离散事件系统满足可诊断性是设计故障诊断算法的前提,因此研究可诊断性验证方法具有重要意义.故障发生后无死锁是研究可诊断性问题常见的假设之一,限制了可诊断性验证方法的应用范围.本文在去掉故障发生后无死锁假设的基础上,首先提出了标签可达图的概念和构建算法,其次提出了一种新的可诊断性验证算法来验证有界Petri网是否满足可诊断性.最后通过例子详细说明可诊断性验证算法的计算过程.
It is important to study diagnosability verification method because it is the premise of designing fault diagnosis algorithm for discrete event system to satisfy the diagnosability. Deadlock-free after a fault is one of the common assumptions in the research field of diagnosability, which limits the application scope of diagnosability verification method. In this paper, we remove the assumption of deadlock-free after the occurrence of a fault. The concept and construction algorithm of the label reachability graph are proposed first. Then a new diagnosability verification algorithm is given to verify diagnosability of bounded Petri nets. Finally, an example is given to illustrate the calculation process of the algorithm.
[1] GIUA A, SEATZU C. Observability of place/transition nets[J]. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2002, 47(9): 1424-1437. DOI:10.1109/TAC.2002.802769.
[2] 郝晋渊, 孙丹丹, 郝真鸣, 等. 基于标签Petri网的自动制造系统初始资源配置优化[J]. 电子测量与仪器学报, 2020, 34(8): 30-36. DOI:10.13382/j.jemi.B1902845.
[3] 刘富春,曹越,赵锐,等.离散事件系统最小故障诊断基的求解与应用[J]. 信息与控制, 2020, 49(5): 521-526. DOI:10.13976/j.cnki.xk.2020.9632.
[4] LIU F C, YANG P B, ZHAO R, et al. Verification of safe diagnosability of stochastic discrete-event systems[J]. Int J Control, 2020: 1-8. DOI:10.1080/00207179.2020.1795269.
[5] BOUSSIF A, GHAZEL M, BASILIO J C. Intermittent fault diagnosability of discrete event systems: an overview of automaton-based approaches[J]. Discrete Event Dyn Syst, 2021, 31(1): 59-102. DOI:10.1007/s10626-020-00324-y.
[6] GENG X N, OUYANG D T, HAN C. Verifying diagnosability of discrete event system with logical formula[J]. Chin J Electron, 2020, 29(2): 304-311. DOI:10.1049/cje.2020.01.008.
[7] 阙蔡雄,刘富春,赵锐,等.基于Petri网诊断器的离散事件系统模式故障的在线诊断[J].控制理论与应用, 2020, 37(7): 1621-1627. DOI:10.7641/CTA.2020.90427.
[8] SAMPATH M, SENGUPTA R, LAFORTUNE S, et al. Diagnosability of discrete-event systems[J]. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 1995, 40(9): 1555-1575. DOI:10.1109/9.412626.
[9] CABASINO M P, GIUA A, LAFORTUNE S, et al. A new approach for diagnosability analysis of petri nets using verifier nets[J]. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2012, 57(12): 3104-3117. DOI:10.1109/TAC.2012.2200372.
[10] QIU W B, KUMAR R. Decentralized failure diagnosis of discrete event systems[J]. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A: Syst Hum, 2006, 36(2): 384-395. DOI:10.1109/TSMCA.2005.853503.
[11] LIU J F, ZHOU Z H, WANG Z S. Online fault diagnosis in partially observed Petri nets[J]. Int J Ind Syst Eng, 2018, 30(2): 205. DOI:10.1504/ijise.2018.094843.
[12] BASILE F, CHIACCHIO P, DE TOMMASI G. An efficient approach for online diagnosis of discrete event systems[J]. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2009, 54(4): 748-759. DOI:10.1109/TAC.2009.2014932.
[13] DOTOLI M, FANTI M P, MANGINI A M, et al. On-line fault detection in discrete event systems by Petri nets and integer linear programming[J]. Automatica, 2009, 45(11): 2665-2672. DOI:10.1016/j.automatica.2009.07.021.
[14] BASILE F, CHIACCHIO P, DE TOMMASI G. On K-diagnosability of Petri nets via integer linear programming[J]. Automatica, 2012, 48(9): 2047-2058. DOI:10.1016/j.automatica.2012.06.039.
[15] LI B, KHLIF-BOUASSIDA M, TOGUYÉNI A. On-the-fly diagnosability analysis of bounded and unbounded labeled petri nets using verifier nets[J]. Int J Appl Math Comput Sci, 2018, 28(2): 269-281. DOI:10.2478/amcs-2018-0019.
[16] LEFEBVRE D. On-line fault diagnosis with partially observed petri nets[J]. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2014, 59(7): 1919-1924. DOI:10.1109/TAC.2013.2294617.
[17] LEFEBVRE D. Fault diagnosis and prognosis with partially observed petri nets[J]. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern: Syst, 2014, 44(10): 1413-1424. DOI:10.1109/TSMC.2014.2311760.
[18] JIROVEANU G, BOEL R K. The diagnosability of petri net models using minimal explanations[J]. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2010, 55(7): 1663-1668. DOI:10.1109/TAC.2010.2046106.
[19] PAIVA P R R, CARVALHO L K, BASILIO J C. Diagnosability and online diagnosis of discrete-event systems modeled by acyclic labeled Petri nets[J]. IFAC-Papers On line, 2017, 50(1): 13630-13635. DOI:10.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.2392.
[20] RAN N, SU H Y, WANG S G. An improved approach to test diagnosability of bounded petri nets[J]. IEEE/CAA J Autom Sin, 2017, 4(2): 297-303. DOI:10.1109/JAS.2017.7510406.
[21] LAFORTUNE S, LIN F, HADJICOSTIS C N. On the history of diagnosability and opacity in discrete event systems[J]. Annu Rev Control, 2018, 45: 257-266. DOI:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2018.04.002.
[22] GERMANOS V, HAAR S, KHOMENKO V, et al. Diagnosability under weak fairness[J]. ACM Trans Embed Comput Syst, 2015, 14(4): 1-19. DOI:10.1145/2832910.
[23] LEFEBVRE D, LECLERCQ E. Diagnosability of Petri nets with observation graphs[J]. Discrete Event Dyn Syst, 2016, 26(3): 539-559. DOI:10.1007/s10626-014-0207-5.
[24] CHEN Q R, YIN L, WU N Q, et al. Diagnosability of vector discrete-event systems using predicates[J]. IEEE Access, 2019, 7: 147143-147155. DOI:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2945132.
[25] RAN N, WANG S G, SU H Y, et al. Fault diagnosis for discrete event systems modeled by bounded petri nets[J]. Asian J Control, 2017, 19(4): 1532-1541. DOI:10.1002/asjc.1500. (
