2004
DOI: 10.1016/s1474-6670(17)30767-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diagnosis of modular discrete event systems 1

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The same consideration motivates our choice of Petri net structures as a means to mitigate the combinatorial explosion that occurs when modular models are converted to monolithic ones. Our approach is different from that in related work such as [4], [8], [13], [14] and thus our work is complementary to these references.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The same consideration motivates our choice of Petri net structures as a means to mitigate the combinatorial explosion that occurs when modular models are converted to monolithic ones. Our approach is different from that in related work such as [4], [8], [13], [14] and thus our work is complementary to these references.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The methodology termed the "Diagnoser Approach", introduced in [2] and subsequently extended in several works including [3], [4], is of particular relevance to the present paper. The key feature of the Diagnoser Approach is the use of a special discrete-event process called the diagnoser.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The cycles in the diagnoser are used to determine when the DES is diagnosable. Recently, fault diagnosis of DES has been addressed through a distributed approach allowing breaking down the complexity when dealing with large and complex systems (Benveniste, et al, 2003;O. Contant, et al, 2004;Debouk, et al, 2000;Genc & Lafortune, 2003;Jiroveanu & Boel, 2003;Pencolé, 2004;Arámburo-Lizárraga, et al, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In (Debouk, et al, 2000) it is proposed a decentralized and modular approach to perform failure diagnosis based on Sampath's results (Sampath, et al, 1995). In (Contant, et al, 2004) and (Pencolé, 2004) the authors presented incremental algorithms to perform diagnosability analysis based on (Sampath, et al, 1995) in a distributed way; they consider systems whose components evolve by the occurrence of events; the parallel composition leads to a complete system model intractable. In (Genc & Lafortune, 2003) it is proposed a method that handles the reachability graph of the PN model in order to perform the analysis similarly to (Sampath, et al, 1995); based on design considerations the model is partitioned into two labelled PN and it is proven that the distributed diagnosis is equivalent to the centralized diagnosis; later, (Genc & Lafortune, 2005) extend the results to systems modeled by several labelled PN that share places, and present an algorithm to determine distributed diagnosis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%