skip to main content
10.1145/1837274.1837462acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

CPS foundations

Published:13 June 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper argues that cyber-physical systems present a sub-stantial intellectual challenge that requires changes in both theories of computation and dynamical systems theory. The CPS problem is not the union of cyber and physical problems, but rather their intersection, and as such it demands models that embrace both. Two complementary approaches are identified: cyberizing the physical (CtP) means to endow physical subsystems with cyber-like abstractions and interfaces; and physicalizing the cyber (PtC) means to endow software and network components with abstractions and interfaces that represent their dynamics in time.

References

  1. F. Baccelli, G. Cohen, G. J. Olster, and J. P. Quadrat. Synchronization and Linearity, An Algebra for Discrete Event Systems. Wiley, New York, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. G. Berry. The effectiveness of synchronous languages for the development of safety-critical systems. White paper, Esterel Technologies, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. C. G. Cassandras. Discrete Event Systems, Modeling and Performance Analysis. Irwin, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. G. Cengic, O. Ljungkrantz, and K. Akesson. Formal modeling of function block applications running in IEC 61499 execution runtime. In 11th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, Prague, Czech Republic, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. P. Derler, E. A. Lee, and S. Matic. Simulation and implementation of the ptides programming model. In IEEE International Symposium on Distributed Simulation and Real Time Applications (DS-RT), Vancouver, Canada, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. S. A. Edwards and E. A. Lee. The case for the precision timed (PRET) machine. In Design Automation Conference (DAC), San Diego, CA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. C. Eidson. Measurement, Control, and Communication Using IEEE 1588. Springer, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. J. C. Eidson, E. A. Lee, S. Matic, S. A. Seshia, and J. Zou. Time-centric models for designing embedded cyber-physical systems. Technical Report UCB/EECS-2009-135, EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley, October 9 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. J. Eker, J. W. Janneck, E. A. Lee, J. Liu, X. Liu, J. Ludvig, S. Neuendorffer, S. Sachs, and Y. Xiong. Taming heterogeneity---the Ptolemy approach. Proceedings of the IEEE, 91(2):127--144, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. T. H. Feng and E. A. Lee. Real-time distributed discrete-event execution with fault tolerance. In Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium (RTAS), St. Louis, MO, USA, 2008. IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. G. Gaderer, P. Loschmidt, E. G. Cota, J. H. Lewis, J. Serrano, M. Cattin, P. Alvarez, P. M. Oliveira Fernandes Moreira, T. Wlostowski, J. Dedic, C. Prados, M. Kreider, R. Baer, S. Rauch, and T. Fleck. The white rabbit project. In Int. Conf. on Accelerator and Large Experimental Physics Control Systems, Kobe, Japan, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Society. 1588: IEEE standard for a precision clock synchronization protocol for networked measurement and control systems. Standard specification, IEEE, November 8 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. S. Johannessen. Time synchronization in a local area network. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pages 61--69, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. G. Karsai, J. Sztipanovits, A. Ledeczi, and T. Bapty. Model-integrated development of embedded software. Proceedings of the IEEE, 91(1):145--164, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. R. Kirner and P. Puschner. Obstacles in worst-case execution time analysis. In Symposium on Object Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (ISORC), pages 333--339, Orlando, FL, USA, 2008. IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. H. Kopetz. Real-Time Systems: Design Principles for Distributed Embedded Applications. Springer, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. H. Kopetz and G. Bauer. The time-triggered architecture. Proceedings of the IEEE, 91(1):112--126, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. E. A. Lee. Modeling concurrent real-time processes using discrete events. Annals of Software Engineering, 7:25--45, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. E. A. Lee. The problem with threads. Computer, 39(5):33--42, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. E. A. Lee. Computing needs time. Communications of the ACM, 52(5):70--79, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. E. A. Lee and H. Zheng. Operational semantics of hybrid systems. In M. Morari and L. Thiele, editors, Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control (HSCC), volume LNCS 3414, pages pp. 25--53, Zurich, Switzerland, 2005. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. E. A. Lee and H. Zheng. Leveraging synchronous language principles for heterogeneous modeling and design of embedded systems. In EMSOFT, Salzburg, Austria, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. I. Lee, S. Davidson, and V. Wolfe. Motivating time as a first class entity. Technical Report MS-CIS-87-54, Dept. of Comp. and Infor. Science, Univ. of Penn, Aug. (Revised Oct.) 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. X. Liu and E. A. Lee. CPO semantics of timed interactive actor networks. Theoretical Computer Science, 409(1):110--125, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. S. R. Madden, M. J. Franklin, J. M. Hellerstein, and W. Hong. Tag: A tiny aggregation service for ad-hoc sensor networks. In ACM Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation (OSDI), 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. O. Maler, Z. Manna, and A. Pnueli. From timed to hybrid systems. In Real-Time: Theory and Practice, REX Workshop, pages 447--484. Springer-Verlag, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. Verifying hybrid systems. Hybrid Systems, pages 4--35, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. A. K. Mok. Annotating ada for real-time program synthesis. In IEEE Conference on Computer Assurance (COMPASS). IEEE, 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. R. Olfati-Saber, J. A. Fax, and R. M. Murray. Consensus and cooperation in networkedmulti-agent systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 95(1):215--233, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. J. L. Paunicka, D. E. Corman, and B. R. Mendel. A CORBA-based middleware solution for UAVs. In Fourth International Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing, pages 261--267, Magdeburg, Germany, 2001. IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. P. Ramadge and W. Wonham. The control of discrete event systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(1):81--98, 1989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. D. C. Schmidt, D. L. Levine, and S. Mungee. The design of the TAO real-time object request broker. Computer Communications, 21(4), 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. S. A. Seshia and A. Rakhlin. Game-theoretic timing analysis. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD), pages 575--582. IEEE Press, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. L. Thiele, E. Wandeler, and N. Stoimenov. Real-time interfaces for composing real-time systems. In EMSOFT, Seoul, Korea, 2006. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. R. Wilhelm, J. Engblom, A. Ermedahl, N. Holsti, S. Thesing, D. Whalley, G. Bernat, C. Ferdinand, R. Heckmann, T. Mitra, F. Mueller, I. Puaut, P. Puschner, J. Staschulat, and P. Stenstr. The worst-case execution-time problem - overview of methods and survey of tools. ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems (TECS), 7(3):1--53, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. B. P. Zeigler, H. Praehofer, and T. G. Kim. Theory of Modeling and Simulation. Academic Press, 2nd edition, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Y. Zhao, E. A. Lee, and J. Liu. A programming model for time-synchronized distributed real-time systems. In Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium (RTAS), Bellevue, WA, USA, 2007. IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. CPS foundations

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in
              • Published in

                cover image ACM Conferences
                DAC '10: Proceedings of the 47th Design Automation Conference
                June 2010
                1036 pages
                ISBN:9781450300025
                DOI:10.1145/1837274

                Copyright © 2010 ACM

                Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                Publisher

                Association for Computing Machinery

                New York, NY, United States

                Publication History

                • Published: 13 June 2010

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • research-article

                Acceptance Rates

                Overall Acceptance Rate1,770of5,499submissions,32%

                Upcoming Conference

                DAC '24
                61st ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference
                June 23 - 27, 2024
                San Francisco , CA , USA

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader