4.7 Article

Synthesis of Maximally-Permissive Supervisors for the Range Control Problem

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL
Volume 62, Issue 8, Pages 3914-3929

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TAC.2016.2644867

Keywords

Discrete event systems; maximal permissiveness; partial observation; supervisory control; synthesis

Funding

  1. U.S. National Science Foundation [CCF-1138860, CNS-1446298]
  2. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  3. Division Of Computer and Network Systems [1446298] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. Division of Computing and Communication Foundations
  5. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr [1138860] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigate the supervisor synthesis problem for centralized partially-observed discrete event systems subject to safety specifications. It is well known that this problem does not have a unique supremal solution in general. Instead, there may be several incomparable locally maximal solutions. One then needs a mechanism to select one locally maximal solution. Our approach in this paper is to consider a lower bound specification on the controlled behavior, in addition to the upper bound for the safety specification. This leads to a generalized supervisory control problem called the range control problem. While the upper bound captures the (prefix-closed) legal behavior, the lower bound captures the (prefix-closed) minimum required behavior. We provide a synthesis algorithm that solves this problem by effectively constructing amaximally-permissive safe supervisor that contains the required lower bound behavior. This is the first algorithm with such properties, as previous works solve either the maximally-permissive safety problem (with no lower bound), or the lower bound containment problem (without maximal permissiveness).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available