Temporal Uncertainties in Cyber-Physical Systems



A cyber-physical system (CPS) consists of two interacting subsystems, a distributed computer system (the C-system) and a physical system (the P-system) that is controlled by the C-system. The different models of time – dense time in the P-system and discrete time in the C-system – lead to an observation uncertainty at the interface of these two subsystems. Within the C-system, the jitter of the communication system can be the source of an inconsistent system state. This paper investigates the effects of the observations uncertainty and the jitter of the communication system on the causality and determinism of the system behavior in a CPS that contains a global notion of time. It comes to the conclusion that in general it is not possible to build a faithful model of a P-system in the C-system. Based on the gained insight some guidelines for the design of cyber-physical systems are given and a short note on the faithfulness of timeless (asynchronous) C- systems are contained in the final part of the paper.



This work was supported in part the EU Project GENESYS under project number FP 7/213322. Many discussions within the project and the research group on distributed real-time systems at the TU Vienna are warmly acknowledged.


  1. 1.
    Kopetz H (2011) Real-time systems–design principles for distributed embedded applications. Second Edition. Springer Verlag, 2011MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kopetz H (2008) The complexity challenge in embedded system design. In ISORC 2008, IEEE PressGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wikipedia (2008) International atomic timeGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Final Report on the August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States and Canada, 2004Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mesarovic MD, Takahara Y (1989) Abstract systems theory. Lecture notes in control and information science, vol 116. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schütz W (1993) The testability of distributed real-time systems, vol ISBN 0–7923–9386–4, Kluwer, Boston, MA, p 160Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoefer C (2004) Causality and determinism: Tension, or outright conflict. Revista de Filosofia 29(2):99–225Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Avizienis A (1982) The four-universe information system model for the study of fault tolerance. In: Proceedings of the 12th FTCS symposium, IEEE Press, Los Angeles, 1982Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kopetz H, Gruensteidl G (1993) TTP – A time- triggered protocol for fault-tolerant real-time systems. In: Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE international symposium on fault-tolerant computing (FTCS-23), IEEE Press, Toulouse, France, 1993Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berwanger J et al (2001) FlexRay – the communication system for advanced automotive control systems. In: SAE World Congress, SAE Press, Detroit, 2001, paper 2001001–0676Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    IEEE (2002) 1588 standard for a precision clock synchronization protocol for network measurement and control systemsGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kopetz H, Ademaj A, Hanslik A (2004) Integration of internal and external clock synchronization by the combination of clock state and clock rate correction in fault tolerant distributed systems. In: RTSS 04, IEEE Press, Lissabon, 2004Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lamport L (1978) Time, clocks, and the ordering of events. Comm. ACM b(7):558–565Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TU WienViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations