Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interacting behavioral Petri nets analysis for distributed causal model-based diagnosis

  • Published:
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper deals with the problem of spatially distributed causal model-based diagnosis on interacting behavioral petri nets (BPNs). The system to be diagnosed comprises different interacting subsystems (each modeled as a BPN) and the diagnostic system is defined as a multi-agent system where each agent is designed to diagnose a particular subsystem on the basis of its local model, the local received observation and the information exchanged with the neighboring agents. The interactions between subsystems are captured by tokens that may pass from one net model to another via bordered places. The diagnostic reasoning scheme is accomplished locally within each agent by exploiting classical analysis techniques of Petri nets like reachability graph and invariant analysis. Once local diagnoses are obtained, agents begin to communicate to ensure that such diagnoses are consistent and recover completely the results that would be obtained by a centralized agent having a global view about the whole system. The paper concludes with an empirical comparison, in terms of the running time, of two implementations of Petri net analysis techniques used as a distributed diagnostic reasoning schemes.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For instance, the admissible values of a state \(s\) could be \(\{normal, abnormal\}\), but if the model were a pure fault model, the only modeled value would be the second one.

  2. This is a common assumption when modeling the causal behavior of a given system without taking into account temporal aspects.

References

  1. Anglano, C., & Portinale, L. (1994). B-W Analysis: A backward reachability analysis for diagnostic problem solving suitable to parallel implementation. LNCS: Application and Theory of Petri Nets (pp. 39–58).

  2. Baldan, P., Corradini, A., Ehrig, H., & Heckel, R. (2001). Compositional modeling of reactive systems using open nets. In K. Larsen & M. Nielsen (Eds.), Proceedings of CONCUR 2001 (Vol. 2154, pp. 502–518)., of LNCS New York: Springer.

  3. Bennoui, H., & Chaoui, A. (2007). Backward reachability analysis based on BPNs to model-based diagnosis with relationships among symptoms. International Review on Computers and Software, 4(2), 350–356.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bennoui, H., Chaoui, A., & Barkaoui, K. (2009). Distributed causal model-based diagnosis based on interacting behavioral Petri nets. In Proceedings of the 8th international symposium on parallel and distributed computing (ISPDC’09) (pp. 99–106).

  5. Bennoui, H., Maouche, M., & Bettaz, M. (1999). Une approche pour le diagnostic des pannes dans les réseaux. In Actes du CFIP’99 (Hermès Edition, pp. 433–445).

  6. Benveniste, A., Fabre, E., Haar, S., & Jard, C. (2003). Diagnosis of asynchronous discrete event systems: a net unfolding appraoch. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 5, 714–727.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Bocaniala, C., & da Costa, J. S. (2004). Novel framework for using causal models in distributed fault diagnosis. In The workshop on advances in control and diagnosis, Karlsruhe, Germany (pp. 142–147).

  8. Cabasino, M., Giua, A., Pocci, M., & Seatzu, C. (2011). Discrete event diagnosis using labeled petri nets. An application to manufacturing systems. Control Engineering Practice, 19(9), 989–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cabasino, M. P., Giua, A., & Seatzu, C. (2010). Fault detection for discrete event systems using petri nets with unobservable transitions. Automatica, 46(9), 1531–1539.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Console, L., & Torasso, P. (1990). Hypothetical reasoning in causal models. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 5, 83–124.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Console, L., & Torasso, P. (1991). A spectrum of logical definitions of model-based diagnosis. Computational Intelligence, 7(3), 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. ElAyeb, B., Marquis, P., & Rusinowitch, M. (1990). A new diagnosis approach by deduction and abduction. In International workshop on expert systems in engineering, LNAI (pp. 32–46).

  13. Genç, S., & Lafortune, S. (2005). A distributed algorithm for on-line diagnosis of place-bordered Petri nets. In IFAC world congress (pp. 04–08).

  14. Giua, A., Corona, D., & Seatzu, C. (2005). State estimation of \(\lambda \)-free labeled petri nets with contact-free nondeterministic transitions. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications, 15(1), 85–108.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Giua, A., Jùlvez, J., & Seatzu, C. (2004). Marking estimation of petri nets with pairs of nondeterministic transitions. Asian Journal of Control (Special Issue on the Control of Discrete Event Systems), 6, 270–280.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Giua, A., & Seatzu, C. (2005). Fault detection for discrete event systems using petri nets with unobservale transitions. In Proceedings of CDC-ECC’05: 44th international conference on decision and control and European control conference (pp. 6323–6328).

  17. Jiroveanu, G., & Boel, R. K. (2005). Multi-agent distributed contextual diagnosis for large Petri net models. In Proceedings of the workshop on control of hybrid and discrete event systems (pp. 185–214).

  18. Jiroveanu, G., & Boel, R. K. (2005) Petri net model-based distributed diagnosis for large interacting systems. In Proceedings of DX’05 (pp. 25–30).

  19. Kalech, M., & Kaminka, G. (2005). Towards model-based diagnosis of coordination failures. In Proceedings of American association for, artificial intelligence (AAAI05) (pp. 102–107).

  20. Lafortune, S., Teneketzis, D., Sampath, M., Sengupta, R., & Sinnamohideen, K. (2001). Failure diagnosis of dynamic systems: An approach based on discrete event systems. In The American control conference (pp. 2058–2071).

  21. Lautenbach, K., Philippi, S., & Pinl, A. (2006). Bayesian networks and Petri nets. In In E. Schnieder (Ed.), Entwurf komplexer Autimatisierungssysteme, EKA 9. Braunschweig: Fachtagung.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Micalizio, R., & Torasso, P. (2008). Supervision and diagnosis of joint actions in multi-agent plans. In Proceedings of of 7th interenational conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2008) (pp. 1375–1378).

  23. Murata, T. (1989). Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(4), 541–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Peterka, G., & Murata, T. (1989). Proof procedure and answer extraction in Petri net model of logic programs. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 15(2), 209–217.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Poole, D. (1989). Normality and faults in logic-based diagnosis. In The 11th international joint conference on, artificial intelligence (pp. 1304–1310).

  26. Portinale, L. (1993). Exploiting T-invariant analysis in diagnostic reasoning on a Petri net model. Application and Theory of Petri Nets, LNCS, 691(1), 339–356.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Portinale, L. (1996). Improving model-based diagnosis through algebraic analysis: The Petri net challenge. In The 13th national conference on artificial intelligence-AAAI’96 (pp. 952–958).

  28. Portinale, L. (1997). Behavioral Petri nets: A model for diagnostic knowledge representation and reasoning. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. Part B: Cybernetics, 27(2), 184–195.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Roos, N., Teije, A., Bos, A., & Witteveen, C. (2002). Multi-agent diagnosis with spatially distributed knowledge. In BNAIC’02 (pp. 275–282).

  30. Roos, N., ten Teije, A., & Witteveen, C. (2003). A protocol for multi-agent diagnosis with spatially distributed knowledge. In Proceedings of international conference on, autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS03) (pp. 655–661).

  31. Roos, N., ten Teije, A., & Witteveen, C. (2004). Reaching diagnostic agreement in multi-agent diagnosis. In Proceedings of the third international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems-volume 3, AAMAS ’04.

  32. Roos, N., & Witteveen, C. (2005). Diagnosis of plan execution and the executing agent. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (LNAI), 3698, 357–366.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ryan, M. (2008). Exploiting subgraph structure in multi-robot path planning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 31, 497–542.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Salido, M. A., & Barber, F. (2006). Distributed csps by graph partitioning. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 183, 491–498.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Sampath, M., Sengupta, R., Lafortune, S., Sinnamohideen, K., & Teneketzis, D. (1995). Diagnosibility of discrete event systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 40(9), 1555–1575.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Su, R., & Wonham, W. M. (2004). A model of component consistency in distributed diagnosis. In IFAC workshop on discrete event systems (WODES’04) (pp. 427–432).

  37. Wittenven, C., Roos, N., van der Krogt, R., & de Weerdt, M. (2005). Diagnosis of single and multi-agent plans. In Proceedings of international conference on, autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS05) (pp. 805–812).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science Department, University of Biskra, 07000 , Biskra, Algeria

    Hammadi Bennoui

Authors
  1. Hammadi Bennoui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hammadi Bennoui.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bennoui, H. Interacting behavioral Petri nets analysis for distributed causal model-based diagnosis. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 28, 155–181 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-013-9221-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-013-9221-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation