papers Accepted for ACC 14. Letter to Corresponding Author of Papers not Accepted for ACC 15. List of Nominators and Nominees for Best Student Paper Award 16. Best Student Paper Evaluation Form 17. Letter to Nominators of Best Student Paper Award Finalists 18. Letter to Nominators of Best Student Paper Award Non-Finalists 19. Sample Certificate for Best Student Paper Award Finalists 20. Sample Certificate for Best Student Paper Award Winner 21. Session Summary Form

ACC-02 Program-at-a-Glance

ACC-02: Statistics Overall 1173 papers were submitted. The submissions were as follows: Society Papers Reviewed Papers Accepted Acceptance Rate AIAA 72 60 83%AIChE 41 38 93%AISE 2 1 50%ASCE 3 2 67%ASME 121 104 86%IEEE 556 428 77%ISA 19 11 58%SCS 16 13 81%Short 90 58 64%

Total 920 715 78% Proposals

Submitted Proposals Accepted

Acceptance Rate

Invited Sessions 34 30 88%Industry-Tutorial 5

(7 pre-proposals)4 80%

2002 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE

May 8-10, 2002 William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska, USA http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002

Prof. Eduardo A. Misawa School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Oklahoma State University 218 Engineering North Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078-5016 Phone: 405-744-5900 Fax: 405-744-7873 e-mail: misawa@ceat.okstate.edu August 9, 2001 «Title» «First_Name» «Last_Name» «Address» Dear «Title» «Last_Name»: Thank you for your willingness to be a Society Review Chair (SRC) for the 2002 American Control Conference (2002 ACC) to be held in Anchorage, Alaska at the William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel from May 8-10, 2002. As the Society Review Chair (SRC) for the «Affiliation», you are responsible for handling the review of contributed regular papers submitted through your society. Your cooperation is essential for us to put together a quality technical program and I ask that you carefully follow the instructions given below. Dr. Jim Zhu is the IEEE Society Review Chair for the 2002 ACC, and chairs the IEEE Control System Society’s Conference Editorial Board (CEB). In his capacity as CEB chair, Jim will log data for all papers submitted for consideration for presentation at the 2002 ACC for all 8 societies. This central database will be utilized for assembling the technical program. Please work closely with Jim’s office throughout the review process so that costly errors may be eliminated. Your responsibilities in this review process include: 1. Electronic Submissions: It is our policy that all papers must be submitted

electronically to the 2002 ACC on the CEB web site. Acceptable file formats are: Postscript (PS) and PDF files, and Zip compressed PS and PDF files. You are expected to handle the review electronically. In order for you to verify that you are setup properly to handle e-submissions, Jim will setup a hidden web site for you to try out downloading the files with your web browser and printing (in case it is needed) the manuscripts. The URL for contributed papers submitted to your society will be provided to you by September 1st. This URL will be used for you to download the actual submissions as well. There is a also a file, with extension .csv, containing the data on the authors and keywords (and optionally the abstract) of each paper submitted to a SRC, which could be used by the SRC for correspondence with the author and for the selection of reviewers. This would save the SRC from manually logging in the data from submissions. Additional information about these .csv files will be provided at later date.

Please test your system as soon as you receive your URL. If you have any problem with handling e-submissions, please let Jim or me know as soon as possible. If you receive any hard copy submission by mail or an electronic submission directly sent to you, please make an effort to introduce the authors to the e-submission procedure at the CEB web site and encourage them to try out e-submission first. If they do have technical difficulty in using e-submission, please let them contact CEB directly by email. You should not accept any hard copy mail or e-mail submissions. At the end of the submission, the CEB office will send to the authors an acknowledgment letter on your behalf for receipt of their manuscripts and verification of the pertinent data on their submissions.

General Chair R. Russell Rhinehart Edward E. Bartlett Chair and Head Oklahoma State University School of Chemical Eng. rrr@okstate.edu Program Chair Eduardo Misawa Professor Oklahoma State University School of Mechanical & Aerospace Eng. misawa@okstate.edu Finance Chair John M. Watkins Associate Professor U.S. Naval Academy Systems Engineering Dept. watkins@novell.nadn.navy.mil Local Arrangements Chair Karlene Hoo Texas Tech University Dept. of Chemical Engineering karlene.hoo@coe.ttu.edu Registration Chair Venkataramanan Balakrishnan Associate Professor Purdue University School of Electrical & Computer Eng. ragu@ecn.purdue.edu Publications Chair James H. Taylor NSERC/Monenco Agra, Professor University of New Brunswick Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. jtaylor@unb.ca Publicity Chair Robert P. Judd Cooper Industries Professor Ohio University School of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci. juddrp@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu Workshop Chair Mike Masten Texas Instruments m.masten@ieee.org Exhibits Chair Daniel W. Repperger Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base daniel.repperger@he.wpafb.af.mil Vice Chair: Contributed Papers James C. Spall Principal Professional Staff Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory james.spall@jhuapl.edu Vice Chair: Invited Sessions Jordan Berg Texas Tech University Dept of Mechanical Eng. jordan.berg@ttu.edu Vice-Chair: Industry and Applications J. Christian Gerdes Mechanical Eng. Dept. - Design Division Stanford University gerdes@cdr.stanford.edu

2. Review of Manuscripts: The deadline for submission of manuscripts is September 15, 2002. We will allow a grace period of one week until September 22 for electronic deliveries of electronically registered papers only. Electronic registration must be made by September 15 at CEB site. You may download Regular papers submitted to your society from your hidden website at CEB periodically prior to the submission deadline, and Jim Zhu will make all e-manuscripts submitted to your society available in your hidden website shortly after September 22. Although you should begin to select three qualified reviewers for each paper as soon as you download it, please do not send out any paper for review prior to the actual close date of September 22. On the other hand, all papers should be sent out for review within two weeks thereafter.

3. Review Forms: For uniformity, it is imperative that all Society Review Chairs use the special form for the 2002

ACC, which will be provided to you by the CEB as a PDF file. Please note that the return address on the review forms can be added by using a PDF editor, such as Adobe Acrobat.

4. Summary Evaluation Form: After the review is complete, and no later than November 16, 2001 (a hard

deadline), you or your associate editor must collect all reviews and prepare a summary evaluation on each paper submitted to your society. Jim Zhu will set up an online Summary Review Form for you to submit your summary evaluations using your web browser. He will send your log-on ID and Password to you in the due time. Please note that the November 16 deadline is crucial since the CEB office must log all data for papers evaluated through your society prior to our Technical Program Committee Meeting in Orlando, FL on December 6, 2001.

5. Technical Program Committee Meeting: You should plan on attending the Technical Program Committee Meeting

on December 6 from 8:30 AM to about 3:00 PM in Orlando, FL to finalize the technical program. It is your responsibility to bring the reviewers’ comments to this meeting for reference. Breakfast and lunch will be provided. Your input will be critical for us to put together a program which is balanced and of the highest quality.

6. Set Password in the CEB Database: If you have not set your password in the CEB database, please do so as soon as

possible. The URL is: http://cssceb.ece.ohiou.edu

7. Additional Responsibilities:

• As a SRC you would know the experts in your respective society and I encourage that you solicit cohesive invited session proposals from your members. Please contact Professor Jordan Berg (vice-chair invited sessions) for information on submitting an invited session proposal. Note that all invited session proposals will be critically peer reviewed and please let the session organizers know that acceptance is not guaranteed.

• You certainly know several of your colleagues who can serve as session chairs and co-chairs. Please provide at least 10 nominations to me no later than September 15th.

If you have any questions about your responsibilities, your best sources of information are: (i) your counterpart from the 2001 ACC (please beware of any changes in the e-submission and e-review procedures since then) ; (ii) Jim Zhu and the CEB Website; and (iii) myself. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any help. If any of your contact information has changed, please let Professors Robert P. Judd (Publicity Chair) and R. Russell Rhinehart (General Chair) know so that our web page may be updated to reflect the most accurate information. Please also change your online database record at the CEB Website using your web browser as that record will be used to print acknowledgment letters for your society. I look forward to working with you in creating an outstanding technical program for the 2002 ACC. Sincerely,

Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair, ACC 2002 cc: R. Russ Rhinehart James Spall Chris Gerdes Jim Zhu Yan Zhu

Society Review Chairs Title First Name Last Name Address Affiliation Phone Number E-mail

Dr. Mark S. Whorton TD55/Vehicle Control NASA MSFC Huntsville, AL 35812

AIAA 256-544-1435 mark.whorton@msfc.nasa.gov

Prof. Jay H. Lee 778 Atlantic Dr. School of Chemical Engineering Georgia Tech Atlanta, GA 30332-0100

AIChE 404-385-2148 jay.lee@che.gatech.edu

Dr. Michael Dudzic Dofasco, Inc.1330 Burlington Street, East P. O. Box 2460 Hamilton, Ont., L8N 3J5 CANADA

AISE 905-548-7200, ext.6986

Mike_dudzic@dofasco.ca

Prof. Shirley Dyke Department of Civil Engineering Washington University Campus Box 1130 St. Louis, MO 63130

ASCE 314-935-5695 sdyke@cive.wustl.edu

Prof. Galip Ulsoy Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Michigan 2250 G. G. Brown Building Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2125

ASME 734-936-0407 ulsoy@umich.edu

Prof. J. Jim Zhu School of Electrical and Computer Science 353 Stocker Center Ohio University Athens, OH 45701

IEEE 740-593-9136 author-support@cssceb.ece.ohiou.edu

Prof. Gary G. Yen School of Electrical and Computer Engineering 202 Engineering South Oklahoma State University Stillwater, OK 74078-5032

ISA 405-744-7743 gyen@okstate.edu

Prof. Mohamed A. Zohdy Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering School of Engineering and Computer Science Oakland University Rochester, MI 48309

SCS 810-370-2234 zohdyma@oakland.edu

http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002

2002 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE May 8-10, 2002 William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska, USA

Dr. Eduardo A. Misawa, Professor School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Oklahoma State University 218 Engineering North Stillwater, OK 74078-5016 Tel. (405) 744-5904 Fax. (405) 744-7873 E-mail: misawa@okstate.edu August 13, 2001 Professor James Spall Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory 11100 Johns Hopkins Road Laurel, Maryland 20723-6099 Dear Professor Spall: Thank you for your willingness to be the Vice-Chair for Contributed Papers (VC-CP) for the 2002 American Control Conference (2002 ACC) to be held in Anchorage, Alaska at the William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel from May 8-10, 2002. I am enclosing the lists of 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee members. In these lists you will have their contact information as well as a matrix showing their areas of expertise; this information will be useful for you in September and beyond, and should be reviewed carefully. As the Vice-Chair for Contributed Papers, you are responsible for handling the review of contributed short papers submitted to 2002 ACC. Your cooperation is essential for us to put together a quality technical program and I ask that you carefully follow the instructions given below. Dr. Jim Zhu is the IEEE Society Review Chair for the 2002 ACC, and chairs the IEEE Control System Society’s Conference Editorial Board (CEB). In his capacity as CEB chair, Jim will log data for all papers submitted for consideration for presentation at the 2002. This central database will be utilized for assembling the technical program. Please work closely with Jim’s office throughout the review process so that costly errors may be eliminated. Your responsibilities in this review process include: 2. Electronic Submissions: It is our policy that all papers must be submitted

electronically to the 2002 ACC on the CEB web site. Acceptable file formats are: Postscript (PS) and PDF files, and Zip compressed PS and PDF files. You are expected to handle the review electronically. In order for you to verify that you are setup properly to handle e-submissions, Jim will setup a hidden web site for you to try out downloading the files with your web browser and printing (in case it is needed) the manuscripts. The URL for contributed (short) papers will be provided to you by September 1st. This URL will be used for you to download the actual submissions as well. There is a also a file, with extension .csv, containing the data on the authors and keywords (and optionally the abstract) of each paper, which could be used for correspondence with the author and for the selection of reviewers. This would save you from manually logging in the data from submissions. Additional information about these .csv files will be provided at later date. Please test your system as soon as you receive your URL. If you have any problem with handling e-submissions, please let Jim or me know as soon as possible. If you receive any hard copy submission by mail or an electronic submission directly sent to you, please make an effort to introduce the authors to the e-submission procedure at the CEB website and encourage them to try out e-submission first. If they do have technical difficulty in using e-submission, please let them contact CEB directly by email. You should not accept any hard copy mail or e-mail submissions.

General Chair R. Russell Rhinehart Edward E. Bartlett Chair and Head Oklahoma State University School of Chemical Eng. rrr@okstate.edu Program Chair Eduardo Misawa Professor Oklahoma State University School of Mechanical & Aerospace Eng. misawa@okstate.edu Finance Chair John M. Watkins Associate Professor U.S. Naval Academy Systems Engineering Dept. watkins@novell.nadn.navy.mil Local Arrangements Chair Karlene Hoo Texas Tech University Dept. of Chemical Engineering karlene.hoo@coe.ttu.edu Registration Chair Venkataramanan Balakrishnan Associate Professor Purdue University School of Electrical & Computer Eng. ragu@ecn.purdue.edu Publications Chair James H. Taylor NSERC/Monenco Agra, Professor University of New Brunswick Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. jtaylor@unb.ca Publicity Chair Robert P. Judd Cooper Industries Professor Ohio University School of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci. juddrp@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu Workshop Chair Mike Masten Texas Instruments m.masten@ieee.org Exhibits Chair Daniel W. Repperger Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base daniel.repperger@he.wpafb.af.mil Vice Chair: Contributed Papers James C. Spall Principal Professional Staff Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory james.spall@jhuapl.edu Vice Chair: Invited Sessions Jordan Berg Texas Tech University Dept of Mechanical Eng. jordan.berg@ttu.edu Vice-Chair: Industry and Applications J. Christian Gerdes Mechanical Eng. Dept. - Design Division Stanford University gerdes@cdr.stanford.edu

At the end of the submission, the CEB office will send to the authors an acknowledgment letter on your behalf for receipt of their manuscripts and verification of the pertinent data on their submissions.

2. Review of Manuscripts: The deadline for submission of manuscripts is September 15, 2002. We will allow a grace

period of one week until September 22 for electronic deliveries of electronically registered papers only. Electronic registration must be made by September 15 at CEB site. You may download contributed short papers from your hidden website at CEB periodically prior to the submission deadline, and Jim Zhu will make all e-manuscripts available in your hidden website shortly after September 22. Although you should begin to select three qualified reviewers for each paper as soon as you download it, please do not send out any paper for review prior to the actual close date of September 22. On the other hand, all papers should be sent out for review within two weeks thereafter. Typical procedure is to use the Program Committee members for two of these and to obtain one other review from a person of your choosing.

3. Review Forms: For uniformity, it is imperative that you use the special form for the 2002 ACC, which will be

inserted into the e-manuscripts by CEB. Please note that the return address on the review forms will be yours. 4. Summary Evaluation Form: After the review is complete, and no later than November 16, 2001 (a hard

deadline), you must collect all reviews and prepare a summary evaluation on each paper submitted to you. Jim Zhu will set up an online Summary Review Form for you to submit your summary evaluations using your web browser. He will send your log-on ID and Password to you in the due time. Please note that the November 16 deadline is crucial since the CEB office must log all data for papers evaluated through your society prior to our Technical Program Committee Meeting in Orlando, FL on December 6, 2001.

5. Technical Program Committee Meeting: You should plan on attending the Technical Program Committee Meeting

on December 6 from 8:30 AM to about 3:00 PM in Orlando, FL to finalize the technical program. It is your responsibility to bring the reviewers’ comments to this meeting for reference. Breakfast and lunch will be provided. Your input will be critical for us to put together a balanced high quality program.

6. Set Password in the CEB Database: If you have not set your password in the CEB database, please do so as soon as

possible. The URL is: http://cssceb.ece.ohiou.edu

7. Additional Responsibilities:

• As a member of your professional society you would know the experts in your respective society and I encourage that you solicit cohesive invited session proposals from your members. Please contact Professor Jordan Berg (vice-chair invited sessions) for information on submitting an invited session proposal. Note that all invited session proposals will be critically peer reviewed and please let the session organizers know that acceptance is not guaranteed.

• You certainly know several of your colleagues who can serve as session chairs and co-chairs. Please provide at least 10 nominations to me no later than September 15th.

If you have any questions about your responsibilities, your best sources of information are: (i) your counterpart from the 2001 ACC (please beware of any changes in the e-submission and e-review procedures since then) ; (ii) Jim Zhu and the CEB Website; and (iii) myself. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any help. If any of your contact information has changed, please let Professors Robert P. Judd (Publicity Chair) and R. Russell Rhinehart (General Chair) know so that our web page may be updated to reflect the most accurate information. Please also change your online database record at the CEB Website using your web browser as that record will be used to print acknowledgment letters. I look forward to working with you in creating an outstanding technical program for the 2002 ACC. Sincerely,

Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair, ACC 2002 CC: R. Russel Rhinehart Jim Zhu Yan Zhu Enclosures: TPC lists

2002 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE May 8-10, 2002 William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska, USA http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002

Prof. Eduardo A. Misawa School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Oklahoma State University 218 Engineering North Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078-5016 Phone: 405-744-5900 Fax: 405-744-7873 e-mail: misawa@okstate.edu August 13, 2001 Professor Jordan Berg Mechanical Engineering MS1021 Texas Tech University Lubbock, TX 79409 Dear Professor Berg: Thank you for your willingness to be the Vice-Chair for Invited Sessions (VC-IS) for the 2002 American Control Conference (2002 ACC) to be held in Anchorage, Alaska at the William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel from May 8-10, 2002. I am enclosing the lists of 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee members. In these lists you will have their contact information as well as a matrix showing their areas of expertise; this information will be useful for you in September and beyond, and should be reviewed carefully. As the Vice-Chair for Invited Sessions, you are responsible for handling the review of invited session proposals submitted to 2002 ACC. Your cooperation is essential for us to put together a quality technical program and I ask that you carefully follow the instructions given below. Dr. Jim Zhu is the IEEE Society Review Chair for the 2002 ACC, and chairs the IEEE Control System Society’s Conference Editorial Board (CEB). In his capacity as CEB chair, Jim will log data for all papers submitted for consideration for presentation at the 2002. This central database will be utilized for assembling the technical program. Please work closely with Jim’s office throughout the review process so that costly errors may be eliminated. Your responsibilities in this review process include: 3. Electronic Submissions: It is our policy that all proposals, extended abstracts and

papers must be submitted electronically to the 2002 ACC on the CEB web site. Acceptable file formats are: Postscript (PS) and PDF files, and Zip compressed PS and PDF files. You are expected to handle the review electronically. In order for you to verify that you are setup properly to handle e-submissions, Jim will setup a hidden web site for you to try out downloading the files with your web browser and printing (in case it is needed) the manuscripts. The URL for invited session proposals and corresponding extended abstracts will be provided to you by September 1st. This URL will be used for you to download the actual submissions as well. There is a also a file, with extension .csv, containing the data on the authors and keywords (and optionally the abstract) of each paper, which could be used for correspondence with the author and for the selection of reviewers. This would save you from manually logging in the data from submissions. Additional information about these .csv files will be provided at later date. Please test your system as soon as you receive your URL. If you have any problem with handling e-submissions, please let Jim or me know as soon as possible. If you receive any hard copy submission by mail or an electronic submission directly sent to you, please make an effort to introduce the session organizers and authors to the e-submission procedure at the CEB web site and encourage them to try out e-submission first. If they do have technical difficulty in using e-submission, please let them contact CEB directly by email. You should not accept any hard copy mail or e-mail submissions.

General Chair R. Russell Rhinehart Edward E. Bartlett Chair and Head Oklahoma State University School of Chemical Eng. rrr@okstate.edu Program Chair Eduardo Misawa Professor Oklahoma State University School of Mechanical & Aerospace Eng. misawa@okstate.edu Finance Chair John M. Watkins Associate Professor U.S. Naval Academy Systems Engineering Dept. watkins@novell.nadn.navy.mil Local Arrangements Chair Karlene Hoo Texas Tech University Dept. of Chemical Engineering karlene.hoo@coe.ttu.edu Registration Chair Venkataramanan Balakrishnan Associate Professor Purdue University School of Electrical & Computer Eng. ragu@ecn.purdue.edu Publications Chair James H. Taylor NSERC/Monenco Agra, Professor University of New Brunswick Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. jtaylor@unb.ca Publicity Chair Robert P. Judd Cooper Industries Professor Ohio University School of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci. juddrp@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu Workshop Chair Mike Masten Texas Instruments m.masten@ieee.org Exhibits Chair Daniel W. Repperger Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base daniel.repperger@he.wpafb.af.mil Vice Chair: Contributed Papers James C. Spall Principal Professional Staff Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory james.spall@jhuapl.edu Vice Chair: Invited Sessions Jordan Berg Texas Tech University Dept of Mechanical Eng. jordan.berg@ttu.edu Vice-Chair: Industry and Applications J. Christian Gerdes Mechanical Eng. Dept. - Design Division Stanford University gerdes@cdr.stanford.edu

At the end of the submission, the CEB office will send to the organizers and authors an acknowledgment letter on your behalf for receipt of their manuscripts and verification of the pertinent data on their submissions.

4. Review of Manuscripts: The deadline for submission of manuscripts is September 15, 2002. We will allow a grace

period of one week until September 22 for electronic deliveries of electronically registered papers only. Electronic registration must be made by September 15 at CEB site. You may download the session proposals and extended abstracts from your hidden website at CEB periodically prior to the submission deadline, and Jim Zhu will make all e-manuscripts available in your hidden website shortly after September 22. Although you should begin to select three qualified reviewers for each paper as soon as you download it, please do not send out any paper for review prior to the actual close date of September 22. On the other hand, all papers should be sent out for review within two weeks thereafter. Typical procedure is to use the Program Committee members for two of these and to obtain one other review from a person of your choosing. Because the invited sessions are considered as entities in themselves, and pass or fail as entire sessions, we do not want to get into evaluating individual papers outside of their intended invited sessions – except possibly in special situations.

5. Review Forms: You may use whatever review form you feel is appropriate to make your recommendations. You

may want to contact Balakrishnan (bala@umr.edu) and Kameshwar Poola (poolla@jagger.me.berkeley.edu) who were Vice-Chair for Invited session for the last 2 ACCs for sample forms and their experiences. For your information we will send to you a review form for the 2002 ACC, which we will be using for regular and short contributed papers. For consistency you may want to use a similar grading system. Ultimately the grading system you choose (or possibly your own decision in cases where no consensus is evident) will determine the number of invited sessions accepted. In recent years the acceptance rate has been around 80%. Let us make sure that we accept quality sessions.

6. Summary Evaluation Form: After the review is complete, and no later than November 16, 2001 (a hard

deadline), you must collect all reviews and prepare a summary evaluation on each session proposal. Jim Zhu will set up an online Summary Review Form for you to submit your summary evaluations using your web browser. He will send your log-on ID and Password to you in the due time. Please note that the November 16 deadline is crucial since the CEB office must log all data for papers evaluated through your society prior to our Technical Program Committee Meeting in Orlando, FL on December 6, 2001.

7. Technical Program Committee Meeting: You should plan on attending the Technical Program Committee Meeting

on December 6 from 8:30 AM to about 3:00 PM in Orlando, FL to finalize the technical program. It is your responsibility to bring the reviewers’ comments to this meeting for reference. Breakfast and lunch will be provided. Your input will be critical for us to put together a balanced high quality program.

8. Set Password in the CEB Database: If you have not set your password in the CEB database, please do so as soon as

possible. The URL is: http://cssceb.ece.ohiou.edu

9. Additional Responsibilities:

• As a Vice-Chair for Invited sessions you should solicit cohesive invited session proposals. Please remind the session organizers that all invited session proposals will be critically peer reviewed and please let them know that acceptance is not guaranteed.

• You certainly know several of your colleagues who can serve as session chairs and co-chairs. Please provide at least 10 nominations to me no later than September 15th.

If you have any questions about your responsibilities, your best sources of information are: (i) your counterpart from the 2001 ACC (please beware of any changes in the e-submission and e-review procedures since then) ; (ii) Jim Zhu and the CEB Website; and (iii) myself. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any help. If any of your contact information has changed, please let Professors Robert P. Judd (Publicity Chair) and R. Russell Rhinehart (General Chair) know so that our web page may be updated to reflect the most accurate information. Please also change your online database record at the CEB Website using your web browser as that record will be used to print acknowledgment letters. I look forward to working with you in creating an outstanding technical program for the 2002 ACC. Sincerely,

Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair, ACC 2002 CC: R. Russel Rhinehart Jim Zhu Yan Zhu

2002 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE May 8-10, 2002 William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska, USA http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002

Prof. Eduardo A. Misawa School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Oklahoma State University 218 Engineering North Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078-5016 Phone: 405-744-5900 Fax: 405-744-7873 e-mail: misawa@ceat.okstate.edu August 13, 2001 Professor Chris Gerdes Mechanical Engineering Department – Design Division Stanford University TERMAN 527 Stanford, CA, 94305-4021 Dear Professor Gerdes: Thank you for your willingness to be the Vice-Chair for Industry and Applications (VC-IA) for the 2002 American Control Conference (2002 ACC) to be held in Anchorage, Alaska at the William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel from May 8-10, 2002. I am enclosing the lists of 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee members. In these lists you will have their contact information as well as a matrix showing their areas of expertise; this information will be useful for you in September and beyond, and should be reviewed carefully. As the Vice-Chair for Industry and Applications (“Tutorial Sessions”), you are responsible for handling the review of tutorial session proposals submitted to 2002 ACC. It includes: (i) initial submission, (ii) coordinating the review of all submitted proposals, (iii) recommendation as to acceptance/rejection, and (iv) informing the session organizers the final disposition of their proposals immediately following the finalization of the technical program committee meeting scheduled to be held on December 6th, 2001 in Orlando, Florida at the CDC. Your cooperation is essential for us to put together a quality technical program and I ask that you carefully follow the instructions given below. Dr. Jim Zhu is the IEEE Society Review Chair for the 2002 ACC, and chairs the IEEE Control System Society’s Conference Editorial Board (CEB). In his capacity as CEB chair, Jim will log data for all papers submitted for consideration for presentation at the 2002. This central database will be utilized for assembling the technical program. Please work closely with Jim’s office throughout the review process so that costly errors may be eliminated. Your responsibilities in this review process include: 10. Preparing the packet of information (instructions, forms, etc) to be sent to those

individuals who contact you about organizing tutorial sessions. You may have already done this but you might consider sending this packet to additional individuals to solicit tutorial sessions from expert that you personally know or others that may have been suggested to you by your colleagues. Remember that as the Vice-chair you can have a major influence on shaping the tutorial sessions. Please make sure that the papers in the tutorial sessions are allocated time slots in multiples of 20 minutes, e.g. one paper for 60 minutes and 3 papers each of 20 minutes.

2. Receiving Submissions: When you receive the completed proposals, due on

September 15, please send the following to Jim Zhu for each proposed tutorial session: (i) a copy of the cover letter and title page from the session organizer, (ii) the session ID number you assign, and (iii) complete author and title information for each paper within the session. This information should obviously be organized in some manner for easy logging.

General Chair R. Russell Rhinehart Edward E. Bartlett Chair and Head Oklahoma State University School of Chemical Eng. rrr@okstate.edu Program Chair Eduardo Misawa Professor Oklahoma State University School of Mechanical & Aerospace Eng. misawa@okstate.edu Finance Chair John M. Watkins Associate Professor U.S. Naval Academy Systems Engineering Dept. watkins@novell.nadn.navy.mil Local Arrangements Chair Karlene Hoo Texas Tech University Dept. of Chemical Engineering karlene.hoo@coe.ttu.edu Registration Chair Venkataramanan Balakrishnan Associate Professor Purdue University School of Electrical & Computer Eng. ragu@ecn.purdue.edu Publications Chair James H. Taylor NSERC/Monenco Agra, Professor University of New Brunswick Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. jtaylor@unb.ca Publicity Chair Robert P. Judd Cooper Industries Professor Ohio University School of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci. juddrp@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu Workshop Chair Mike Masten Texas Instruments m.masten@ieee.org Exhibits Chair Daniel W. Repperger Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base daniel.repperger@he.wpafb.af.mil Vice Chair: Contributed Papers James C. Spall Principal Professional Staff Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory james.spall@jhuapl.edu Vice Chair: Invited Sessions Jordan Berg Texas Tech University Dept of Mechanical Eng. jordan.berg@ttu.edu Vice-Chair: Industry and Applications J. Christian Gerdes Mechanical Eng. Dept. - Design Division Stanford University gerdes@cdr.stanford.edu

Please coordinate and send all of this information as group to Jim as early as possible, but no later than September 22, so that he can enter this information into the database. You should send acknowledgement letters to the session organizers yourself asking them to contact the individual authors in their sessions to acknowledge receipt. To facilitate data entry and assembly of technical program, I ask that you adopt the numbering scheme: ACC02-Tmm-n where mm stands for session number, and n stands for the specific paper number within the session number mm.

3. Review of Manuscripts: The deadline for submission of manuscripts is September 15, 2002. We will allow a grace

period of one week until September 22. Although you should begin to select three qualified reviewers for each proposal as soon as you receive it, please do not send out any proposal for review prior to the actual close date of September 22. On the other hand, all papers should be sent out for review within two weeks thereafter. Typical procedure is to use the Program Committee members for two of these and to obtain one other review from a person of your choosing. Because the tutorial sessions are considered as entities in themselves, and pass or fail as entire sessions, we do not want to get into evaluating individual papers outside of their intended invited sessions – except possibly in special situations.

4. Review Forms: You may use whatever review form you feel is appropriate to make your recommendations. You

may want to contact Jeffrey Cook (jcook2@ford.com) and Lingappa K. Mestha (lkmestha@crt.xerox.com) who were Vice-Chair for Industry and Applications for the last 2 ACCs for sample forms and their experiences. For your information we will send to you a review form for the 2002 ACC, which we will be using for regular and short contributed papers. For consistency you may want to use a similar grading system. Ultimately the grading system you choose (or possibly your own decision in cases where no consensus is evident) will determine the number of tutorial sessions accepted. Let us make sure that we accept quality sessions.

5. Summary Evaluation Form: After the review is complete, and no later than November 16, 2001 (a hard

deadline), you must collect all reviews and prepare a summary evaluation on each session proposal. Send them as a group to Jim Zhu along with title and author information for each paper in the session. Because he will be logging the information, it is imperative that you be prompt and as complete as possible. Please note that the November 16 deadline is crucial since the CEB office must log all data for papers evaluated through your society prior to our Technical Program Committee Meeting in Orlando, FL on December 6, 2001.

6. Technical Program Committee Meeting: You should plan on attending the Technical Program Committee Meeting

on December 6 from 8:30 AM to about 3:00 PM in Orlando, FL to finalize the technical program. It is your responsibility to bring the reviewers’ comments to this meeting for reference. I encourage you to assist in the process of assembling tracks in the program, so that one track gets dedicated to the tutorial sessions. Breakfast and lunch will be provided. Your input will be critical for us to put together a balanced high quality program.

7. After the program committee meeting: Immediately after the program committee meeting and before Christmas,

you are responsible for notifying the session organizers and the author of each paper in the tutorial session for those sessions you handled, as to the acceptance or rejection of the session and papers therein. The Publication Chair will be responsible for sending the author kit information to those authors whose papers have been accepted. Jim Zhu will eventually have all of the necessary information in a central database, so you may wish to directly coordinate these activities with him.

8. Additional Responsibilities: You certainly know several of your colleagues who can serve as session chairs and co-

chairs. Please provide at least 10 nominations to me no later than September 15th. If you have any questions about your responsibilities, your best sources of information are: (i) your counterpart from the 2001 ACC; (ii) Jim Zhu and the CEB Website; and (iii) myself. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any help. If any of your contact information has changed, please let Professors Robert P. Judd (Publicity Chair) and R. Russell Rhinehart (General Chair) know so that our web page may be updated to reflect the most accurate information. Please also change your online database record at the CEB Website using your web browser as that record will be used to print acknowledgment letters. I look forward to working with you in creating an outstanding technical program for the 2002 ACC. Sincerely,

Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair, ACC 2002 CC: R. Russel Rhinehart, Jim Zhu, Yan Zhu

2002 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE May 8-10, 2002 William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska, USA http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002

Prof. Eduardo A. Misawa School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Oklahoma State University 218 Engineering North Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078-5016 Phone: 405-744-5900 Fax: 405-744-7873 e-mail: misawa@okstate.edu August 13, 2001 Professor May-Win Thein Department of Mechanical Engineering University of New Hampshire M212 Kingsbury Hall Durham, New Hampshire 03824 Dear Professor Thein: Thank you for your willingness to be the Vice-Chair for Student Affairs (VC-SA) for the 2002 American Control Conference (2002 ACC) to be held in Anchorage, Alaska at the William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel from May 8-10, 2002. I am enclosing the lists of 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee members. In these lists you will have their contact information as well as a matrix showing their areas of expertise; this information will be useful for you in September and beyond, and should be reviewed carefully. As the Vice-Chair for Student Affairs, you are responsible for organizing and running all student-oriented activities in the 2002 ACC. Your cooperation is essential for us to put together a quality technical program and I ask that you carefully follow the instructions given below. Your responsibilities include: 1. Student travel grant: it is ACC tradition to encourage students’ participation in

the conference. ACC’s student travel grant provides partial financial support for the students who want to come to the conference. Your responsibility is to raise funds to support this effort. The National Science Foundation (NSF) and the member societies of the American Automatic Control Council (AACC) are the primary sources for this fund, but you may consider soliciting funds from other organizations. Please remember that it is necessary to submit proposals to these organizations.

2. Lodging for the students: as the vice-chair for student affairs, it is your

responsibility to arrange for affordable lodging for the students. It can in the form of use of dormitories in universities and colleges conveniently located near the conference site. Another option is to setup room-sharing service to match students who may be looking for another student to split the cost of a room in the conference hotel.

3. Student oriented activities: please coordinate with Karlene Hoo (local

arrangements chair), Russ Rhinehart (General Chair), Dan Repperger (exhibits chair) and myself to organize activities that will attract and benefit the students. Some of the activities that we have discussed are (i) student orientation session; (ii) job fair for companies and organizations interested in recruiting students with major in systems and control; (iii) reception supported by companies and organizations recruiting students at ACC; (iv) exhibits of companies recruiting students.

4. Chair the best student paper award: ACC chooses 5 finalists among all the

student lead papers nominated to be the best student paper of the ACC. The nominations are sent to me according to the call for papers. You should log these nominations. Three members of the program committee, you and I will be the selection committee for this award, and I would like you to chair this committee.

General Chair R. Russell Rhinehart Edward E. Bartlett Chair and Head Oklahoma State University School of Chemical Eng. rrr@okstate.edu Program Chair Eduardo Misawa Professor Oklahoma State University School of Mechanical & Aerospace Eng. misawa@okstate.edu Finance Chair John M. Watkins Associate Professor U.S. Naval Academy Systems Engineering Dept. watkins@novell.nadn.navy.mil Local Arrangements Chair Karlene Hoo Texas Tech University Dept. of Chemical Engineering karlene.hoo@coe.ttu.edu Registration Chair Venkataramanan Balakrishnan Associate Professor Purdue University School of Electrical & Computer Eng. ragu@ecn.purdue.edu Publications Chair James H. Taylor NSERC/Monenco Agra, Professor University of New Brunswick Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. jtaylor@unb.ca Publicity Chair Robert P. Judd Cooper Industries Professor Ohio University School of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci. juddrp@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu Workshop Chair Mike Masten Texas Instruments m.masten@ieee.org Exhibits Chair Daniel W. Repperger Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base daniel.repperger@he.wpafb.af.mil Vice Chair: Contributed Papers James C. Spall Principal Professional Staff Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory james.spall@jhuapl.edu Vice Chair: Invited Sessions Jordan Berg Texas Tech University Dept of Mechanical Eng. jordan.berg@ttu.edu Vice-Chair: Industry and Applications J. Christian Gerdes Mechanical Eng. Dept. - Design Division Stanford University gerdes@cdr.stanford.edu

The nominated papers will be reviewed for technical merit through the normal review procedure. In addition to these reviews, you should collect 3 additional reviews for each nominated paper, from members of the technical program committee using a review form of your choice. Samples of previous review forms for evaluation of papers nominated for the student best paper award can be obtained from the final reports from past ACCs. The student best paper award committee should meet during the technical program committee to make the final selection of the 5 finalists. It will be your responsibility to schedule these 5 finalists to present their papers during the first day of the conference, so that the selection committee can judge their presentation. You should notify the nominators regarding the decision on the selection of the finalists, right after the technical program committee meeting at CDC. The committee should judge the presentation of the finalists for both technical content and quality of the presentation, and make the final selection for the best student award before the end of the first day of the 2002 ACC, and that decision should be communicated to both Russ and I so that the award can be presented during the awards luncheon.

If you have any questions about your responsibilities, your best sources of information are Russ and myself. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any help. If any of your contact information has changed, please let Professors Robert P. Judd (Publicity Chair) and R. Russell Rhinehart (General Chair) know so that our web page may be updated to reflect the most accurate information. Please also change your online database record at the CEB Website using your web browser. I look forward to working with you in creating an outstanding technical program for the 2002 ACC. Sincerely,

Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair, ACC 2002 CC: R. Russell Rhinehart Enclosures: TPC lists

Technical Program Committee Invitation Dear Dr. , As the Program Chair for the 2002 American Control Conference (ACC), it is my pleasure to invite you to be a member of the technical program committee (TPC) for this conference. As a member of the TPC your duty will be: 1) to review invited session proposals (typically no more than 2 proposals) 2) to review short papers (typically less than 10 papers) 3) If possible, to participate in the process of making the actual sessions and the overall program at the TPC meeting at 2001 CDC. 4) to recommend colleagues who can serve as sessions chairs and co-chairs. I have been part of the TPC for the past ACCs and I believe that it is not a very demanding task, and it is an import service to the professional societies in the systems and control area and for the ACC. I hope you will accept this invitation. Please let me know about your decision no later than Thursday, March 1st. Best regards, Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair 2002 American Control Conference __________________________________________________ Eduardo A. Misawa, Ph.D. -- Professor Oklahoma State University Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 218 Engineering North Tel. (405) 744-5900 Stillwater, OK 74078-5016 Fax (405) 744-7873 misawa@ceat.okstate.edu, misawae@asme.org, misawa@ieee.org, misawa@alum.mit.edu __________________________________________________

2002 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE May 8-10, 2002 William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska, USA http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002

Prof. Eduardo A. Misawa

School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

Oklahoma State University

218 Engineering North

Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078-5016

Phone: 405-744-5900

Fax: 405-744-7873

e-mail: misawa@ceat.okstate.edu

August 6, 2001 Dr. «First_Name» «Last_Name» «Mailing_address» Dear Dr. «Last_Name»: I would like to thank you again for accepting my invitation to be a member of the Technical Program Committee (TPC) for the 2002 American Control Conference (ACC) to be held in Anchorage at the William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and the Anchorage Hilton Hotel during May 8-10, 2002. I would like to ensure that your contact information is the same as before. Please verify your address as it appears above and phone, fax and e-mail information as it appears below. If your telephone number and/or fax number are missing, please send us this information. Tel: Fax: e-mail: «email_address_» As a member of the TPC your contributions are crucial for the assembly of a technical program of the highest quality for 2002 ACC. The work needed to construct the technical program will begin very soon, and I believe we have an outstanding committee to take on this important task. The main purpose of this letter is to reiterate what your responsibilities are and to provide a time line for the various tasks you may be called upon to perform. Your primary contacts with regard to the Technical Program for the 2002 ACC will be Jim Spall (Vice-Chair for Contributed Papers), Jordan Berg (Vice-Chair for Invited Sessions), Chris Gerdes (Vice-Chair for Industry and Applications Sessions), and myself. Their coordinates can be found on the left margin of this letter. The tasks that most of you will be undertaking are: 1. Review of Contributed Short Papers: You will be asked to review short papers submitted to Jim Spall (Vice-Chair for Contributed Papers). Since the deadline for submissions is September 15, expect to receive 10-15 short papers for review around the third week of September. Jim will be contacting you directly about short paper reviews. Note that you will not be asked to review regular papers as a task of the TPC. You need to return the reviews promptly by the deadline set by the Vice-Chair. The deadline will be around the November 1st. For your information, Jim must send all the review data to Jim Zhu by November 16 (a hard deadline).

General Chair R. Russell Rhinehart Edward E. Bartlett Chair and Head Oklahoma State University School of Chemical Eng. rrr@okstate.edu Program Chair Eduardo Misawa Professor Oklahoma State University School of Mechanical & Aerospace Eng. misawa@okstate.edu Finance Chair John M. Watkins Associate Professor U.S. Naval Academy Systems Engineering Dept. watkins@novell.nadn.navy.mil Local Arrangements Chair Karlene Hoo Texas Tech University Dept. of Chemical Engineering karlene.hoo@coe.ttu.edu Registration Chair Venkataramanan Balakrishnan Associate Professor Purdue University School of Electrical & Computer Eng. ragu@ecn.purdue.edu Publications Chair James H. Taylor NSERC/Monenco Agra, Professor University of New Brunswick Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. jtaylor@unb.ca Publicity Chair Robert P. Judd Cooper Industries Professor Ohio University School of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci. juddrp@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu Workshop Chair Mike Masten Texas Instruments m.masten@ieee.org Exhibits Chair Daniel W. Repperger Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base daniel.repperger@he.wpafb.af.mil Vice Chair: Contributed Papers James C. Spall Principal Professional Staff Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory james.spall@jhuapl.edu Vice Chair: Invited Sessions Jordan Berg Texas Tech University Dept of Mechanical Eng. jordan.berg@ttu.edu Vice-Chair: Industry and Applications J. Christian Gerdes Mechanical Eng. Dept. - Design Division Stanford University gerdes@cdr.stanford.edu

2. Review of Invited Session Proposals: You will be asked to review proposals for invited sessions submitted to Jordan Berg (Vice-Chair for Invited Sessions); thus, you will be contacted directly by Jordan. Given the numbers from recent ACCs, you can expect to receive 3-5 proposals from Jordan for review. Expect to receive these proposals around mid-September. Again, please make sure that you return the reviews to Jordan by the deadline so that he can transmit the results to Jim Zhu by November 16. 3. Review of Industry and Applications Session Proposals: You may be asked to review proposals for Industry and Applications Sessions submitted to Chris Gerdes (Vice-Chair for Industry and Applications Sessions); thus, you will be contacted directly by Chris. It is hard for me to predict how many proposals we might receive in this category for 2002 ACC. Again, please be prompt with your review if you do get asked. 4. Session Chair and Co-Chair Nominations: Selecting responsible session chairs and co-chairs is a crucial task. When people assigned as session chairs and co-chairs don’t show up for the session, it disrupts the entire session and we want to make sure that this does not happen at the 2002 ACC. To accomplish this, I ask that you contact potential attendees and submit about 10 names of responsible individuals who could serve as a session chair/co-chair, and their e-mail addresses directly to me (e-mail: misawa@ceat.okstate.edu) by September 15. By that time potential attendees would have already submitted their manuscripts and may be semi-committed to attending the 2002 ACC. It is understood that some may not be able to commit unless they are assured that their papers are accepted (unknown until the technical program is finalized). It is better to have a semi-commitment than no commitment at all. I suggest that you commit yourself as a potential session chair should you plan on attending the conference. I might contact you if I need additional information. 5. Student Paper Competition: The task of selecting the best student paper from the nominated papers falls on the TPC. I plan to form a subcommittee for this task and you may be called upon to serve. I have asked Prof. May-Win Thein (University of New Hampshire, Vice-Chair for Student Affairs) to chair the subcommittee and she has agreed. The primary responsibility of the subcommittee is to select the five finalists with the help from the TPC members. The number of nominations for this competition varies from year to year and is difficult to predict. You may be asked to help us review a few of these submissions. 6. Technical Program Committee Meeting: The Technical Program Committee meeting to finalize the technical program will be held December 6, 2001, in Orlando, Florida, at the CDC. The meeting will start at 7:30 a.m. and should not last later than 5:00 p.m. We will provide breakfast and lunch. Please plan on attending the Program Committee meeting. Your input will be very valuable in setting up the final program. 7. Additional Responsibilities: Please contact your colleagues and encourage them to organize Invited and Industry & Applications sessions. Note that each invited session should have six papers each of 20-minute duration. Jordan Berg (Vice-Chair) will be happy to provide more details about Invited sessions. The Industry and Applications sessions may have a slightly different format. Typically, the latter sessions will have a tutorial of 60 minutes, to be followed by three papers each of 20-minute duration. Please contact Chris Gerdes (Vice-Chair) for further information if you are interested. This format is adopted to encourage industrial participation and your help in this regard would be most appreciated. As you can see, our tasks are very important for the success of the conference. Obviously, timing is very tight to get the reviews done and I ask that you respect all the deadlines. If you have any questions about your responsibilities, please contact me. I look forward to working with you in assembling a technical program of the highest quality for 2002 ACC. Sincerely,

Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair, ACC 2002 cc: Russ Rhinehart

Jim Spall Jordan Berg Chris Gerdes

To:

Cc: misawa@okstate.edu

Subject: ACC-02: about TPC meeting and info about potential session chairs Dear Colleagues, First of all my apologies for starting the e-mail with an impersonal "dear Colleague", but it avoids me the work of sending essentially identical e-mails to most of you. As you are all aware of, the reviews of papers submitted to the 2002 ACC is progressing, and you are involved with the process. I really appreciate the time and effort that you are putting into the review of papers and proposals submitted to our conference. I have two requests for you: 1) As you may recall from one of my previous e-mails, as a member of TPC one of your duties is " If possible, to participate in the process of making the actual sessions and the overall program at the TPC meeting at 2001 CDC. " The TPC meeting will be on Thursday, December 6th. We will start at 8 AM with a breakfast, and we will be working toll around 3 PM, with a lunch served at noon. Most of work will be done before lunch, so you may leave after lunch, but I will need a good number of you to help in the afternoon to organize the tracks and resolve conflicts. The request is: Please let me know if you will be attending the TPC meeting, and if you are, whether you will be able to stay till 3 PM. I have to make arrangements for breakfast and lunch, so I have to have an idea of how many people will actually be at the TPC meeting, and I also have to make sure that we have enough people helping in the afternoon. 2) I also mentioned that as a member of the TPC, you are "to recommend colleagues who can serve as sessions chairs and co-chairs." I need about 10 names from each of you. I will contact them to verify whether they are willing to serve as session chairs. If you have already sent your list, thank you! But if you have not, please send the names of reliable persons who can serve as session chairs. We need about 320 persons to serve in these capacities, and this year - because the conference is one month earlier than the usual time - we do NOT have time to start inviting folks to server as session chair after the TPC meeting and start iterating... we have to assign people to serve as session chair, who we know that are willing to do that. So, in summary: please let me know if you will be coming to the TPC meeting at CDC-01 on 12/06 and please send the list of people who can serve as

session chair. Please send your information to me as soon as possible, and no later than November 8th. Thank you again for your help with 2002 ACC. best regards, Eduardo (Program Chair for 2002 ACC) __________________________________________________ Eduardo A. Misawa, Ph.D. -- Professor Oklahoma State University Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 218 Engineering North Tel. (405) 744-5900 Stillwater, OK 74078-5016 Fax (405) 744-7873 misawa@okstate.edu __________________________________________________

TPC MEETING

NAME Not Attending Attending Leaving Early

Attending, Staying till End

Feliachi, Ali X Feron, Eric X

Freudenberg, James X Ghorbel, Fathi H. X

Hespanha, Joao P. X Iglesias, Pablo A. X

Joshi, S. M. X Kelkar, Atul X

King, Belinda X Kiriakidis, Kiriakos X

Leonard, Naomi X Lin, Zongli X

Lipset, Robert X Meckl, Peter X Muske, Ken X

O'Brien, Rich X Paschalidis, Yannis X

Pieper, Jeff X Sasiadek, Jurek X

Smith, Craig X Sridhar, Banavar X

Stankovic, Alex X Sznaier, Mario X

Teel, Andy X Thompson, David X

Tsao, Tsu-Chin X Vincent, Tyrone X

Wise, Kevin X Yen, Gune X

Total 11 2 16

Technical Program Committee Last Name First Name e-mail address Mailing address Telephone Fax

Balas Mark mark.balas@Colorado.edu Center for Aerospace Structures Aerospace Engineering Sciences University of Colorado at Boulder Boulder, CO 80309-0429

303-492-3177

Colgren Richard richard.colgren@lmco.com Lockheed Martin Aeronatics Company Flight Controls Lead Engineer Reconnaissance and Advanced Programs 1011 Lockheed Way, B608, P10 Palmdale, CA 93599-2526

661-572-3233 661-572-3076

Feliachi Ali alfeliachi@mail.wvu.edu West Virginia University Engineering Sciences Building PO Box 6109 Morgantown, WV 26506

Feron Eric feron@MIT.EDU Massachusetts Institute of Technology Aerospace and Astro Engineering 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139

Franchek Matt Franchek@ecn.purdue.edu Purdue University Mechanical Engineering West Lafayette, IN 47907

Freudenbrg Jim jfr@eecs.umich.edu Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 4213 EECS Building University of Michigan 1301 Beal Avenue Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2122

Ghorbel Fathi H. ghorbel@rice.edu Rice University Dept. of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science MS 321 P. O. Box 1892 Houston, TX 77251-1892

713-348-3738 713-348-5969

Last Name First Name e-mail address Mailing address Telephone Fax

Gonzalez Oscar gonzalez@ece.odu.edu Old Dominion University Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering 231-B Kaufman-Duckworth Hall Norfolk, VA 23529-0246

804-683-4966 804-683-3220

Hadaegh Fred Y. Fred.Y.Hadaegh@jpl.nasa.gov

Senior Research Scientist Jet Propulsion Laboratory 198-326 California Institute of Technology 4800 Oak Grove Dr. Pasadena, CA 91109

Hespanha Joao hespanha@usc.edu University of Southern California Electricl Eng.-Systems 3740 MCClintock Ave., Room 318, MC 2563 Los Angeles, CA 90089-2563

213-740-9137 213-821-1109

Iglesias Pablo pi@jhu.edu Johns Hopkins University Electrical and Computer Engineering School of Engineering Baltimore, MD 21218

Joshi Suresh s.m.joshi@larc.nasa.gov NASA LangleyDynamics and Control Branch Mail Stop 132 FDCD Research Center Hampton, VA 23681-2199

757-864-6608 757-864-7797

Kelkar Atul akelkar@iastate.edu Iowa State University Mechanical Engineering Ames, Iowa 50011

King Belinda Belinda.King@afosr.af.mil AFOSR/NM801 N. Randolph Dr., Room 732 Arlington, VA 22203

703-696-8409 703-696-8450

Kiriakidis Kiriakos kiriakid@gwmail.usna.edu The United States Naval Academy Weapons & Systems Engineering Department (Stop 14A) 105 Maryland Ave. Annapolis, MD 21402-5025

Last Name First Name e-mail address Mailing address Telephone Fax

Leitner Jesse Jesse.Leitner@gsfc.nasa.gov GN&C Systems Engineer Code 571 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD 20771

301-286-2630 301-286-1719

Leonard Naomi naomi@princeton.edu Princeton University Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering D234 Engrg Quad Princeton, New Jersey 08544

Lin Zongli zl5y@virginia.edu University of Virginia En-Elec/Computer Engr Dept. P. O. Box 400743 Thornton Hall Charlottesville, VA 22904-4743

Lipset Robert lipset@ohiou.edu Ohio University Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering Athens, OH 45701

740-593-1547 740-593-0778

Lu Ping plu@iastate.edu Iowa State University Aerospace Engineering 498 Town Engineering Building Ames, Iowa 50011

Meckl Peter meckl@ecn.purdue.edu Purdue University Mechanical Engineering Department West Lafayette, IN 47907

Muske Ken krmuske@kayak.che.vill.edu University of Villanova Chemical Engineering Department White Hall Room 117 Villanova, PA 19085

O'Brien Richard riobrien@gwmail.usna.edu The United States Naval Academy Weapons & Systems Engineering Department (Stop 14A) 105 Maryland Ave. Annapolis, MD 21402-5025

Last Name First Name e-mail address Mailing address Telephone Fax

O'Dell Brian bodell@acl.okstate.edu School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Oklahoma State University 218 Engineering North Stillwater, OK 74078-5016

Pagilla Prabhakar pagilla@ceat.okstate.edu Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Oklahoma State University 218 Engineering North Stillwater, OK 74078

Paschalidis Ioannis yannisp@ionia.bu.edu Dept. of Manufacturing Engineering College of Engineering Boston University Boston MA 02215 USA

617-353-0434 617-353-5548

Pieper Jeff pieper@ucalgary.ca Calgary University Mechanical Engineering Department ME B 521 Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4

Sasiadek Jurek Z. jsas@ccs.carleton.ca Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Carleton University 1125 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, Ontario, K1S 5B6 CANADA

Shin Seiichi shin@axis.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp University of Tokyo School of Engineering Hongo 7-3-1, Bunkyo-ku Tokyo 113 Japan

Shtessel Yuri shtessel@ebs330.eb.uah.edu The University of Alabama in Huntsville Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Huntsville, AL 35899

Smith Craig CSmith@mengr.tamu.edu Department of Mechanical Engineering Texas A & M University 3123 TAMU College Station, TX 77843-3123

979-458-0110 979-845-3081

Last Name First Name e-mail address Mailing address Telephone Fax

Sridhar Banavar bsridhar@mail.arc.nasa.gov Chief, Automation Concepts Branch (AFC) Aviation Systems Research, Technology and Simulation Division M/S 210-10 NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000

Stankovic Alex astankov@ece.neu.edu Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engr. Northeastern University 442DA Boston, MA 02115 U.S.A.

Stefanopoulou A. annastef@umich.edu Mechanical Engineering University of Michigan G058 WE Lay Auto Lab 1231 Beal Ave. Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2121

Swaroop D. dswaroop@mengr.tamu.edu Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Texas A&M University 313 Engineering/Physics Building Office Wing College Station, TX 77843-3123

979-862-2238 979-862-2418

Syrmos Vassilis L. hellas@euclid.eng.hawaii.edu Dept. of Elect. Engr. Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa Honolulu, HI 96822 USA

Sznaier Mario msznaier@frodo.ee.psu.edu The Pennsylvania State University Department of Electrical Engineering 227E Electrical Engineering West University Park, PA 16802

Teel Andy teel@ece.ucsb.edu University of California at Santa Barbara Electrical and Computer Engineering Department 5121 Engineering I Santa Barbara, CA 93106

Thein May-Win mthein@cisunix.unh.edu Department of Mechanical Engineering University of New Hampshire M212 Kingsbury Hall Durham, NH 03824-3591

Last Name First Name e-mail address Mailing address Telephone Fax

Thompson David F. david.thompson@uc.edu Department of Mechanical, Industrial and Nuclear Engineering University of Cincinnati P.O. Box 210072 Cincinnati, OH 45221-0072

Tsao T.C. ttsao@seas.ucla.edu University of California at Los Angeles Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department 38-137 Engr IV Los Angeles, CA 90095-1361

Vincent Tyrone tvincent@Mines.edu Division of Engineering Colorado School of Mines Golden, CO 80401 USA

303-273-3641 303-273-3602

Wise Kevin Kevin.Wise@MW.Boeing.com

111 Summerset Drive Saint Charles, MO 63304-7671

Yen Gary gyen@ceat.okstate.edu Oklahoma State University Electrical Engineering Department Stillwater, OK 74074

405-744-7743 405-744-9198

Zhou Kemin kemin@sol.ee.lsu.edu Louisiana State University Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Baton Rouge, LA 70803-5901

2002 ACC TPC Technical Interest Profile

Bal

as, M

ark

Col

gren

, Ric

hard

Felia

chi,

A.

Fero

n, E

.

Fran

chek

, M.

Freu

denb

erg,

J.

Gho

rbel

, Fat

hi H

.

Gon

zale

z, O

.

Had

aegh

, Fre

d Y

. H

espa

nha,

Joa

o

Igle

sies

, P.

Josh

i, S

.

Kel

kar,

A.

Kin

g, B

.

Kiri

akid

is,

Kiri

akos

Le

itner

, J.

Leon

ard,

N.

Lin,

Zon

gli

Lips

et, R

.

Lu, P

.

Mec

kl, P

.

Mus

ke, K

.

O'B

rien,

Ric

h

O'D

ell,

Bria

n

P. P

agill

a

Pas

chal

idis

, I.

Adaptive Control X X XX X X X X X X X X X Aerospace Sys/Control X X X X X X X X X X X X Automotive Sys/Control X X X X X X

Autonomous Systems X X X X X X X X Biomedical Systems X X X X X

Biotechnology X X XCommunication Network Control X X X

Comp-Aided Design X X X Control Education X X X X X X X X

Decentralized Control X X X X X X Delay Systems X X

Discrete Event Systems X X XDiscrete Time Systems X X X X X X X X

Distrib. Param. Systems X X X XEstimation X X X X X X

Fault Detection X X X X X X Flexible Structures X X X X X X X X X X X

Fluid Power Control X Fuzzy Control X X X

Hybrid Systems X X X X X X X Identification X X X X X X X X

Information Systems X X X Intelligent Control X X X X X X X

IVHS X XLarge Scale Systems X X X X

Linear Matrix Inequality X X X X X Linear Systems X X X X X X X X X X X

Manufacturing Systems X X XMaterials/Processing X

Mechanics and Control X X X X X X X X X XMEMS X X X X

Model Reduction X X X X X XModeling and Simulation X X X X X X X X X X X

Motion Control X X X X X X X Nanotechnology X X X X Neural Networks X X X X X X

Nonholonomic Systems X X Nonlinear Sys/Control X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Numerical Method X s X X Optimal Control X X X X X X XPower Systems X Process Control X X X

Quant Feedback Theory X X Robotics X X X X X X X X X X

Robust Control X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Smart Structures X X

2002 ACC TPC Technical Interest Profile

Bal

as, M

ark

Col

gren

, Ric

hard

Felia

chi,

A.

Fero

n, E

.

Fran

chek

, M.

Freu

denb

erg,

J.

Gho

rbel

, Fat

hi H

.

Gon

zale

z, O

.

Had

aegh

, Fre

d Y

. H

espa

nha,

Joa

o

Igle

sies

, P.

Josh

i, S

.

Kel

kar,

A.

Kin

g, B

.

Kiri

akid

is,

Kiri

akos

Le

itner

, J.

Leon

ard,

N.

Lin,

Zon

gli

Lips

et, R

.

Lu, P

.

Mec

kl, P

.

Mus

ke, K

.

O'B

rien,

Ric

h

O'D

ell,

Bria

n

P. P

agill

a

Pas

chal

idis

, I.

Spacecraft Control X X X X X X X Stability/Robust Stability X X X X X X X X X X X X

Stochastic Systems X X X X Uncertain Systems XX X X X X

(Under)water Vehicles X X X Variable Structure Sys X X X X X X

2002 ACC TPC Technical Interest Profile

Pie

per,

J.

Sas

iade

k, J

urek

Z.

S

hin,

S.

Sht

esse

l, Y

.

Sm

ith, C

.

Srid

har,

Ban

avar

S

tank

ovic

, A.

Ste

fano

poul

ou,

A.

Sw

aroo

p, D

.

Syr

mos

, V.

Szn

aier

, M.

Teel

, A.

Thei

n, M

.

Thom

pson

, D.

Tsao

, T.C

.

Vin

cent

, T.

Wis

e, K

evin

Yen

, G.

Zhou

, K.

Adaptive Control X X X XAerospace Sys/Control X X X X X X XAutomotive Sys/Control X X X X X X

Autonomous Systems X X XBiomedical Systems X

Biotechnology Communication Network Control X

Comp-Aided Design XControl Education X X X

Decentralized Control X X Delay Systems XX

Discrete Event Systems X X Discrete Time Systems X X X X XX X X

Distrib. Param. Systems Estimation X X X X

Fault Detection X X XX X X X XFlexible Structure s X X

Fluid Power Control X X X XFuzzy Control X X X

Hybrid Systems X X Identification X XX X X X

Information Systems X X Intelligent Control X X X

IVHS X X Large Scale Systems X X X

Linear Matrix Inequality X X X XLinear Systems X X X X XX X X

Manufacturing Systems X Materials/Processing X

Mechanics and Control X X X X MEMS X X

Model Reduction X X X XX XModeling and Simulation X XX X X X

Motion Control X X X X X XNanotechnology X Neural Networks X XX X

Nonholonomic Systems Nonlinear Sys/Control X X XX X XX X X

Numerical Method s X X Optimal Control X X X X X XX XPower Systems X X Process Control X X

Quant Feedback Theory X

2002 ACC TPC Technical Interest Profile

Pie

per,

J.

Sas

iade

k, J

urek

Z.

S

hin,

S.

Sht

esse

l, Y

.

Sm

ith, C

.

Srid

har,

Ban

avar

S

tank

ovic

, A.

Ste

fano

poul

ou,

A.

Sw

aroo

p, D

.

Syr

mos

, V.

Szn

aier

, M.

Teel

, A.

Thei

n, M

.

Thom

pson

, D.

Tsao

, T.C

.

Vin

cent

, T.

Wis

e, K

evin

Yen

, G.

Zhou

, K.

Robotics X X XRobust Control X X X X X X X X

Smart Structures X Spacecraft Control X X X X

Stability/Robust Stability X X X X X X X XStochastic Systems X Uncertain Systems X X X X X X X X

(Under)water Vehicles Variable Structure Sys X X X X X

Re: <<Paper Number>> Dear <<Prof.>>: On behalf of the 2002 ACC Technical Program and Operating Committees, I am asking you to chair a session (detailed above) at the conference. Session Chairs/Co-Chairs are crucial to a smooth running of the conference program. The main responsibilities of session chairs are: 1. Attend the complimentary speakers' breakfast on the morning of the session. You can use this informal setting to meet with the speakers in your session. 2. Introduce the speaker during the session; the two chairs can decide on the format/order in which they would make introductions. 3. Keep the speakers on time-schedule. Since many of the attendees like to attend papers from several parallel sessions, it is important that each paper is presented during its allocated time slot so the attendees can plan their schedule ahead of time. 4. Fill in the session summary form that will be given to you during the speakers' breakfast. Completed forms need to be turned in to the conference registration area following the session. Please note that it is very important to return the completed session summary forms, as the ACC is trying to keep track of authors that do not present their work. We have tried our best to assign you to the sessions in which you are also presenting a paper. There will be minor conflicts due to last minute adjustments to the Technical Program; we can resolve these as they are encountered. Note that the deadline for advance registration for the ACC is 15 April, and the ACC requires that all session chairs register for the conference at appropriate rates. The registration details can be found on the conference web site below. For your convenience, we will be placing abstracts of all papers accepted for the Technical Program on the conference web site http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002 by March so you can familiarize yourself with the contents of papers in your session. If you do not wish to chair the session that I have assigned you, please email me at misawa@okstate.edu no later than January 31, 2002, so I can find a suitable replacement for your session. Once again, I thank you for your willingness to serve as a Session Chair and look forward to seeing you in Anchorage at the ACC. Sincerely, Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair

Re: <<Session Number>> Dear Colleague: On behalf of the 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee and the Organizing Committee, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for accepting the invitation to chair a session at the conference. As you can imagine, Session Chairs/Co-Chairs are crucial to a smooth running of the Technical Program at the conference. Very briefly, the main responsibilities allocated to Session Chairs are enumerated below: 1. Attend the complimentary speakers' breakfast on the morning of the session you are chairing. You can use this informal setting to familiarize yourself with the speakers in your session. 2. Introduce the speaker during the session; the two chairs can decide on the format/order in which they would make introductions. 3. Keep the speakers on time-schedule. Since many of the attendees like to attend papers from several parallel sessions, it is important that each paper is presented during its allocated time slot so the attendees can plan their schedule ahead of time. 4. Fill in the session summary form that will be given to you during the speakers' breakfast. Completed forms need to be turned in to the conference registration area following the session. Please note that it is very important to return the completed session summary forms, as the ACC is trying to keep track of authors that do not present their work, thereby causing interruption in the Technical Program. The form will also give you an opportunity to recommend quality papers for awards. We have tried our best to assign you to the sessions in which you are also presenting your paper (where applicable). Inevitably, there will be minor conflicts due to last minute adjustments to the Technical Program. I am confident that we can resolve them as they are encountered. Note that the deadline for advance registration for the ACC is April 30th, unlike some conferences, the ACC requires that all session chairs register for the conference at appropriate rates. The registration rates can be found on the conference web site listed below. For your convenience, we have placed abstracts of all papers accepted for the Technical Program on the conference web site http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002/ so you can familiarize yourself with the contents of papers in your session. If, for some reason, your plans for attending the ACC change between now and the conference, please send me an e-mail at misawa@okstate.edu as soon as possible so I can find a suitable replacement for your session. My contact information appears to the left. Once again, I thank you for your willingness to serve as a Session Chair and look forward to seeing you in Anchorage, Alaska at the ACC. Sincerely, Eduardo A. Misawa, Program Chair

Session Chairs

Name Affiliation Email Address Interests

Agrawal, Sunil K. University of Delaware agrawal@me.udel.edu Bevly, David M. Auburn University dmbevly@Eng.Auburn.edu Automotive

Optimal Estimation Sensor Fusion System ID

Buffington, James M. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. james.m.buffington@lmco.com Aerospace Control Control Allocation

Cloutier, James R. Eglin Air Force Base cloutiej@eglin.af.mil Aerospace Control Riccatti Equations

D'Andrea, Raffaello

Cornell University rd28@cornell.edu

Erwin, Richard "Scott" Kirtland Air Force Base richard.erwin@kirtland.af.mil Control of Spacecraft or Space Structures Digital Control System ID

Gonzalez, Oscar

Old Dominion University gonzalez@ece.odu.edu

Gray, W. Steven

Old Dominion University gray@ece.odu.edu

Julier, Simon

ITT Industries julier@ait.nrl.navy.mil

King, Belinda Virginia Tech/Air Force Office of Scientific Research

belinda.king@afosr.af.mil

Louca, Loucas A. University of Michigan cyl@umich.edu Automated Modeling of Large Scale Systems Bond Graph Theory Computer Aided Modeling Physical System Modeling & Model Reduction Proper Modeling of Automotive Systems

Name Affiliation Email Address Interests

Lu, Xiao-yun University of California - Berkeley

xylu@path.Berkeley.edu Computer Aided Control System Design Nonlinear Control Theory & Application Real-time Control Stabilization of Nonlinear Systems Vehicle Dynamics & Control

Masten, Mike IEEE m.masten@ieee.org

Michel, Anthony

Notre Dame Anthony.N.Michel.1@nd.edu

Murphey, Robert Eglin Air Force Base robert.murphey@eglin.af.mil Combinatorial Optimization Cooperative Control Decentralized & Multivariable Control Stability Analysis Stochastic Optimization

Pao, Lucy University of Colorado at Boulder pao@leo.Colorado.edu Estimation Flexible Structures Control Haptic Interfaces Information Storage Systems Control Multisensor Data Fusion Target Tracking

Parisini, Thomas

DEEI-University of Trieste - Italy parisini@univ.trieste.it

Repperger, Daniel W.

Wright Patterson Air Force Base Daniel.Repperger@HE.WPAFB.AF.MIL

Rotea, Mario

Purdue University msafonov@usc.edu

Spall, James C.

Johns Hopkins University james.spall@jhuapl.edu

Sparks, Andrew

Wright Patterson Air Force Base andrew.sparks@wpafb.af.mil

Shoureshi, Rahmat Colorado School of Mines rshoresh@mines.edu Intelligent Control Structural Control

Smith, Roy University of California - Berkeley

roy@ece.ucsb.edu Model Validation Robust Control Spacecraft Formation Flying

Name Affiliation Email Address Interests

Siciliano, Bruno

University of Napoli Federico II siciliano@unina.it

Stankovic, Alex

Northeastern University astankov@ece.neu.edu

Sznaier, Mario

Pennsylvania State University msznaier@frodo.ee.psu.edu

Tai, Meihua (Connie)

Polytechnic University mtai@duke.poly.edu

White, Warren

Kansas State University wnw@ksu.edu

Yin, George Wayne State University gyin@turing.math.wayne.edu

Zaccarian, Luca Tor Vergata University - Rome zack@disp.uniroma2.it

2002 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE May 8-10, 2002 William A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska, USA http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002 General Chair R. Russell Rhinehart Edward E. Bartlett Chair and Head Oklahoma State University School of Chemical Eng. rrr@okstate.edu Program Chair Eduardo Misawa Professor Oklahoma State University School of Mechanical & Aerospace Eng. misawa@okstate.edu Finance Chair John M. Watkins Associate Professor U.S. Naval Academy Systems Engineering Dept. watkins@novell.nadn.navy.mil Local Arrangements Chair Karlene Hoo Texas Tech University Dept. of Chemical Engineering karlene.hoo@coe.ttu.edu Registration Chair Venkataramanan Balakrishnan Associate Professor Purdue University School of Electrical & Computer Eng. ragu@ecn.purdue.edu Publications Chair James H. Taylor NSERC/Monenco Agra, Professor University of New Brunswick Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. jtaylor@unb.ca Publicity Chair Robert P. Judd Cooper Industries Professor Ohio University School of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci. juddrp@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu Workshop Chair Mike Masten Texas Instruments m.masten@ieee.org Exhibits Chair Daniel W. Repperger Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base daniel.repperger@he.wpafb.af.mil Vice Chair: Contributed Papers James C. Spall Principal Professional Staff Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory james.spall@jhuapl.edu Vice Chair: Invited Sessions Jordan Berg Texas Tech University Dept of Mechanical Eng. jordan.berg@ttu.edu Vice-Chair: Industry and Applications J. Christian Gerdes Mechanical Eng. Dept. - Design Division Stanford University gerdes@cdr.stanford.edu Vice-Chair: Student Activities May-Win Thein Dept. of Mechanical Eng. Univ. of New Hampshire mthein@cisunix.unh.edu

January 7, 2002 It is my pleasure to inform you that the paper identified in the enclosed letter from the Conference Editorial Board, submitted by you for the 2002 American Control Conference (2002 ACC) has been accepted for presentation at the conference. Please convey this information and my congratulations to your co-authors. By mid January you can visit our web site at http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002 to see the advanced program and the schedule for your presentation. Acceptance of your paper is made with the understanding that you or one of your co-authors will attend the ACC to present the paper. If a paper is not presented during a session, it causes severe disruption to the session and defeats the purpose of the conference, which is to meet people and exchange the latest information about our research results. To avoid such interruptions, I would greatly appreciate it if you could inform me and withdraw the paper at the earliest time in case you or a co-author cannot attend the conference to present the paper. Quality of the conference is very important to us, and quality includes that of the presentation as well as the publication. Important Information Regarding Submission of Final Manuscript: Both the electronic and camera-ready copy of the manuscript are due on February 15, 2002 to the printer Omnipress. The detailed "Author Kit" with instructions and forms that need to be completed for your manuscript to appear in the Proceedings, will be e-mailed to you separately. These instructions and forms may also be downloaded from the 2002 ACC web site In addition to the electronic and camera-ready manuscript, you will also need to submit the abstract of your paper electronically to Omnipress. Abstracts of all accepted papers will be included in a Book of Abstracts, which will be included with your registration package at the ACC. The procedure for submission of abstract is explained in the Author Kit instructions. Please follow the steps carefully to ensure accuracy of the Book of Abstracts. If you have any questions concerning preparation of your manuscript which are not clear from the Author Kit instructions or the conference web site, please contact Jim Taylor, Publications Chair (jtaylor@unb.ca). On behalf of the 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee and the Organizing Committee, I thank you for your contribution and look forward to seeing you in Anchorage at the ACC. Sincerely, Eduardo A. Misawa, Program Chair

, http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002.

2002 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE May 8-10, 2002 illiam A. Egan Civic & Convention Center and Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska, USA http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002

General Chair R. Russell Rhinehart Edward E. Bartlett Chair and Head Oklahoma State University School of Chemical Eng. rrr@okstate.edu Program Chair Eduardo Misawa Professor Oklahoma State University School of Mechanical & Aerospace Eng. misawa@okstate.edu Finance Chair John M. Watkins Associate Professor U.S. Naval Academy Systems Engineering Dept. watkins@novell.nadn.navy.mil Local Arrangements Chair Karlene Hoo Texas Tech University Dept. of Chemical Engineering karlene.hoo@coe.ttu.edu Registration Chair Venkataramanan Balakrishnan Associate Professor Purdue University School of Electrical & Computer Eng. ragu@ecn.purdue.edu Publications Chair James H. Taylor NSERC/Monenco Agra, Professor University of New Brunswick Dept. of Electrical & Computer Eng. jtaylor@unb.ca Publicity Chair Robert P. Judd Cooper Industries Professor Ohio University School of Electrical Eng. & Computer Sci. juddrp@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu Workshop Chair Mike Masten Texas Instruments m.masten@ieee.org Exhibits Chair Daniel W. Repperger Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base daniel.repperger@he.wpafb.af.mil Vice Chair: Contributed Papers James C. Spall Principal Professional Staff Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory james.spall@jhuapl.edu Vice Chair: Invited Sessions Jordan Berg Texas Tech University Dept of Mechanical Eng. jordan.berg@ttu.edu Vice-Chair: Industry and Applications J. Christian Gerdes Mechanical Eng. Dept. - Design Division Stanford University gerdes@cdr.stanford.edu Vice-Chair: Student Activities May-Win Thein Dept. of Mechanical Eng. Univ. of New Hampshire mthein@cisunix.unh.edu

W

January 7, 2002 Based on the review of the papers submitted for the 2002 American Control Conference, I regret to inform you that your paper identified in the enclosed letter from the Conference Editorial Board has not been accepted for the conference program. Please inform your co-authors (if applicable) of this decision. Due to tight timeline for conference reviewing, all decisions regarding acceptance/rejection of manuscripts are final; i.e., the authors do not have an opportunity to revise their manuscripts for resubmission. The reviewers' comments for your manuscript (if any) will be sent to you automatically. The average quality of the papers submitted to 2002 ACC was exceptionally high and we expect the Technical Program to be of extremely high quality. By mid January you can visit our web site at http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002 to see the advanced program. On behalf of the 2002 ACC Organizing Committee and Technical Program Committee, I would like to thank you for your contribution to the 2002 ACC and we wish you the best of success. We hope you will have the opportunity to attend the ACC in Anchorage, Alaska. Sincerely,

Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair

Best Student Paper Nominees

Paper No. Author Submitted By Name of Paper

ACC02-SBP01 Luis G. Crespo Prof. Jian Qiao Sun Effects of Control Bounds in the Stochastic Optimal Control Problem

ACC02-SBP02 Marco Muenchhof Prof. Tarunraj Singh Desensitized Jerk Limited Time Optimal Control of Multi-Input Systems

ACC02-SBP03 Tarek Alaeddine Prof. Haris Doumanidis Distributed Parameter Thermal Controllability - the Inverse Heat Conduction Problem in Materials Processing

ACC02-SBP04 D. H. Sanjeeva Maithripala Prof. Jordan M. Berg Loss of Structurally Stable Regulation Implies Loss of Stability

ACC02-SBP05 Chanat La-orpacharapan Prof. Lucy Pao Projected Phase-Plane Control for Flexible Structures with Friction

ACC02-SBP06 Alec Bateman Prof. Zongli Lin An Analysis and Design Method for Linear Systems Under Nested Saturation

ACC02-SBP07 Craig F. Cutforth Prof. Lucy Pao Analysis and Design of an Adaptive Input Shaper for the Control of Flexible Structures

ACC02-SBP08 Nael H. El-Farra Prof. Panagiotis D. Christofides Integrating Feedback and Switching for Control of Spatially Distributed Systems

ACC02-SBP09 Manxue Lu Prof. Robert N. K. Loh Modeling, Design and Implementation of Discrete Sliding Mode Control for an Engine Idle Speed Control System

ACC02-SBP10 Wim Symens Prof. H. Van Brussel Dynamic Characterization of Hysteresis Elements in Mechanical Systems

ACC02-SBP11 E. F. Mulder Prof. Mayuresh V. Kothare Control-Theoretic Band-on-Demand Protocol for Satellite Networks

Paper No. Author Submitted By Name of Paper

ACC02-SBP12 Radhakant Padhi Prof. S. N. Balakrishnan Proper Orthogonal Decomposition Based Feedback Optimal Control Synthesis of Distributed Parameter Systems Using Neural Networks

ACC02-SBP13 Jingang Yi Prof. Roberto Horowitz Macroscopic Traffic Flow Stability through Wavefront Expansion

ACC02-SBP14 Kartik Ariyur Prof. Miroslav Krstic Multiparameter Extremum Seeking

ACC02-SBP15 Ning Lu Prof. Alan A. Desrochers A Multi-layer Petri Net Model for Deregulated Electric Power Systems

ACC02-SBP16 Jonas Balderud Dr. David Wilson Predictive Control of a Toy Helicopter

ACC02-SBP17 Niclas Andersson Dr. David Wilson Validating Continuous Kraft Digester Kinetic Control

ACC02-SBP18 Michael Schinkel Prof. Kenneth J. Hunt Optimal Control for Systems with Varying Sampling Rate

ACC02-SBP19 Mrs. Salmah Prof. Dr. Bambang Soedijono Non-Zero-Sum Linear Quadratic Dynamic Game with Descriptor Systems

ACC02-SBP20 Jason Lawrence Dr. William Singhose An Analytical Solution for a Zero Vibration Input Shaper for Systems with Coulomb Friction

ACC02-SBP21 Osvaldo Driollet Prof. K. S. Narendra Adaptive Control Using Multiple Models and Set-Membership Identification

ACC02-SBP22 Yoshio Ebihara Prof. Tomomichi Hagiwara New Dilated LMI Characterizations for Continuous-Time Control Design and Robust Multiobjective Control

ACC02-SBP23 Antonio Pietrabissa Prof. Ing. Francesco Delli Priscoli Control-Theoretic Band-on-Demand Protocol for Satellite Networks

Paper No. Author Submitted By Name of Paper

ACC02-SBP24 Vassilis Sakizlis Prof. Efstratios N. Pistikopoulos The Explicit Control Law for Hybrid Systems via Parametric Programming

ACC02-SBP25 Ying Tan Dr. Jian-Xin Xu ILC Transient Response Analysis and Robust Optimal Design in Iteration Domain

ACC02-SBP26 Silvia Ferrari Prof. Rob Stengel An Adaptive Critic Global Controller

Best Student Paper Award Competition Evaluation Form Reviewer’s Name: Dr. «First_Name» «Last_Name» Affiliation: «Mailing_address» Telephone/Fax: «Telephone» / «Fax» E-mail: «email_address_» Signature: Criteria for evaluation: You may base your evaluation on: 1. Area (is the subject current or obsolete, you be the judge) 2. Quality a. Knowledge of and relation to the surrounding literature b. Originality and degree of breakthrough c. Impact on the field 3. Articulation/presentation of the ideas Evaluation:

Paper # Poor Average Good Excellent «SBP_1» 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 «SBP_2» 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 «SBP_3» 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please report your evaluation by November 25, 2001, to: Professor Eduardo A. Misawa School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 218 Engineering North Oklahoma State University Stillwater, OK 74078-5016 Tel: 405-744-5900 Fax: 405-744-7873 misawa@ceat.okstate.edu

Dear Dr. You have been assigned the following ACC02 Student Papers to evaluate for Best Student Paper: . Please download these from our website at www.mae.okstate.edu/acc02sbp. Attached is your evaluation form. Please return it by November 25, 2001. We appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to this. Sincerely, Dr. Eduardo A. Misawa Sharon Green Assistant for Dr. Misawa ASME's JDSMC Oklahoma State University Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering 218 Engineering North Stillwater, OK 74078-5016 (405)744-5900 dept (405)744-7873 fax email: greensa@ceat.okstate.edu Dr. Misawa's email: misawa@ceat.okstate.edu

January 7, 2002 Professor … <Address> Re: Nomination for 2002 ACC Student Paper Contest Dear Professor <Last_Name>: It is my pleasure to inform you that the paper entitled “<Paper_Title>“, which was nominated by you for the 2002 American Control Conference (ACC), Best Student Paper Contest was selected as one of the five finalists. Please convey this information and my congratulations to your student <Student_Name>. Due to a rather enthusiastic response, the quality of nominations for the competition for this year was well above average. Each of the 26 nominations received for the contest was evaluated for its technical merit, timeliness and novelty by at least three members of the 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee. Evaluation by the TPC, together with reviews obtained through ACC review process were compiled by a panel from within the TPC to select the five finalists for the competition. The names and manuscript titles of finalists appear on the conference web page http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002. All finalist’ papers have been scheduled for presentation on Wednesday, May 8th so that the panel members will have the opportunity to attend and evaluate each presentation. Please note that all finalists must present their papers to stay in contention. To help prepare the panelists for the presentation, please send me four copies of the final version of the formatted, camera ready copies of the manuscript (as it would appear in the conference proceedings) by February 15, 2002. The winner of the competition will be decided based on the combined evaluation of manuscripts and their presentation. All finalists will receive a certificate and the winner will also receive a plaque at the Awards Luncheon on Thursday, May 9th. Additionally, to help offset the cost for travel and other conference related expenses, each finalist will receive a maximum of US$700. On behalf of the 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee and the Organizing Committee, I thank you for your contribution and look forward to seeing you in Anchorage at the ACC. Sincerely, Eduardo A. Misawa, Program Chair

January 7, 2002 Professor … <ADDRESS> Re: Nomination for 2002 ACC Student Paper Contest, manuscript: Dear Professor <Last_Name>: It is my unpleasant responsibility to inform you that the paper entitled “<Paper_Title>“ (<Paper_ID>), which was nominated by you for the 2002 American Control Conference (ACC), Best Student Paper Contest was not selected as one of the five finalists. Please convey this information and my regrets to your student <Student_Name>. Due to a rather enthusiastic response, the quality of nominations for the competition this year was well above average. Each of the 26 nominations received for the contest was evaluated for its technical merit, timeliness and novelty by at least three members of the 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee. Evaluation by the TPC, together with reviews obtained through ACC review process were compiled by a panel from within the TPC to select the five finalists for the competition. The names and manuscript titles of finalists appear on the conference web page http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~acc2002. In view of the selection process mentioned above, the outcome, in no way reflects the quality of your nomination. I hope that you would encourage your student to participate in the contest in future years. On behalf of the 2002 ACC Technical Program Committee and the Organizing Committee, I thank you for your contribution and look forward to seeing you in Anchorage at the ACC. Sincerely, Eduardo A. Misawa Program Chair – 2002 ACC

The American Automatic Control Council AIAA, AIChE, AISE, ASCE, ASME, IEEE, ISA & SCS

Recognizes

Whoever I. Tease

as a finalist for the Best Student Paper

with the paper entitled

The most obscure topic on earth

presented at the 2002 American Control Conference Anchorage, Alaska, USA May 8 – 10, 2002

R. Russell Rhinehart Eduardo A. Misawa

General Chair Program Chair

The American Automatic Control Council AIAA, AIChE, AISE, ASCE, ASME, IEEE, ISA & SCS

Bestows the Best Student Paper Award to

The Winner

with the paper entitled

Be Sure to Type the Paper Title

on Two Lines

presented at the 2002 American Control Conference Anchorage, Alaska, USA May 8 – 10, 2002

R. Russell Rhinehart Eduardo A. Misawa

General Chair Program Chair

D R A F T 6/30/2003 -- 12:41 PM D R A F T

Session No.:

Item #3 must be filled in. As session chair, it is your duty to select the best presentation in your session (you may do this yourself, or solicit opinions from others, such as your session co-chair). As in previous years a small memento will be given to one speaker in each session who made the clearest, most interesting presentation of his or her paper. The list of speakers selected for each session will be posted by the registration desk.

After your session, drop off the completed form at the Registration Desk.

2002 American Control Conference Session Summary Form

(To be completed by session chairs - one form per session) Instructions: Please fill in the session number (top right) and respond to the following questions.

* NOTE: Best Presentation of Session Award *

1. What was the approximate average attendance at your session? (Circle one) <20 20-40 40-60 60-80 80-100 >100 2. Tell us of any paper(s) that were not presented. Simply give the paper time-slot(s) as

listed on the back of this form. 3. Please give the time-slot, title, and speaker for the Best Presentation in your session.

(Refer to back of form and circle the winning presentation).

Time: Speaker:

Title: 4. Were there any papers worthy of nomination for the 0. Hugo Schuck Best Paper

Award? Please consider the technical excellence and quality of both written and oral presentation.

5. On the reverse of this form, please list any observations or suggestions that you feel

might benefit future ACCs. 6. Name(s) of session chair(s) completing this form (please print): Session Chair Session Co-Chair

D R A F T 6/30/2003 -- 12:41 PM D R A F T

*Thank you for helping make this a high-quality conference!*