Abstract
This paper studies modular decomposition as an approach for failure diagnosis based on Discrete Event Systems. This paper also analyses the problem of coupling produced in the implementation of centralized modular diagnosers, as coupled diagnosers cannot carry out their own diagnosis task, when there is a failure in another subsystem sharing a common energy or material flow. In addition, we propose a method to avoid diagnoser coupling, by means of decoupling functions using non-local information with respect to the coupled diagnoser and generated in the diagnoser where the failure has been isolated.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arnold A (1989). MEC: A system for constructing and analyzing transition systems. In J Sifakis (ed) Automatic Verification of Finite State Systems—Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 407. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, New York, pp. 117–132.
Baroni P, Lamperti G, Pogliano P, Zanella M (2000). Diagnosis of a class of distributed discrete-event systems. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics—Part A, 30(6):731–752.
García E (2000). Descomposición modular de diagnosticadores de fallos basados en modelos de eventos discretos. Tesis doctoral. Valencia.
García E, Morant F (1999). Modular failure diagnosis based on discrete event systems for a mixer chemical process. XIX Factory Automation, Barcelona, pp. 205–210.
Hopcroft JE, Ullman JD (1979). Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley.
Lin F (1994) Diagnosability of discrete event systems and its applications. J. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications. 4(2):197–212.
Ozveren CM, WiIlsky AS (1990). Observability of discrete-event dynamic systems. IEEE Transactions in Automatic Control, pp. 797–806.
Pencolé Y (2004). Diagnosability analysis of distributed discrete event systems. In proceedings of the 15th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX'04). pp. 173–178.
Ricker LS, Fabre E (2000). On the construction of modular observers and diagnosers for discrete event systems. In 39th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Sydney. IEEE Control Systems Society, pp. 2240–2244.
Ricker SL, Van Schuppen JH (2001). Decentralized failure diagnosis with asynchronous communication between supervisors. Proceedings European Control Conference. pp. 1002–1006.
Sampath M, Sengupta R, Lafortune S, Sinnamohideen K, Teneketzis D (1994). Failure diagnosis using discrete-event models. Dep. EECS, University of Michigan, Tech. Rep.CGR94-3.
Sampath M, Sengupta R, Lafortune S, Sinnamohideen K, Teneketzis D (1995). Diagnosability of discrete-event systems. IEEE Transactions in Automatic Control, pp. 1555–1575.
Sampath M, Sengupta R, Lafortune S, Sinnamohideen K, Teneketzis D (1996) .Failure diagnosis using discrete-event models. IEEE Transactions in Control Systems, pp. 105–124.
Viswanadham N, Narahari Y (1992). Performance Modeling of Automated Manufacturing Systems. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
García Moreno, E., Correcher Salvador, A., Morant Anglada, F. et al. Centralized Modular Diagnosis and the Phenomenon of Coupling. Discrete Event Dyn Syst 16, 311–326 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10626-006-9325-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10626-006-9325-z