On the Computation of Natural Observers in Discrete-Event Systems

Natural projections with the observer property have proved effective in reducing the computational complexity of nonblocking supervisory control design, and the state sizes of the resulting controllers. In this paper we present an algorithm to verify this property, or if necessary to achieve it. A natural projection is a special type of general causal reporter map; for the latter an algorithm is already known for verification and modification. This algorithm could be used to verify the observer property of a natural projection, but if the natural projection is not an observer the algorithm is not applicable to modify it to an observer. Also, while a general reporter map always admits a unique smallest refinement with the observer property, a natural projection does not. Indeed there may exist several minimal extensions to the original observable event set of a natural projection. We show that the problem of finding a minimal extension is NP-hard, but propose a polynomial-time algorithm that always finds an acceptable extension. While not guaranteed to be minimal, it is in practice often reasonably small.

[1]  W. M. Wonham,et al.  The control of discrete event systems , 1989 .

[2]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and In stractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H Freeman, San Fran , 1979 .

[3]  Jean-Claude Fernandez,et al.  An Implementation of an Efficient Algorithm for Bisimulation Equivalence , 1990, Sci. Comput. Program..

[4]  B. Gaudin,et al.  Modular and decentralized supervisory control of concurrent discrete event systems using reduced system models , 2006, 2006 8th International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems.

[5]  D.M. Tilbury,et al.  Modular Supervisory Control of Discrete-Event Systems with Abstraction and Incremental Hierarchical Construction , 2006, 2006 8th International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems.

[6]  Stéphane Lafortune,et al.  On the computational complexity of the verification of modular discrete-event systems , 2002, Proceedings of the 41st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2002..

[7]  R. Tennant Algebra , 1941, Nature.

[8]  K. Loparo,et al.  Minimizing the cardinality of an events set for supervisors of discrete-event dynamical systems , 1996, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[9]  Hangju Cho Designing Observation Functions in Supervisory Control , 1990 .

[10]  Walter Murray Wonham,et al.  Nonblocking supervisory control of state tree structures , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[11]  Walter Murray Wonham,et al.  Hierarchical interface-based supervisory control-part II: parallel case , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[12]  Lei Feng,et al.  Supervisory Control Architecture for Discrete-Event Systems , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[13]  Shengbing Jiang,et al.  Optimal sensor selection for discrete-event systems with partial observation , 2003, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[14]  Walter Murray Wonham,et al.  On the Computation of Observers in Discrete-Event Systems , 2004, Discret. Event Dyn. Syst..

[15]  Walter Murray Wonham,et al.  Decentralized supervisory control of discrete-event systems , 1987, Inf. Sci..

[16]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[17]  Christos G. Cassandras,et al.  Introduction to Discrete Event Systems , 1999, The Kluwer International Series on Discrete Event Dynamic Systems.

[18]  Walter Murray Wonham,et al.  Modular Control and Coordination of Discrete-Event Systems , 1998, Discret. Event Dyn. Syst..

[19]  Walter Murray Wonham,et al.  Hierarchical interface-based supervisory Control-part I: serial case , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[20]  Walter Murray Wonham,et al.  On the complexity of supervisory control design in the RW framework , 2000, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B.

[21]  Robin Milner,et al.  Communication and concurrency , 1989, PHI Series in computer science.

[22]  T. Moor,et al.  Marked-String Accepting Observers for the Hierarchical and Decentralized Control of Discrete Event Systems , 2006, 2006 8th International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems.

[23]  Stéphane Lafortune,et al.  NP-completeness of sensor selection problems arising in partially observed discrete-event systems , 2002, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[24]  L. Grigorov Hierarchical control of discrete-event systems , 2005 .

[25]  Samir Khuller,et al.  Approximating the Minimal Sensor Selection for Supervisory Control , 2004, Discret. Event Dyn. Syst..

[26]  Kai C. Wong,et al.  On the Complexity of Projections of Discrete-Event Systems , 1998 .

[27]  Peter E. Caines,et al.  Dynamical consistency in hierarchical supervisory control , 2002, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[28]  Michael Sipser,et al.  Introduction to the Theory of Computation , 1996, SIGA.

[29]  J.E.R. Cury,et al.  Testing Modularity of Local Supervisors: An Approach Based on Abstractions , 2006, 2006 8th International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems.

[30]  MengChu Zhou,et al.  Design and implementation of a petri net based supervisor for a flexible manufacturing system , 1992, Autom..

[31]  W. Wonham Linear Multivariable Control: A Geometric Approach , 1974 .

[32]  Vijay K. Garg,et al.  Optimal Sensor and Actuator Choices for Discrete Event Systems , 1994 .

[33]  W. M. Wonham,et al.  On the consistency of hierarchical supervision in discrete-event systems , 1990 .

[34]  Lei Feng Computationally efficient supervisor design for discrete-event systems , 2007 .

[35]  W. M. Wonham,et al.  On the Computation of Natural Observers in Discrete-Event Systems , 2006, CDC.

[36]  K. Schmidt,et al.  A Hierarchical Architecture for Nonblocking Control of Decentralized Discrete Event Systems , 2005 .