Discrete Event Dynamic Systems

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 451–470 | Cite as

Prognosis of ω-Languages for the Diagnosis of *-Languages: A Topological Perspective

Article

Abstract

This article offers a novel perspective on the diagnosis of *-languages via a topological characterization of ω-languages. This allows for the different concepts that currently exist in diagnosis of discrete-event systems to be related to one another in a uniform setting and to study their complexity. For this purpose, we introduce the notion of prognosability of an ω-language, which in the classical setting corresponds to testing if a language is diagnosable and prediagnosable. We show that we can build a prognoser for some ω-language if this language is open and saturated, where openness is usually implied in the finitary setting. For both of these problems we present PSPACE algorithms, and establish that prognosability (i.e., whether or not a prognoser exists) for an ω-language is a PSPACE-complete problem. Our new characterization offers a novel point of view in the classical setting of diagnosis.

Keywords

Diagnosis 

References

  1. Alpern B, Schneider FB (1987) Recognizing safety and liveness. Distrib Comput 2:117–126MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berstel J (1979) Transductions and context-free languages. Teubner Studienbücher, StuttgartMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Elgot CC, Mezei JE (1965) On relations defined by generalized finite automata. IBM J Res Develop 9:47–68MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Frougny C, Sakarovitch J (1993) Synchronized rational relations of finite and infinite words. Theor Comput Sci 108(1):45–82MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Gire F, Nivat M (1984) Relations rationnelles infinitaires. Calcolo 21(2):91–125MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Grädel E, Thomas W, Wilke T (eds) (2002) Automata, logics, and infinite games: a guide to current research (outcome of a Dagstuhl seminar, February 2001). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2500. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Jeron T, Marchand H, Pinchinat S, Cordier M-O (2006) Supervision patterns in discrete event systems diagnosis. In: 8th workshop on discrete event systems, WODES’06, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  8. Jéron T, Marchand H, Genc S, Lafortune S (2008) Predictability of sequence patterns in discrete event systems. In: IFAC World Congress, SeoulGoogle Scholar
  9. Jiang S, Kumar R (2004) Failure diagnosis of discrete event systems with linear-time temporal logic fault specifications. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 49(6):934–945CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Jiang S, Huang Z, Chandra V, Kumar R (2001) A polynomial time algorithm for diagnosability of discrete event systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 46(8):1318–1321MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Klarlund N (1991) Progress measures for complementation of omega-automata with applications to temporal logic. In: FOCS. IEEE, pp 358–367Google Scholar
  12. Kupferman O, Vardi MY (2001) Model checking of safety properties. Form Methods Syst Des 19(3):291–314MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Landweber LH (1969) Decision problems for omega-automata. Math Syst Theory 3(4):376–384MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. McNaughton R (1966) Testing and generating infinite sequences by a finite automaton. Inf Control 9:521–530MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Peled D, Wilke T, Wolper P (1998) An algorithmic approach for checking closure properties of ω-regular languages. Theor Comp Sci 195(2):183–203MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. Perrin D, Pin J-E (2004) Infinite words, automata, semigroups, logic and games. Elsevier, AmsterdamMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Prieur C (2000) Fonctions rationnelles de mots infinis et continuté. Thèse de Doctorat, Univ. Paris 7Google Scholar
  18. Rabin MO, Scott D (1959) Finite automata and their decision problems. IBM J Res Develop 3:114–125MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sampath M, Sengupta R, Lafortune S, Sinaamohideen K, Teneketzis D (1995) Diagnosability of discrete event systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 40(9):1555–1575MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sampath M, Sengupta R, Lafortune S, Sinaamohideen K, Teneketzis D (1996) Failure diagnosis using discrete event models. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 4(2):105–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Savitch WJ (1970) Relationships between nondeterministic and deterministic tape complexities. J Comput Syst Sci 4:177–192MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Sistla AP (1994) Safety, liveness and fairness in temporal logic. Form Asp Comput 6(5):495–512MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sistla AP, Vardi M, Wolper P (1987) The complementation problem for Buchï automata with applications to temporal logic. Theor Comp Sci 49:217–237MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. Staiger L (1997) ω-languages. In: Rozenberg G, Salomaa A (eds) Handbook of formal languages, vol 3: beyond words, chapter 10. Springer, New York, pp 339–388Google Scholar
  25. Thomas W (1990) Infinite trees and automaton definable relations over ω-words. In: Proc. STACS 90, Rouen, LNCS 415. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Yoo T, Lafortune S (2002) Polynomial-time verification of diagnosability of partially-observed discrete-event systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 47(9):1491–1495CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.IRISARennesFrance

Personalised recommendations