skip to main content
10.1145/2535838.2535875acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespoplConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Battery transition systems

Published:08 January 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

The analysis of the energy consumption of software is an important goal for quantitative formal methods. Current methods, using weighted transition systems or energy games, model the energy source as an ideal resource whose status is characterized by one number, namely the amount of remaining energy. Real batteries, however, exhibit behaviors that can deviate substantially from an ideal energy resource. Based on a discretization of a standard continuous battery model, we introduce {\em battery transition systems}. In this model, a battery is viewed as consisting of two parts -- the available-charge tank and the bound-charge tank. Any charge or discharge is applied to the available-charge tank. Over time, the energy from each tank diffuses to the other tank.

Battery transition systems are infinite state systems that, being not well-structured, fall into no decidable class that is known to us. Nonetheless, we are able to prove that the $\omega$-regular model-checking problem is decidable for battery transition systems. We also present a case study on the verification of control programs for energy-constrained semi-autonomous robots.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

d3_left_t7.mp4

mp4

358.4 MB

References

  1. R. Adany and T. Tamir. Online algorithm for battery utilization in electric vehicles. In FedCSIS, pages 349--356, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. Alur, C. Courcoubetis, and D. L. Dill. Model-checking for real-time systems. In LICS, pages 414--425, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. S. Bardin, A. Finkel, J. Leroux, and P. Schnoebelen. Flat acceleration in symbolic model checking. In ATVA, volume 3707 of LNCS, pages 474--488, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. L. Benini, G. Castelli, A. Macii, E. Macii, M. Poncino, and R. Scarsi. Extending lifetime of portable systems by battery scheduling. In DATE, pages 197--203, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. G. G. Botte, V. R. Subramanian, and R. White. Mathematical modeling of secondary lithium batteries. Electrochimica Acta, 45 (15): 2595--2609, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. A. Chakrabarti, L. de Alfaro, T. Henzinger, and M. Stoelinga. Resource interfaces. In EMSOFT, volume 2855 of LNCS, pages 117--133, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. K. Chatterjee and L. Doyen. Energy parity games. Theor. Comput. Sci., 458: 49--60, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. K. Chatterjee, L. Doyen, T. A. Henzinger, and J. F. Raskin. Generalized mean-payoff and energy games. In FSTTCS, volume 8 of LIPIcs, pages 505--516, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. C. Chiasserini and R. Rao. Energy efficient battery management. J. on Selected Areas in Communications, 19 (7): 1235--1245, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. M. Doyle, T. F. Fuller, and J. Newman. Modeling of galvanostatic charge and discharge of the lithium/polymer/insertion cell. J. of the Electrochemical Society, 140 (6): 1993, 1526--1533.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. A. Finkel and P. Schnoebelen. Parallel program schemata. J. of Computer and System Sciences, 3 (2): 147--195, 1969. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. A. Finkel and P. Schnoebelen. Well-structured transition systems everywhere! Theor. Comput. Sci., 256 (1--2): 63--92, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. T. F. Fuller, M. Doyle, and J. Newman. Relaxation phenomena in lithiumion-insertion cells. J. of the Electrochemical Society, 141 (4): 982--990, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. S. Gold. A PSPICE macromodel for lithium-ion batteries. In Annual Battery Conference on Applications and Advances, pages 215--222, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. S. C. Hageman. Simple PSPICE models let you simulate common battery types. Electronic Design News, 38 (22): 117--129, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. R. Jongerden. Model-based energy analysis of battery powered systems. PhD thesis, University of Twente, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. M. R. Jongerden and B. R. Haverkort. Which battery model to use? IET Software, 3 (6): 445--457, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. M. R. Jongerden, A. Mereacre, H. C. Bohnenkamp, B. R. Haverkort, and J.-P. Katoen. Computing optimal schedules for battery usage in embedded systems. IEEE Trans. Industrial Informatics, 6 (3): 276--286, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. K. G. Larsen, S. Laursen, and J. Srba. Action investment energy games. In MEMICS, volume 7721 of LNCS, pages 155--167, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. J. Manwell and J. McGowan. Lead acid battery storage model for hybrid energy systems. Solar Energy, 50 (5): 399--405, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. E. Podlaha and H. Cheh. Modeling of cylindrical alkaline cells. J. of the Electrochemical Society, 14 (1): 15--27, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. D. Rakhmatov and S. Vrudhula. An analytical high-level battery model for use in energy management of portable electronic systems. In International Conference on Computer Aided Design (ICCAD), pages 488--493, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. S. Safra and M. Vardi. On ω-automata and temporal logic. In STOC, pages 127--137, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. M. Vardi. An automata-theoretic approach to linear temporal logic. In phLogics for Concurrency: Structure versus Automata, volume 1043 of LNCS, pages 238--266, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Battery transition systems

      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
        POPL '14: Proceedings of the 41st ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages
        January 2014
        702 pages
        ISBN:9781450325448
        DOI:10.1145/2535838

        Copyright © 2014 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: 8 January 2014

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        POPL '14 Paper Acceptance Rate51of220submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate824of4,130submissions,20%

        Upcoming Conference

        POPL '25

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader