Managing Diagnosis Processes with Interactive Decompositions

  • Quang-Huy GIAP
  • Stephane PLOIX
  • Jean-Marie FLAUS
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 296)


In the scientific literature, it is generally assumed that models can be completely established before the diagnosis analysis. However, in the actual maintenance problems, such models appear difficult to be reached in one step. It is indeed difficult to formalize a whole complex system. Usually, understanding, modelling and diagnosis are interactive processes where systems are partially depicted and some parts are refined step by step. Therefore, a diagnosis analysis that manages different abstraction levels and partly modelled components would be relevant to actual needs. This paper proposes a diagnosis tool managing different modelling abstraction levels and partly depicted systems.


  1. [1]
    K. Autio. Abstraction of behaviour and structure in model-based diagnosis. In the Sixth International Workshop on Principle of Diagnosis (DX95), pages 1–7, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    K. Autio and R. Reiter. Structural abstraction in model based diagnosis. In The 13th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-98), pages 269–273. John Wiley and Sons, 1998.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    L. Chittaro and R. Ranon. Hierarchical model-based diagnosis based on structural abstraction. Artificial Intelligence, 1–2:147–182, 2004.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Johan de Kleer. Problem solving with the atms. Artif. Intell., 28(2):197–224, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Johan de Kleer and Brian C. Williams. Diagnosis with behavioral modes. Readings in model-based diagnosis, pages 124–130, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    I. Mozetic. Hierarchical model-based diagnosis, pages 354–372. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    S. Ploix, S. Touaf, and J. M. Flaus. A logical framework for isolation in fault diagnosis. In SAFEPROCESS'2003, Washington D.C., U.S.A., 2003.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. Reiter. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence, 32:57–95, 1987.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Peter Struss and Oskar Dressler. “physical negation” integrating fault models into the general diagnostic engine. pages 1318–1323, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Quang-Huy GIAP
    • 1
  • Stephane PLOIX
    • 1
  • Jean-Marie FLAUS
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire G-SCOPFrance

Personalised recommendations