Comining Quantitative and Qualitative Models with Active Observtions to Improve Diagnosis of Complex Systems

  • Gerald Steinbauer
  • Franz Wotawa
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 38)

Abstract

Quantitative and qualitative models and reasoning methods for diagnosis are able to cover a wide range of different properties of a system. Both groups of methods have advantages and drawbacks in respect to fault diagnosis. In this chapter we propose a framework which combines methods of both groups to a combined diagnosis engine in order to improve the overall quality of diagnosis. Moreover, we present the different methods based on a running example of an autonomous mobile robot. Furthermore, we discuss the problems and research topics which arise from such a fusion of diverse methods. Finally, we explain how actively gathered observation are able to further improve the quality of diagnosis of complex systems.

Keywords

Model-based diagnosis Robustness Fault-tolerance Embedded systems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Friedrich G., Stumptner M., and Wotawa F., Model-based diagnosis of hardware designs. Artificial Intelligence, 111(2):3–39 (1999).MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hofbaur M., Köb J., Steinbauer G., and Wotawa F., Improving robustness of mobile robots using model-based reasoning. Journal of Intelligence and Robotic Systems, 48(1):37–54 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Steinbauer G. and Wotawa F., Detecting and locating faults in the control software of autonomous mobile robots. In 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-05), pp. 1742–1743 (2005).Google Scholar
  4. Köb D. and Wotawa F., Introducing alias information into model-based debugging. In Ramon Lopez de Mantaras and Lorenza Saitta, editors, Proceedings of the 16th Eureopean Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI’2004, pp. 833–837 (2004). IOS Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Struss P. and Price C., Model-based systems in the automotive industry. AI Magazine, 24(4):17–34 (2004).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muscettola N., Nayak P., Pell B., and Williams B., Remote agent: To boldly go where no AI system has gone before. Artificial Intelligence, 103(1–2):5–48 (1998).MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reiter R., A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence, 32(1):57–95 (1987).MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Hamscher W., Console L., and de Kleer J., Readings in Model-Based Diagnosis. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mate. (1992).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kalman R., A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. ASME Transactions, Journal of Basic Engineering, 82:35–50 (1960).Google Scholar
  10. Anderson B. and Moore J., Optimal Filtering. Information and System Sciences Series. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1979).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Isermann R., Supervision, fault-detection and fault-diagnosis methods - an introduction. Control Engineering Practice, 5(5):639–652 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen J. and Patton R., Robust Model-Based Fault Diagnosis for Dynamic Systems. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1999).Google Scholar
  13. Dearden R. and Clancy D., Particle filters for real-time fault detection in planetary rovers. In Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis, pages 1 – 6 (2002).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Verma V., Gordon G., Simmons R., and Thrun S., Real-time fault diagnosis. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 11(2):56 – 66 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roos N., ten Teije A., Bos A., and Witteveen C., Multi-agent diagnosis with spatially distributed knowledge. In Proceedings of the Belgium-Netherlands Artificial Intelligence Conference (BNAIC), pp 275–282 (2002).Google Scholar
  16. de Kleer J., Getting the probabilities right for measurement selection. In 17th InternationalWorkshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX-06), pp 141–146 (2006).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hofbaur M., Hybrid Estimation of Complex Systems, volume 319 of Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences. Springer Verlag, New York (2005).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Drolet L., Michaud F., and Cote J., Adaptable sensor fusion using multiple kalman filters. In Proceedings IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). (2000).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerald Steinbauer
    • 1
  • Franz Wotawa
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Software TechnologyGraz University of TechnologyA-8010 GrazAustria

Personalised recommendations