Why is my supervisor empty? Finding causes for the unreachability of states in synthesized supervisors

Although supervisory control synthesis has been around for many years, adoption is still low. A weak point of synthesis is the absence of a reporting mechanism. When an empty or unexpected supervisor is returned, it is very difficult to explain why this is the case. It is desired to return an explanation for a question, like, “Why is my supervisor empty?”. In general, the information needed to provide such an explanation is not present in the synthesized result. In this paper, causes (explanations) are generated for questions regarding the absence of behavior in the synthesized system. To this end, it is first investigated what information is needed and how it should be stored. Based on these findings, information of the influence of each requirement is encoded in the supervisor. This is done by annotating colors. The resulting so-called colored predicates can be used after synthesis to derive a cause for a given question.

[1]  J. M. van de Mortel-Fronczak,et al.  Application of supervisory control theory to theme park vehicles , 2012, WODES.

[2]  Mayur Naik,et al.  From symptom to cause: localizing errors in counterexample traces , 2003, POPL '03.

[3]  Michel Pasquier,et al.  Supervising passenger land-transport systems , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[4]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Verification of Supervisory Control Software Using State Proximity and Merging , 2008, HSCC.

[5]  Martin Fabian,et al.  PLC-based implementation of supervisory control for discrete event systems , 1998, Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (Cat. No.98CH36171).

[6]  Ramon R. H. Schiffelers,et al.  Application of Supervisory Control Synthesis to a Patient Support Table of a Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scanner , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering.

[7]  Knut Åkesson,et al.  Symbolic approach to nonblocking and safe control of Extended Finite Automata , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering.

[8]  Jasen Markovski,et al.  A state-based framework for supervisory control synthesis and verification , 2010, 49th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).

[9]  Olaf Stursberg,et al.  Verification of Embedded Supervisory Controllers Considering Hybrid Plant Dynamics , 2005, Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng..

[10]  S. Balemi,et al.  Supervisory control of a rapid thermal multiprocessor , 1993, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[11]  A. T. Hofkamp,et al.  CIF 3: Model-Based Engineering of Supervisory Controllers , 2014, TACAS.

[12]  Alex Groce,et al.  What Went Wrong: Explaining Counterexamples , 2003, SPIN.

[13]  Knut Åkesson,et al.  Modeling of discrete event systems using finite automata with variables , 2007, 2007 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[14]  P. Ramadge,et al.  Supervisory control of a class of discrete event processes , 1987 .

[15]  Knut Åkesson,et al.  Supremica - A Tool for Verification and Synthesis of Discrete Event Supervisors , 2003 .