Formal Methods in System Design

, Volume 30, Issue 2, pp 117–141 | Cite as

Designing communicating transaction processes by supervisory control theory

  • L. Feng
  • W. M. Wonham
  • P. S. Thiagarajan


A Communicating Transaction Process (CTP) is a computational model that serves as a high level specification language for reactive embedded system components and their interactions. It consists of a network of communicating processes coordinating their behaviors via common actions and the common actions are refined as a set of guarded Message Sequence Charts (MSCs). There has been little work devoted to developing CTP models systematically. This paper takes the first step towards bridging this gap. In our work, communicating processes of embedded components are modeled and controlled as Discrete-Event Systems (DES). The control logic among communicating components is derived by Supervisory Control Theory (SCT), so as to guarantee that the communicating processes meet all predefined constraints and possess other desirable system behavioral properties. The control logic is then translated into propositional formulas for guarded MSCs which then results in a CTP model with guaranteed behavioral properties.


Communicating transaction processes Message sequence charts Supervisory control Discrete-event systems 


  1. 1.
    Åkesson K, Flordal H, Fabian M (2002) Exploiting modularity for synthesis and verification of supervisors. In: Proceedings of the 15th IFAC World Congress on automatic control, Barcelona, Spain, 2002Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balarin F, Lavagno L, Passerone C, Sangiovanni-Vincentelli A, Watanabe Y, Yang G (2002) Concurrent execution semantics and sequential simulation algorithms for the metropolis meta-model. In: International symposium on hardware/software codesign (CODES), May 6–8, pp 13–18Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cadence Berkeley Laboratories (2004) The SMV model checker, Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brandin BA, Charbonnier FE (1994) The supervisory control of the automated manufacturing system of the AIP. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on computer integrated manufacturing and automation technology. IEEE Computer Society Press, New York, USA, pp 319–324Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cao X-R, Cohen G, Giua A, Wonham WM, van Schuppen JH (2002) Unity in diversity, diversity in unity: retrospective and prospective views on control of discrete event systems. Discr Event Dyn Syst: Theory Appl 12(3):253–264Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cassandras C, Lafortune S (1999) Introduction to discrete event systems, 2nd edn. Kluwer, Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chandra V, Huang Z, Kumar R (2003) Automated control synthesis for an assembly line using discrete event system control theory. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern—Part C: Appl Rev 33(2):284–289Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohen G, Gaubert S, Quadrat JP (1991) Algebraic tools for performance evaluation in discrete event systems. In: Discrete event dynamic systems: analyzing complexity and performance in the modern world. IEEE Press, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gajski D, Zhu J, Dmer R, Gerstlauer A, Zhao S (2000) SpecC: Specification language and methodology. Kluwer, Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gohari P, Wonham WM (2000) On the complexity of supervisory control design in the RW framework. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern—Part B: Cybern 30(5):643–652Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grotker T, Liao S, Martin G, Swan S (2002) System design with system C. Kluwer, Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harel D, Kugler H, Marelly R, Pnueli A (2002) Smart play-out of behavioral requirements. International conference on formal methods in computer aided design (FMCAD), pp 378–398Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ho YC (1992) Discrete event dynamic systems: analyzing complexity and performance in the modern world. IEEE Press, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holloway LE, Krogh BH, Giua A (1997) A survey of petri net methods for controlled discrete event systems. Discr Event Dyn Syst: Theory Appl 7(2):151–190Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holzmann GJ (1997) The model checker SPIN. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 23(5):279–295Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    International Telecommunication Union (1996) Z.120: Message Sequence Charts,, 1996.
  17. 17.
    Jafari MA, Darabi H, Boucher TO, Amini A (2002) A distributed discrete event dynamic model for supply chain of business enterprises. Proceedings of the sixth international workshop on discrete event systems (WODES'02), pp 279–285Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kozák P, Wonham WM (1996) Design of transaction management protocols. IEEE Trans Autom Contr 41(9):1330–1335Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lee SH, Wong KC (2002) Structural decentralized control of concurrent discrete-event systems. Eur J Contr 8(5):477–491Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Peterson JL (1981) Petri net theory and the modeling of systems. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USAGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    de Queiroz MH, Cury JER (2000) Modular supervisory control of large scale discrete event systems. Discr Event Syst: Anal Control. Kluwer, Boston, USA, pp 103–110Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramadge PJ, Wonham WM (1987) Supervisory control of a class of discrete event processes. SIAM J Control Optimization 25(1):206–230Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ramadge PJ, Wonham WM (1989) The control of discrete-event systems. Proc IEEE 77(1):81–98Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ricker S, Sarkar N, Rudie K (1996) A discrete-event system approach to modeling dexterous manipulation. Robotica 14(5):515–526Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roychoudhury A, Thiagarajan P (2003) Communicating transaction processes. IEEE international conference on applications of concurrency in system design (ACSD), June 18–20, pp 157–166Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Roychoudhury A, Thiagarajan P (2003) An executable specification language based on message sequence charts. Formal methods at the crossroads: From panacea to foundational support, LNCS 2757. Springer VerlagGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schmidt K, Reger J, Moor T (2004) Hierarchical control for structural decentralized DES. Proceedings of the seventh international workshop on discrete event systems (WODES'04), pp 289–294Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Su R, Wonham WM (2004) Supervisor reduction for discrete-event systems. Discr Event Dyn Syst: Theory Appl 14(1):31–53Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wong KC, Wonham WM (1998) Modular control and coordination of discrete event systems. Discr Event Dyn Syst: Theory Appl 8(3):247–297.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wonham WM (2005) Supervisory control of discrete event systems and XPTCT software (Version 85). Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Toronto,
  31. 31.
    Wonham WM, Ramadge PJ (1987) On the supremal controllable sub-language of a given language. SIAM J Contr Optim 25(3):637–659Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.School of ComputingNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations