Hashemi Attar, Nazanin (2021) Robust State-Based Supervisory Control of Hierarchical Discrete-Event Systems. PhD thesis, Concordia University.
Preview |
Text (application/pdf)
2MBHashemiAttar_PhD_F2021.pdf - Accepted Version Available under License Spectrum Terms of Access. |
Abstract
Model uncertainty due to unknown dynamics or changes (such as faults) must be addressed in supervisory control design. Robust supervisory control, one of the approaches to handle model uncertainty, provides a solution (i.e., supervisor) that simultaneously satisfies the design objectives of all possible known plant models. Complexity has always been a challenging issue in the supervisory control of discrete-event systems, and different methods have been proposed to mitigate it. The proposed methods aim to handle complexity either through a structured solution (e.g. decentralized supervision) or by taking advantage of computationally efficient structured models for plants (e.g., hierarchical models). One of the proposed hierarchical plant model formalisms is State-Tree-Structure (STS), which has been successfully used in supervisor design for systems containing up to 10^20 states.
In this thesis, a robust supervisory control framework is developed for systems modeled by STS. First, a robust nonblocking supervisory control problem is formulated in which the plant model belongs to a finite set of automata models and design specifications are expressed in terms of state sets. A state-based approach to supervisor design is more convenient for implementation using symbolic calculation tools such as Binary Decision Diagrams (BDDs). In order to ensure that the set of solutions for robust control problem can be obtained from State Feedback Control (SFBC) laws and hence suitable for symbolic calculations, it is assumed, without loss of generality, that the plant models satisfy a mutual refinement assumption. In this thesis, a set of necessary and sufficient conditions is derived for the solvability of the robust control problem, and a procedure for finding the maximally permissive solution is obtained.
Next, the robust state-based supervisory framework is extended to systems modeled by STS. A sufficient condition is provided under which the mutual refinement property can be verified without converting the hierarchical model of STS to a flat automaton model. As an illustrative example, the developed approach was successfully used to design a robust supervisor for a Flexible Manufacturing System (FMS) with a state set of order 10^8.
| Divisions: | Concordia University > Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science > Electrical and Computer Engineering |
|---|---|
| Item Type: | Thesis (PhD) |
| Authors: | Hashemi Attar, Nazanin |
| Institution: | Concordia University |
| Degree Name: | Ph. D. |
| Program: | Electrical and Computer Engineering |
| Date: | 16 February 2021 |
| Thesis Supervisor(s): | Hashtrudi Zad, Shahin |
| Keywords: | Discrete-Event Systems, Robust Control, Hierarchical Models, Stated-based Supervisory Control, Binary Decision Diagram, State-Tree-Structure, symbolic Calculations |
| ID Code: | 988319 |
| Deposited By: | NAZANIN HASHEMI ATTAR |
| Deposited On: | 29 Jun 2021 23:07 |
| Last Modified: | 29 Jun 2021 23:07 |
References:
[1] S. B. Akers, “Binary decision diagrams,” IEEE Trans. Comput., vol. c-27, no. 6, pp. 509–516, June 1978.[2] S. Balemi, G. J. Hoffmann, P. Gyugyi, H.Wong-Toi, and G. F. Franklin, “Supervisory control of a rapid
thermal multiprocessor,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 1040–1059, July 1993.
[3] F. Boroomand and S. Hashtrudi-Zad, “A limited lookahead policy in robust nonblocking supervisory
control of discrete event systems,” Proc. American Control Conference (ACC),Washington, DC, USA, pp.
935–939, June 2013.
[4] S. E. Bourdon, M. Lawford, and W. M.Wonham, “Robust nonblocking supervisory control of discreteevent
systems,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 50, no. 12, pp. 2015–2021, December 2005.
[5] Y. Brave and M. Heymann, “Control of discrete-event systems modeled as hierarchical state machine,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 1803–1819, December 1993.
[6] R. E. Bryant, “Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation,” IEEE Trans. Comput., vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 677–691, August 1986.
[7] L. K. Carvalho, J. C. Basilio, and M. V. Moreira, “Robust diagnosis of discrete event systems against intermittent loss of observations,” Automatica, vol. 48, no. 9, pp. 2068–2078, 2012.
[8] W. Chao, Y. Gan, Z. Wang, and W. Wonham, “Representation of supervisory controls using state tree structures, binary decision diagrams, automata, and supervisor reduction,” Proc. of 24th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC), Taiyuan, China, pp. 45–50, May 2012.
[9] ——, “Modular supervisory control and coordination of state tree structures,” International Journal of Control, vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 9–21, 2013.
[10] W. Chao, Y. Gan,W. M.Wonham, and Z.Wang, Nonblocking supervisory control of flexible manufacturing systems based on state tree structures, ser. A volume in the Advances in Civil and Industrial Engineering (ACIE) Book Series. Engineering Science Reference, 2013, ch. 1, pp. 1–19.
[11] X. Y. Chen, Online robust nonblocking supervisory control of discrete-event systems. M.A.Sc. Thesis, Dept. Electrical and Computer Eng., Concordia Univ., 2007.
[12] X. Y. Chen and S. Hashtrudi-Zad, “A direct approach to robust supervisory control of discrete-event systems,” 2008 Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, Niagara Falls, Ont., Canada, pp. 957–962, May 2008.
[13] S.-L. Chung and S. Lafortune, “Limited lookahead policies in supervisory control of discrete event systems,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 1921–1935, December 1992.
[14] J. E. R. Curry and B. H. Krogh, “Robustness of supervisors for discrete-event systems,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 376–379, February 1999.
[15] M. H. De Queiroz, J. E. R. Cury, and W. M. Wonham, “Multitasking supervisory control of discrete event systems,” Discrete Event Dynamic Systems, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 375–395, 2005.
[16] K. Dong, Q. Quan, andW. M.Wonham, “Failsafe mechanism ddesign for autonomous aerial refueling using state tree structures,” Unmanned Systems, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 261–279, June 2019.
[17] P. A. eite, F. L. Baldissera, and J. E. Cury, “State-based supervisory control with restrictions on the supervisor realization,” Discrete Event Dyn Syst, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 671–693, 2020.
[18] Z. Fei, S. Miremadi, K. Akesson, and B. Lennartson, “Efficient symbolic supervisor synthesis for extended finite automata,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 2368–2375, November 2014.
[19] Z. Fei, S. Reveliotis, S. Miremadi, and K. Akesson, “A BDD-based approach for designing maximally permissive deadlock avoidance policies for complex resource allocation systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 990–1006, July 2015.
[20] B. Gaudin and H. Marchand, “Supervisory control of product and hierarchical discrete event systems,” European Journal of Control, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 131–145, December 2004.
[21] J. Geurts, Supervisory control of MRI subsystems. M.A.Sc. Thesis, Dept. Mechanical Eng., System Eng. Group, Eindhoven Univ. Technol., 2012.
[22] C. Gu, X.Wang, and Z. Li, “Synthesis of supervisory control with partial observation on normal state-tree-structures,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 984–997, April 2019.
[23] C. Gu, X. Wang, Z. Li, and N. Wu, “Supervisory control of state-tree structures with partial observation,” Information Sciences, vol. 465, pp. 523–544, 2018.
[24] J. Gunnarsson, Symbolic methods and tools for discrete event dynamic systems. PhD. Thesis, Division of Automatic Control Department of Electrical Engineering, Linkoping Studies in Science and Technology, Sweden, 1997.
[25] N. B. Hadj-Alouane, S. Lafortune, and F. Lin, “Variable lookahead supervisory control with state information,”
IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 2398–2410, December 1994.
[26] D. Harel, “Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems,” Science of Computer Programing, vol. 8, pp. 231–274, June 1987.
[27] L. E. Holloway, B. H. Krogh, and A. Giua, “A survey of petri net methods for controlled discrete event systems,” Discrete Event Dynamic Systems, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 151–190, Apr 1997.
[28] R. Kamphuis, Design and real-time implementation of a supervisory controller for baggage handling at Veghel Airport. M.A.Sc. Thesis, Dept. Mechanical Eng., System Eng. Group, Eindhoven Univ. Technol., 2013.
[29] J. Komenda, J. van Schuppen, B. Gaudin, and H. Marchand, “Supervisory control of modular systems with global specification languages,” Automatica, vol. 44, pp. 1127–1134, 2008.
[30] T. Korssen, V. Dolk, J. Van De Mortel-Fronczak, M. Reniers, and M. Heemels, “Systematic model-based design and implementation of supervisors for advanced driver assistance systems,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 533–544, February 2018.
[31] S. Lafortune and E. Chen, “The infimal closed controllable super language and its application in supervisory control,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 398–405, April 1990.
[32] R. J. Leduc, P. Dai, and R. Song, “Synthesis method for hierarchical interface-based supervisory control,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 54, no. 7, pp. 1548–1560, July 2009.
[33] R. J. Leduc, M. Lawford, andW. M.Wonham, “Hierarchical interface-based supervisory control—part ii: Parallel case,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 50, no. 9, September 2005.
[34] C. Y. Lee, “Representation of switching circuits by binary decision programs,” Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 985–999, July 1959.
[35] Y. Li and W. M. Wonham, “Controllability and observability in the state-feedback control of discrete event systems,” Proc. of the 27th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Austin, Texas, USA, pp.203–208, December 1988.
[36] ——, “Control of vector discrete-event systems I-the base mode,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 1214–1227, August 1993.
[37] F. Lin, “Robust and adaptive supervisory control of discrete event systems,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 1848–1852, December 1993.
[38] H. Liu, R. J. Leduc, and S. L. Ricker, “Hierarchical interface-based decentralized supervisory control,” Proc. of 54th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Osaka, Japan, pp. 1693–1700, December 2015.
[39] C. Ma and W. Wonham, “Nonblocking supervisory control of state-tree structures,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 782–793, May 2006.
[40] C. Ma and W. M. Wonham, Nonblocking supervisory control of state tree structures, ser. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2005, vol. 317.
[41] ——, “STSLib and its application to two benchmarks,” Proc. of the 9th International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems (WODES’08), Goteborg, Sweden, pp. 119–124, May 2008.
[42] S. Miremadi, K. A. Z. Fei, and B. Lennartson, “Symbolic computation of reduced guards in supervisory control,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 754–765, October 2011.
[43] ——, “Symbolic representation and computation of timed discrete-event systems,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 6–19, January 2014.
[44] S. Miremadi and B. Lennartson, “Symbolic on-the-fly synthesis in supervisory control theory,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 1705–1716, September 2016.
[45] S. Miremadi, B. Lennartson, and K. Akesson, “A BDD-based approach for modeling plant and supervisor by extended finite automata,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1421–1435, November 2012.
[46] R. Mohammadi and S. Hashtrudi-Zad, “A recursive algorithm for diagnosis in hierarchical finite state machines,” 2007 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Montreal, Que., Canada, pp. 1345–1350, Oct 2007.
[47] A. Mohammadi-Idghamishi and S. Hashtrudi-Zad, “Hierarchical fault diagnosis: Application to an ozone plant,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., Syst.: Part C, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 1040–1047, September 2007.
[48] A. Paoli and S. Lafortune, “Diagnosability analysis of a class of hierarchical state machines,” Discrete Event Dynamic Systems, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 385–413, Sep. 2008. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10626-008-0044-5
[49] S.-J. Park and J.-T. Lim, “Robust and nonblocking supervisory control of nondeterministic discrete event systems using trajectory models,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 655–658, April 2002.
[50] S.-J. Park and K.-H. Cho, “Decentralized supervisory control of nondeterministic discrete event systems: The existence condition of a robust and nonblocking supervisor,” Automatica, vol. 43, pp. 377–383, 2007.
[51] S. Rahnamoon and W. M. Wonham, “State-based control of timed discrete-event systems,” in Proc. Of 54th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Miami Beach, FL, USA. IEEE, December 2018, pp. 4833–4838.
[52] P. J. Ramadge and W. M. Wonham, “Modular feedback logic for discrete event systems,” SIAM J. Control Optim., vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 1202–1218, September 1987.
[53] ——, “Supervisory control of a class of discrete event processes,” SIAM J. Control Optim, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 206–230, January 1987.
[54] F. F. Reijnen, M. A. Reniers, J. M. van de Mortel-Fronczak, and J. E. Rooda, “structured synthesis of fault-tolerant supervisory controllers,” in 10th IFAC Symposium on Fault Detection, Supervision and Safety for Technical Processes SAFEPROCESS 2018: Warsaw, Poland, vol. 51, no. 24. IFACPapersOnLine, August 2018, pp. 894–901.
[55] A. Saadatpoor, Timed state-tree-structures: supervisory control and fault diagnosis. PhD. Thesis, Dept. Electrical Eng., Univ. of Toronto, 2009.
[56] A. Saadatpoor and W. Wonham, “State based control of timed discrete event systems using binary decision diagrams,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 62–74, January 2007.
[57] A. Saboori and S. Hashtrudi-Zad, “Robust nonblocking supervisory control of discrete-event systems under partial observation,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 55, pp. 839–848, 2006.
[58] A. Schumann, Y. Pencole, and S. Thiebaux, “Diagnosis of discrete-event systems using BDDs.” 15th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX-04), pp. 197–202, 2004.
[59] J. Sztipanovits and A. Misra, “Diagnosis of discrete-event systems using ordered binary decision diagrams,” 7th Intl. Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX-96), Val Morin, Canada, 1996.
[60] S. Takai, “Robust supervisory control of a class of timed discrete event systems under partial observation,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 39, pp. 267–273, April 2000.
[61] ——, “Synthesis of maximally permissive and robust supervisors for prefix-closed language specifications,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 132–136, January 2002.
[62] ——, “Maximizing robustness of supervisors for partially observed discrete event systems,” Automatica, vol. 40, pp. 531–535, March 2004.
[63] ——, “Robust failure diagnosis of partially observed discrete event systems,” 10th IFAC Workshop on Discrete Event Systems (WODES’10), Berlin, Germany, vol. 43, pp. 205–510, August 2010.
[64] ——, “Robust prognosability for a set of partially observed discrete event systems,” Automatica, vol. 51, pp. 123–130, 2015.
[65] J. H. A. Tomola, F. G. Cabral, L. K. Carvalho, and M. V. Moreira, “Robust disjunctive-codiagnosability of discrete-event systems against permanent loss of observations,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 62, no. 11, pp. 5808–5815, December 2017.
[66] A. Vahidi, M. Fabian, and B. Lennartson, “Efficient supervisory synthesis of large systems,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 14, pp. 1157–1167, April 2006.
[67] J. M. van de Mortel-Fronczak, M. H. van der Heijden, R. G. Huisman, and M. A. Reniers, “Supervisor synthesis in model-based automotive systems engineering,” Proc. 2014 ACM/IEEE Conference on Cyber- Physical Systems, ICCPS, Berlin, Germany, pp. 187–198, April 2014.
[68] B. Wang, Top-down design for RW supervisory control theory. M.A.Sc. Thesis, Dept. Electrical and Computer Eng., Univ. of Toronto, 1995.
[69] D. Wang, L. Lin, Z. Li, and W. M. Wonham, “State-based control of discrete-event systems under partial observation,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 42 084–42 093, 2018.
[70] D. Wang, X. Wang, and Z. Li, “Nonblocking supervisory control of state-tree structures with conditional-preemption matrices,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 3744–3756, June 2020.
[71] X.Wang, Z. Li, andW. M.Wonham, “Real-time scheduling based on nonblocking supervisory control of state-tree structures,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, doi:10.1109/TAC.2020.3031023.
[72] W. M. Wonham and P. J. Ramadge, “On the supremal controllable sublanguage of a given language,” SIAM J. Control Optim., vol. 25, no. 3, p. 637–659, May 1987.
[73] ——, “Modular supervisory control of discrete-event systems,” Math. Control Signals Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13–30, 1988.
[74] W. M. Wonham and K. Cai, Supervisory control of discrete-event systems, ser. Monograph Series Communications and Control Engineering. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2018.
[75] C. Xiao and F. Liu, “Robust fault prognosis of discrete-event systems against loss of observations,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, pp. 1–12, 2021.
[76] F. Yari, S. Hashtrudi-Zad, and S. Tafazoli, “Robust supervisory control of a spacecraft propulsion system,” 20th IFAC Symposium on Automatic Control in AerospaceACA 2016, Sherbrooke, Que., Canada, vol. 49, no. 17, pp. 200–205, August 2016.
[77] X. Yin, J. Chen, Z. Li, and S. Li, “Robust fault diagnosis of stochastic discrete event systems,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, vol. 64, no. 10, pp. 4237–4244, October 2019.
All items in Spectrum are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. The use of items is governed by Spectrum's terms of access.
Repository Staff Only: item control page
Download Statistics
Download Statistics