Advertisement

Discrete Event Dynamic Systems

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 471–493 | Cite as

Discrete Semantics for Hybrid Automata

Avoiding Misleading Assumptions in Systems Biology
  • Alberto Casagrande
  • Carla Piazza
  • Alberto Policriti
Article

Abstract

Many natural systems exhibit a hybrid behavior characterized by a set of continuous laws which are switched by discrete events. Such behaviors can be described in a very natural way by a class of automata called hybrid automata. Their evolution are represented by both dynamical systems on dense domains and discrete transitions. Once a real system is modeled in a such framework, one may want to analyze it by applying automatic techniques, such as Model Checking or Abstract Interpretation. Unfortunately, the discrete/continuous evolutions not only provide hybrid automata of great flexibility, but they are also at the root of many undecidability phenomena. This paper addresses issues regarding the decidability of the reachability problem for hybrid automata (i.e., “can the system reach a state a from a state b?”) by proposing an “inaccurate” semantics. In particular, after observing that dense sets are often abstractions of real world domains, we suggest, especially in the context of biological simulation, to avoid the ability of distinguishing between values whose distance is less than a fixed ε. On the ground of the above considerations, we propose a new semantics for first-order formulæ which guarantees the decidability of reachability. We conclude providing a paradigmatic biological example showing that the new semantics mimics the real world behavior better than the precise one.

Keywords

Hybrid automata First-order logics Approximate semantics Reachability problem 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank T. Colcombet, A. Montanari, and G. Puppis for useful discussions.

References

  1. Agrawal M, Stephan F, Thiagarajan PS, Yang S (2006) Behavioural approximations for restricted linear differential hybrid automata. In: Hybrid systems: computation and control, 9th international workshop, HSCC 2006, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, 29–31 March 2006, Proceedings. ser. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3927. Springer, New York, pp 4–18Google Scholar
  2. Alur R, Courcoubetis C, Halbwachs N, Henzinger TA, Ho P-H, Nicollin X, Olivero A, Sifakis J, Yovine S (1995) The algorithmic analysis of hybrid systems. Theor Comp Sci 138(1):3–34zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alur R, Courcoubetis C, Henzinger TA, Ho PH (1992) Hybrid automata: an algorithmic approach to the specification and verification of hybrid systems. In: Grossman RL, Nerode A, Ravn AP, Richel H (eds) Hybrid systems. ser. LNCS. Springer, New York, pp 209–229Google Scholar
  4. Alur R, Dill DL (1994) A theory of timed automata. Theor Comp Sci 126(2)183–235zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Asarin E, Dang T, Maler O (2002) The d/dt tool for verification of hybrid systems. In: Brinksma E, Larsen KG (eds) Proc. of 14th international conference on computer aided verification (CAV’02). ser. LNCS, vol 2404, pp 365–370Google Scholar
  6. Basu S (1997) An improved algorithm for quantifier elimination over real closed fields. In: Proceedings of the thirty-eighth annual symposium on foundations of computer science (FOCS ’97). IEEE Computer Society Press, Silver Spring, pp 56–65Google Scholar
  7. Basu S, Pollack R, Roy M-F (1996) On the combinatorial and algebraic complexity of quantifier elimination. J Assoc Comput Mach 43(6):1002–1045zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Bortolussi L, Policriti A (2008) Hybrid systems and biology. continuous and discrete modeling for systems biology. In: Bernardo M, Degano P, Zavattaro G (eds) Formal methods for computational system biology, vol 5016. Springer, New York, pp 424–448. (ISBN/ISSN: 978-3-540-68892-1)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bournez O, Maler O, Pnueli A (1999) Orthogonal polyhedra: representation and computation. In: Vaandrager FW, van Schuppen JH (eds) Proc. of hybrid systems: computation and control (HSCC’99). ser. LNCS, vol 1569. Springer, Berlin, pp 46–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Casagrande A, Piazza C, Mishra B (2005) Semi-algebraic constant reset hybrid automata - SACoRe. In: Proc. of the 44rd conference on decision and control (CDC’05). IEEE Computer Society Press, Silver Spring, pp 678–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casagrande A, Piazza C, Policriti A (2008) Discreteness, hybrid automata, and biology. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on discrete event systems (WODES 2008). Göteburg, Sweden, pp 281–286 (invited paper)Google Scholar
  12. Chaouiya C (2007) Petri net modelling of biological networks. Brief Bioinform 8(4):210–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chaouiya C, Remy E, Thieffry D (2008) Petri net modelling of biological regulatory networks. J Discret Algorithms 6(2):165–177zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Collier JR, Monk NAM, Maini PK, Lewis JH (1996) Pattern formation by lateral inhibition with feedback: a mathematical model of delta–notch intercellular signalling. J Theor Biol 183:429–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Collins GE (1975) Quantifier elimination for the elementary theory of real closed fields by cylindrical algebraic decomposition. In: Proceedings of the second GI conference on automata theory and formal languages. ser. LNCS, vol 33. Springer, Berlin, pp 134–183Google Scholar
  16. Egerstedt M, Johansson KH, Sastry S, Lygeros J (1999) On the regularization of Zeno hybrid automata. Syst Control Lett 38:141–150zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Enderton HB (2001) A mathematical introduction to logic, ii ed. Harcourt/Academic Press Google Scholar
  18. Fisher J, Henzinger TA (2006) Executable biology. In: WSC ’06: proceedings of the 38th conference on winter simulation. Winter simulation conference, pp 1675–1682Google Scholar
  19. Fisher J, Henzinger TA (2007) Executable cell biology. Nat Biotechnol 25:1239–1249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fränzle M (1999) Analysis of hybrid systems: an ounce of realism can save an infinity of states. In: Flum J, Rodríguez-Artalejo M (eds) Proc of 13th international workshop on computer, science, and logic (CSL 99). ser. LNCS, vol 1683. Springer, New York, pp 126–140Google Scholar
  21. Ghosh R, Tiwari A, Tomlin C (2003) Automated symbolic reachability analysis; with application to delta-notch signaling automata. In: Maler O, Pnueli A (eds) Proc. of hybrid systems: computation and control (HSCC’03). ser. LNCS, vol 2623. Springer, New York, pp 233–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ghosh R, Tomlin C (2001) Lateral inhibition through delta-notch signaling: a piecewise affine hybrid model. In: Benedetto MDD, Sangiovanni-Vincentelli A (eds) Proc. of hybrid systems: computation and control (HSCC’01). ser. LNCS, vol 2034. Springer, New York, pp 232–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gillespie DT (1977) Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions. J Phys Chem 81(25):2340–2361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Girard A, Julius AA, Pappas GJ (2008) Approximate simulation relations for hybrid systems. Discret Event Dyn Syst 18(2):163–179zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. Girard A, Pappas GJ (2007) Approximate bisimulation relations for constrained linear systems. Automatica 43(8):1307–1317zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. Girard A, Pappas GJ (2009) Hierarchical control system design using approximate simulation. Automatica 45(2):566–571zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. Griffith M, Courtney T, Peccoud J, Sanders WH (2006) Dynamic partitioning for hybrid simulation of the bistable hiv-1 transactivation network. Bioinformatics 22(22):2782–2789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grigorév D (1988) Complexity of deciding tarski algebra. J Symb Comput 5(1–2):65–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Haddon C, Jiang YJ, Smithers L, Lewis J (1998) Delta–notch signalling and the patterning of sensory cell differentiation in the zebrafish ear: evidence from the mind bomb mutant. Development 125(23):4637–4644Google Scholar
  30. Halasz AM, Julius AA, Pappas G, Kumar V (2008) From discrete to continuous and back: abstractions and mesoscopic phenomena in cells. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on discrete event systems (WODES 2008). Göteburg, Sweden, pp 269–274Google Scholar
  31. Hardy S, Robillard PN (2004) Modeling and simulation of molecular biology systems using Petri nets: modeling goals of various approaches. J Bioinform Comput Biol 2(4):595–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Henzinger TA, Kopke PW, Puri A, Varaiya P (1995) What’s decidable about hybrid automata? In: Proc. of ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOCS’95), pp 373–382Google Scholar
  33. Kauffman A (1969) Metabolic stability and epigenesis in randomly constructed genetic nets. J Theor Biol 22:437–467CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. Kopke P (1996) The theory of rectangular hybrid automata. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell Univ.Google Scholar
  35. Lafferriere G, Pappas GJ, Sastry S (2000) O-minimal hybrid systems. Math Control Signals Syst 13:1–21zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. Luthi PO, Chopard B, Preiss A, Ramsden JJ (1998) A cellular automaton model for neurogenesis in drosophila. Phys D 118(1–2):151–160zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Macintyre A, Wilkie A (1995) On the decidability of the real exponential field. In: Odifreddi P (ed) Kreisel 70th birthday volume. ser. CLSIGoogle Scholar
  38. Maler O, Manna Z, Pnueli A (1991) From timed to hybrid systems. In: de Bakker JW, Huizing C, de Roever WP, Rozenberg G (eds) Real-time: theory in practice, vol 600. Springer, New York, pp 447–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marnellos G, Deblandre GA, Mjolsness E, Kintner C (2000) Delta–notch lateral inhibitory patterning in the emergence of ciliated cells in xenopus: experimental observations and a gene network model. In: Pac symp biocomput, pp 329–340Google Scholar
  40. Marnellos G, Mjolsness E (1998) A gene network approach to modeling early neurogenesis in drosophila. In: Pacific symposium on biocomputing, pp 30–41Google Scholar
  41. Mendelson E (1997) Introduction to mathematical logic, iv ed. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  42. Milner R (1982) A calculus of communicating systems. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Mysore V, Piazza C, Mishra B (2005) Algorithmic algebraic model checking II: decidability of semi-algebraic model checking and its applications to systems biology. In: Peled D, Tsay Y-K (eds) Proceedings of 3rd international symposium on automated technology for verification and analysis (ATVA 2005). Springer, Berlin, pp 217–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Petri CA (1962) Fundamentals of a theory of asynchronous information flow. In: IFIP congress, pp 386–390Google Scholar
  45. Piazza C, Antoniotti M, Mysore V, Policriti A, Winkler F, Mishra B (2005) Algorithmic algebraic model checking I: challenges from systems biology. In: Computer aided verification, 17th international conference, CAV 2005, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 6–10 July 2005, proceedings. ser. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3576. Springer, New York, pp 5–19Google Scholar
  46. Priami C (1995) Stochastic pi-calculus. Comput J 38(7):578–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Priami C, Quaglia P (2004) Beta binders for biological interactions. In: Danos V, Schächter V (eds) Int. conference on computational methods in systems biology (CMSB’04). ser. LNCS, vol 3082. Springer, New York, pp 20–33Google Scholar
  48. Puri A, Varaiya P (1994) Decidability of hybrid systems with rectangular differential inclusions. In: Dill DL (ed) Proceedings of international conference on computer aided verification (CAV’94). ser. LNCS, vol 818. Springer, New York, pp 95–104Google Scholar
  49. Renegar J (1992) On the computational complexity and geometry of the first-order theory of the reals, parts I–III. J Symb Comput 13:255–352zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schwartz JT (1986) The pernicious influence of mathematics on science. Discrete thoughts: essays in mathematics, science, and phylosophy, pp 19–25Google Scholar
  51. Tarski A (1951) A decision method for elementary algebra and geometry. Univ. California Press, BerkeleyzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. Troncale S, Tahi F, Campard D, Vannier J-P, Guespin J (2006) Modeling and simulation with hybrid functional Petri nets of the role of interleukin-6 in human early haematopoiesis. In: Altman RB, Murray T, Klein TE, Dunker AK, Hunter L (eds) Biocomputing 2006, proceedings of the Pacific symposium, Maui, Hawaii, USA, 3–7 January 2006. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 427–438Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alberto Casagrande
    • 1
    • 2
  • Carla Piazza
    • 3
  • Alberto Policriti
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.DMIUniv. di TriesteTriesteItaly
  2. 2.Applied Genomics InstituteUdineItaly
  3. 3.DIMIUniv. di UdineUdineItaly

Personalised recommendations