The Impact of Requirement Splitting on the Efficiency of Supervisory Control Synthesis

Abstract

DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User Agreement:

Modeling Guidelines for Component-Based Supervisory Control Synthesis

“…The third modeling guideline expresses to use the abstraction level of the inputs and outputs of the control hardware for the plant models. These three modeling guidelines extend the set of modeling guidelines previously published in [10,11].…”

“…Multilevel synthesis allows to apply synthesis to a subsystem of component and requirement models, as long as all component models related to these requirement models are included in this subsystem. Therefore, it is important to formulate small requirement models, as shown in [11].…”

“…The effect of the first modeling guideline is that each individual plant model is modeled as small as possible. Besides that smaller models are easier to understand and maintain over time, having smaller plant models has a significant positive effect on the efficiency of module-based synthesis techniques, like modular synthesis of [22] and multilevel synthesis of [15], as shown in [11]. The second guideline is a natural extension to the first guideline.…”

The Road Ahead for Supervisor Synthesis

“…Multilevel synthesis for Lock III produces local supervisors that in total require 1.8 • 23 states, as compared to the aforementioned 6.0 • 10 24 states for a monolithic supervisor. It turns out to be very important for the efficiency of multilevel synthesis to split a requirement into smaller requirements when possible [8]. The reason is that this gives rise to fewer relations between the different plant components, so that smaller clusters of components can be synthesized at the start.…”

“…This requirement can be divided into 13 smaller requirements: (1) split the 3 disjuncts; (2) disentangle references to multiple system states (e.g., "not closed"); and (3) disentangle references to multiple plant components (e.g., gates consist of multiple components). Overall, in [8], the 142 requirements for Lock III are split into 358 requirements. As a result, the number of states required for the local supervisors drops to 4.5 • 10 19 states.…”