Advertisement

Discrete Event Dynamic Systems

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 143–170 | Cite as

Approximating the Minimal Sensor Selection for Supervisory Control

  • Kurt R. RohloffEmail author
  • Samir Khuller
  • Guy Kortsarz
Research Article

Abstract

This paper discusses the problem of selecting a set of sensors of minimum cost that can be used for the synthesis of a supervisory controller. It is shown how this sensor selection problem is related to a type of directed graph st-cut problem that has not been previously discussed in the literature. Approximation algorithms to solve the sensor selection problem can be used to solve the graph cutting problem and vice-versa. Polynomial time algorithms to find good approximate solutions to either problem most likely do not exist (under certain complexity assumptions), but a time efficient approximation algorithm is shown that solves a special case of these problems. It is also shown how to convert the sensor selection problem into an integer programming problem.

Keywords

Supervisory control Automata Sensor selection Computational complexity Approximation algorithms 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arora S, Lund C (1997). Hardness of approximations. In: D S Hochbaum (ed) Algorithms for NP-Hard Problems. Boston, MA: PWS Publishing, pp 46–93.Google Scholar
  2. Ausiello G, Crescenzi P, Gambosi G, Kahn V, Marchetti-Spaccamela A, Protasi M (1999). Complexity and Approximation Combinatorial Optimization Problems and Their Approximability Properties, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  3. Cassandras CG, Lafortune S (1999). Introduction to Discrete Event Systems. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Cho H (1990). Designing observation functions in supervisory control. In Proc. Korean Automatic Control Conference, pp 523–528.Google Scholar
  5. Garey MR, Johnson DS (1979). Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  6. Haji-Valizadeh A, Loparo KA (1996). Minimizing the cardinality of an events set for supervisors of discrete-event dynamical systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 41(11): 1579–1593.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Jiang S, Kumar R, Garcia HE (2003). Optimal sensor selection for discrete-event systems with partial observation. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 48(3):369–381.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Khuller S, Kortsarz G, Rohloff K (2004, September). Approximating the minimal sensor selection for supervisory control. In Proc. 7th Workshop on Discrete Event Systems, Reims, France, pp 85–90Google Scholar
  9. Kortsarz G (2001). On the hardness of approximating spanners, Algorithmica, special Approx-98 issue, 30(3):432–450.Google Scholar
  10. Lin F, Wonham WM (1988). On observability of discrete-event systems. Inf Sci 44:173–198.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Papadimitriou CH, Steiglitz K (1982). Combinatorial Optimization: Algorithms and Complexity. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  12. Ramadge PJ, Wonham WM (1987). Supervisory control of a class of discrete-event processes. SIAM J Control Optim 25(1):206–230.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Ramadge PJ, Wonham WM (1989). The control of discrete-event systems. Proc. IEEE 77(1):81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Raz R (1998). A parallel repetition theorem. SIAM J Comput 27(3):763–803.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Rohloff K (2004). Computations on Distributed Discrete-Event Systems. PhD thesis, The University of Michigan: Ann Arbor. Available at http://www.eecs.umich.edu/umdes.Google Scholar
  16. Rohloff K, van Schuppen JH (2004, December). Approximating the minimal-cost sensor-selection for discrete-event systems. Technical Report MASR0404, Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  17. Rohloff K, van Schuppen JH (2005). Approximating minimal communicated event sets for decentralized supervisory control. In Proc. of the 16th IFAC World Congress.Google Scholar
  18. Rudie K, Willems JC (1995). The computational complexity of decentralized discrete-event control problems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 40(7):1313–1318.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. Tsitsiklis J (1989). On the control of discrete-event dynamical systems. MCCS Math Control Signals and Syst 2:95–107.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. Vazirani V (2001). Approximation Algorithms. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  21. Yoo T-S, Lafortune S (2002). NP-completeness of sensor selection problems arising in partially-observed discrete-event systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 47(9):1495–1499.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Young S, Garg VK (1994, October). Optimal sensor and actuator choices for discrete event systems. In Proc. 31st Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing, pp 36.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BBN TechnologiesCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  3. 3.Computer Science Department, Business and Science BuildingRutgers UniversityCamdenUSA

Personalised recommendations