4.7 Article

Lossless Event Compression of Discrete Event Systems

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL
卷 66, 期 5, 页码 2312-2318

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TAC.2020.3003068

关键词

Discrete-event systems; Protocols; Automata; Dictionaries; Sensor systems; Computational complexity; Big data; discrete event systems; lossless event compression; monotonicity; storage resource; recoverability

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61673297, 61773287]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [22120180519]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article investigates the lossless event compression problem of discrete event systems and introduces two compression protocols. Algorithms are proposed to construct an automaton and ensure the recoverability of compressed strings, achieving compression of source strings.
This article investigates the lossless event compression problem of discrete event systems which is, given a discrete event system and a source string generated by it, to find a minimal recoverable compressed string by removing as many events as possible. In order for the problem to be well post, two compression protocols are introduced. One requires that the last event is always kept. The other requires that, for any loop substring, at least one event is kept. We say a compressed string is recoverable if we can uniquely determine the source string based on the knowledge of the given discrete event system. We first construct an automaton to present all the possible source strings for a given compressed string. Based on the automaton, an algorithm is proposed to check whether the given compressed string is recoverable or not. We then propose an algorithm to calculate a minimal recoverable compressed string for a source string. The compressed string satisfies monotonicity which can significantly reduce the computational complexity of the algorithm. Finally, we use a practical example to illustrate these results.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据