Upload
universitaet-rostock
View
743
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
AWPN 2010
Citation preview
Karsten Wolf
DecidabilityDecidability IssuesIssues forforDecentralizedDecentralized ControllabilityControllability of Open Netsof Open Nets
read more: www.service-technology.org
Controllability
centralizeddecentralized
autonomous
read more: www.service-technology.org
Decentralized ControllabilityAdaptability
read more: www.service-technology.org
Decentralized ControllabilityAdaptability
read more: www.service-technology.org
Decentralized ControllabilityAdaptability
read more: www.service-technology.org
Decentralized ControllabilityAdaptability Realizability
read more: www.service-technology.org
Decentralized ControllabilityAdaptability Realizability
read more: www.service-technology.org
So far: decidable for…
centralizeddecentralized
autonomous
Finite statedeadlock freedomweak termination
Acyclicdeadlock freedom(= weak termination)
Finite statedeadlock freedom
read more: www.service-technology.org
Decentralized (acyclic)
-Start with centralized most permissive partner, unrolled to tree-Remove nodes (subtrees) where actions of different ports do not commute
?a ?b
!a !b
!a disables !b
!a !b
Does not work on graphs
read more: www.service-technology.org
Post‘s Correspondance Problem
Given: finitely many pairs of words
(a,aba) , (ab,bb), (baa,aa).
Problem: Is there a (nonempty) sequence of pairs such that left words concatenate to the same result as right words?
yes, 1 3 2 3:
a baa ab baa = aba aa bb aa.
Problem undecidable. Proof by reduction from halting problem of TM –
difference between left and right corresponds to TM
configuration
read more: www.service-technology.org
Reduce Decentralized Controllability to PCP
Idea: Controller corresponds to solution of PCP
(a,aba) , (ab,bb), (baa,aa).
Left: 1 a 3 baa 2 ab 3 baa #
Right: 1 aba 3 aa 2 bb 3 aa #
Service
-Checks whether input is solution
-Checks whether input is valid
-Goes to deadlock if anything goes wrong
Impossible at the same timedecide internally, check one
read more: www.service-technology.org
Service (Sketch)
b b
1,2,3
1,2,3
# #
1 12 2 3 3
(a,aba) , (ab,bb), (baa,aa)
a abaab bb baa aa
# #a a
c c
Weak terminating controller must be bothvalid and solution
read more: www.service-technology.org
What about deadlock freedom?
Can avoid deadlock by sending infinite sequence
What about centralized controllability?
Centralized controller can detect internal decision ofservice according to different progress at left and right ports
after detection proceed with either none-solution or invalid sequence
read more: www.service-technology.org
What about the others?[Tripakis]Control problem = languagePCP is encoded in language to be enforced
[Bontemps & Schobbens]
-Internal decision: send either left or right sequence to A, indices to B-A may talk to B-In the end, A and B must return ‚left‘
or ‚right‘
(claim: impossible if and only if PCP has solution)implicitly requires unbounded memory
In our setting: „may talk to each other“
= centralized setting, decidable
read more: www.service-technology.org
Conclusion-Decentralized controllability for weak termination is undecidable
-This result apparently not covered by previous approaches
-Realizability, adaptability most likely undecidable
-Decentralized controllability for deadlock freedom still open
-Centralized and autonomous settings provide useful lower and upper bounds
-Floor open for approximations, heuristics, subclasses, …