Logical Analysis of Discrete Event System Using Compositional Minimization

  • Wan-Bok Lee
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 235)


Logical analysis of a system is an indispensable process for high quality and reliable system development. In this paper, we propose an analysis method based on compositional minimization for DEVS models. For the purpose of logical analysis of DEVS models, Communicating Discrete Event Systems (CDEVS) model was defined, which enables representing the nondeterministic behavior of systems. As a means of systematic proof technique, two operations named composition and minimization were defined. These operations are compatible with the meaning of the communication semantics of DEVS models. Repetitive composition and minimization of component models produces a new CDEVS model that has the same input output responses to an environment. As the conformation criteria between the specification and the implementation, equivalence relation has been used.


Logical analysis Compositional minimization DEVS Verification 


  1. 1.
    Hwang MH, Zeigler BP (2009) Reachability graph of finite and deterministic DEVS networks. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 6(3):454–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miah S Md, Koo I (2012) Performance analysis of ILEACH and LEACH protocols for wireless sensor networks. J Inf Commun Convergence Eng (JICCE) 10(4):384–389Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zeigler B Theory of modeling and simulation, 1st edn. Wiley Interscience, New York. ISBN 0-12-778455-1Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Manna z, Pnueli A (1992) The temporal logic of reactive and concurrent systems. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Milner R (1980) A calculus of communicating systems, LNCS, vol. 92. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clarke EM, Emerson EA, Sistla AP (1986) Automatic verification of finite state concurrent systems using temporal logic. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 8:244–263MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heymann M (1990) Concurrency and discrete event control. IEEE Control Syst Mag 10(4):103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Paige R, Tarjan RE (1987) Three partition refinement algorithms. SIAM J Comput 16(6):973–989MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zeigler BP, Praehofer H, Kim TG (2000) Theory of modelling and simulation, 2nd edn. Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holzmann GJ (1991) Design and validation of computer protocols. Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bartlett KA, Scantlebury RA, Wilkinson PT (1969) A note on reliable full-duplex transmission over half-duplex lines. Commun ACM 12(5):260–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kongju National UniversityGongju-siRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations