Abstract
Systems prone to faults are often equipped with a controller whose aim consists in restricting the behaviour of the system in order to perform a diagnosis. Such a task is called active diagnosis. However to avoid that the controller degrades the system in view of diagnosis, a second objective in terms of quality of service is usually assigned to the controller. In the framework of stochastic systems, a possible specification, called safe active diagnosis requires that the probability of correctness of the infinite (random) run is non null. We introduce and study here two alternative specifications that are in many contexts more realistic. The notion of (γ,v)-fault freeness associates with each run a value depending on the discounted length of its correct prefix where the discounting factor is γ. The controller has to ensure that the average of this value is above the threshold v. The notion of α-resiliency requires that asymptotically, at every time step, a proportion greater than α of correct runs remain correct. From a semantic point of view, we determine the equivalences and (non) implications between the three notions of degradations both for finite and infinite systems. From an algorithmic point of view, we establish the border between decidability and undecidability of the diagnosability problems. Furthermore in the positive case, we exhibit their precise complexity and propose a synthesis of the controller which may require an infinite memory.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In this paper, we assume some familiarity with basic complexity notions, and refer the interested reader to Papadimitriou (1994).
References
Baier C, Katoen J-Ps (2008) Principles of model checking. MIT Press
Bertrand N, Genest B, Gimbert H (2009) Qualitative determinacy and decidability of stochastic games with signals. In: Proceedings of LICS’09. IEEE Computer Society, pp 319–328
Bertrand N, Fabre E, Haar S, Haddad S, Hélouët L (2014a) Active diagnosis for probabilistic systems. In: Proceedings of FoSSaCS’14, volume 8412 of lecture notes in computer science. Springer, pp 29–42
Bertrand N, Haddad S, Lefaucheux E (2014b) Foundation of diagnosis and predictability in probabilistic systems. In: Proceedings of FSTTCS’14, volume 29 of Leibniz international proceedings in informatics. Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, pp 417–429
Chatterjee K, Doyen L, Henzinger TA (2013) A survey of partial-observation stochastic parity games. Formal Methods Syst Des 43(2):268–284
Gimbert H, Oualhadj Y (2010) Probabilistic automata on finite words: decidable and undecidable problems. In: ICALP 2010, volume 6199 of lecture notes in computer science. Springer, pp 527–538
Haar S, Haddad S, Melliti T, Schwoon S (2017) Optimal constructions for active diagnosis. J Comput Syst Sci 83(1):101–120
Jiang S, Huang Z, Chandra V, Kumar R (2001) A polynomial algorithm for testing diagnosability of discrete-event systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 46 (8):1318–1321
Papadimitriou CH (1994) Computational complexity. Addison-Wesley
Paz A (1971) Introduction to probabilistic automata. Academic Press
Sampath M, Lafortune S, Teneketzis D (1998) Active diagnosis of discrete-event systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 43(7):908–929
Thorsley D, Teneketzis D (2005) Diagnosability of stochastic discrete-event systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 50(4):476–492
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The work of Serge Haddad was supported by the project ERC EQualIS (FP7-308087).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bertrand, N., Haddad, S. & Lefaucheux, E. Diagnosis and Degradation Control for Probabilistic Systems. Discrete Event Dyn Syst 30, 695–723 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10626-020-00320-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10626-020-00320-2