Decentralized supervisory control with communicating controllers

Barrett, G.; Lafortune, Stéphane

doi:10.1109/9.880613

Cited by 133 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the event that a control solution cannot be found in one of the various decentralized architectures [1], [15], there are conditions under which decentralized communication protocols can be synthesized, allowing synchronously communicating controllers to reach a control decision (e.g., [3], [16], [17]). …”

Section: A Decentralized Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finding the weakest link(s): Coalition games for decentralized discrete-event control

Ricker

Marchand

2016

2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In decentralized discrete-event system (DES) architectures, agents fuse their local decisions to arrive at the global decision. The contribution of each agent to the final decision is never assessed; however, it may be the case that only a subset of agents, i.e., a (static) coalition, perpetually contribute towards the correct final decisions. In casting the decentralized DES control (with and without communication) problem as a cooperative game, it is possible to quantify the average contribution that each agent makes towards synthesizing the overall correct control strategy. Specifically, we explore allocations that assess contributions of non-communicating and communicating controllers for this class of problems. This allows a quantification of the contribution that each agent makes to the coalition with respect to decisions made solely based on its partial observations and decisions made based on messages sent to another agent(s) to facilitate a correct control decision.

show abstract

Section: A Decentralized Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finding the weakest link(s): Coalition games for decentralized discrete-event control

Ricker

Marchand

2016

2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This assumption was later dropped in [12,48,58,66], where a decentralized solution was sought to a possibly indecomposable specification. More recently, this architecture was extended by permitting communications among decentralized supervisors, which thus may cooperatively resolve ambiguity due to 'myopic' local observation [5,46,47,55,59]. …”

Section: Modular Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

Supervisor Localization: A Top-Down Approach to Distributed Control of Discrete-Event Systems

Cai

Wonham

2009

AIP Conference Proceedings

150

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study distributed control design for discrete-event systems (DES) in the framework of supervisory control theory. Our DES comprise multiple agents, acting independently except for specifications on 'global' behavior. The central problem investigated is how to synthesize 'local' controllers for individual agents such that the resultant controlled behavior is identical with that achieved by global supervision.The investigation is carried out with both language-and state-based models. In the language-based setting, a supervisor localization algorithm is developed that solves the problem in a top-down fashion: first, compute a global supervisor, then decompose it into local controllers. For large-scale DES where a global supervisor might not be feasibly computable owing to state explosion, a decomposition-aggregation solution procedure is established. In the state-based setting, specifically that of 'state tree structures' (STS), a counterpart supervisor localization algorithm is developed having potential to exploit the known efficiency of STS for large-DES control design.ii Acknowledgements It is my great honour and pleasure to study under the supervision of Professor W.M.Wonham, to whom I would like to express my deepest gratitude for his patient guidance and inspiring comments throughout the course of study. Learning closely from him, I have begun to understand and appreciate the rigorous attitude and systematic methodology toward research, the far-reaching value being unmeasurable in terms of the amount of knowledge. In addition, I am grateful to him and his wife, Anne, for their warm care and help in life.

show abstract

“…Several original approaches have been proposed to solve this problem by means of formal languages approaches using automata [1], [8], [11], [12]. On the contrary, Petri Nets (PNs) have not received much attention in this context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralized Supervisory Control of Petri Nets with Monitor Places

Basile

Giua²,

Seatzu³

2007

2007 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we study the problem of determining a set of decentralized monitors for place/transition nets to enforce a global specification on the net behavior given in terms of Generalized Mutual Exclusion Constraints (GMECs). We generalize our previous results in this topic. In particular, the novel contribution here consists in removing the restrictive assumption that the weights of the GMECs must be positive, while we still assume that all transitions are controllable and observable, and the support of each decentralized GMEC is a singleton. The main feature of the proposed solution is that it guarantees fairness among places.

show abstract

Decentralized supervisory control with communicating controllers

Cited by 133 publications

References 26 publications

Finding the weakest link(s): Coalition games for decentralized discrete-event control

Finding the weakest link(s): Coalition games for decentralized discrete-event control

Supervisor Localization: A Top-Down Approach to Distributed Control of Discrete-Event Systems

Decentralized Supervisory Control of Petri Nets with Monitor Places

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About