Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why Event Observation: Observability Revisited

  • Published:
Discrete Event Dynamic Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we revisit observability defined in Lin and Wonham (1988a). We show that although the original definition is intended for event observation with projection, its significance goes beyond its original intent. Specifically, we show that (1) supervisory control with state observation can be studied in terms of event observation; (2) supervisory control problems with event mask can be converted to problems with event projection; and (3) nondeterminism is closely related to unobservability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ben Hadj-Alouane, N., Lafortune, S., and Lin, F. 1993. Control of partially observed discrete event systems with variable lookahead maximal policies. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing, pp. 898–907.

  • Cho, H., and Marcus, S. I. 1989. Supremal and maximal sublanguages arising in supervisor synthesis problems with partial observations. Mathematical Systems Theory 22: 177–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, S. L., Lafortune, S., and Lin, F. 1992. Limited lookahead policies in supervisory control of discrete event systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 37(12): 1921–1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cieslak, R., Desclaux, C., Fawaz A., and Varaiya, P. 1988. Supervisory control of discrete-event processes with partial observations. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 33(3): 249–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heymann, M. 1990. Concurrency and discrete event control. IEEE Control Systems Magazine 10(4): 103–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heymann, M., and Lin, F. 1994. On-line control of partially observed discrete event systems. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications 4(3): 221–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heymann, M., and Lin, F. 1996. Discrete event control of nondeterministic systems. CIS Report 9601, Technion, Israel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heymann, M., and Meyer, G. 1991. An algebra of discrete event processes. NASA Technical Memorandum 102848.

  • Hoare, C. A. R. 1985. Communicating Sequential Processes, New York: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, R. 1993. Formulas for observability of discrete event dynamical systems. Proceedings of 1993 Conference on Information Sciences and Systems, pp. 581–586.

  • Kumar, R., and Shayman, M. A. 1993. Non-blocking supervisory control of nondeterministic systems via prioritized synchronization. Technical Research Report, T.R. 93-58, Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland.

  • Lin, F., and Wonham, W. M. 1988a. Decentralized supervisory control of discrete-event systems. Information Sciences 44(3), 199–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, F., and Wonham, W. M. 1988b. On observability of discrete event systems. Information Sciences 44(3): 173–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, F., and Wonham, W. M. 1990. Decentralized control and coordination of discrete event systems with partial observation. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 35(12): 1330–1337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Overkamp, A. 1994. Supervisory control for nondeterministic systems. Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Analysis and Optimization of Systems, pp. 59–65.

  • Ramadge, R. J., and Wonham, W. M. 1987. Supervisory control of a class of discrete event processes. SIAM J. Control and Optimization 25(1): 206–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramadge, P. J., and Wonham, W. M. 1989. The control of discrete event systems. Proceedings of IEEE 77(1): 81–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudie, K., and Wonham, W. M. 1992. Think globally, act locally: decentralized supervisory control. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 37(11): 1692–1708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudie, K., and Wonham, W. M. 1990. The infimal prefix-closed and observable superlanguage of a given language. Systems & Control Letters 15: 361–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampath, M., Sengupta, R., Lafortune, S., Sinnamohideen, K., and Teneketzis, D. 1994. Failure diagnosis using discrete event models. Report CGR-94-03, University of Michigan.

  • Shayman, M., and Kumar, R. 1995. Supervisory control of nondeterministic systems with driven events via prioritized synchronization and trajectory models. SIAM Journal of Control and Optimization 33(2): 469–497.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Delco Electronics Corporation, Kokomo, IN, 46904

    Changwei Cao

  2. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48202

    Feng Lin

  3. Institute of VLSI, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200030, China

    Zheng-Hui Lin

Authors
  1. Changwei Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Feng Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zheng-Hui Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cao, C., Lin, F. & Lin, ZH. Why Event Observation: Observability Revisited. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems 7, 127–149 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008226632478

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008226632478

Search

Navigation