ProbReach: Probabilistic Bounded Reachability for Uncertain Hybrid Systems
|
|
- Maud Kelley
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 ProbReach: Probabilistic Bounded Reachability for Uncertain Hybrid Systems Fedor Shmarov, Paolo Zuliani School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, UK 1 / 41
2 Introduction ProbReach tool for probabilistic reachability analysis in uncertain hybrid systems. Uncertain hybrid systems: random and nondeterministic parameters. 2 / 41
3 Introduction ProbReach tool for probabilistic reachability analysis in uncertain hybrid systems. Uncertain hybrid systems: random and nondeterministic parameters. Reachability = deciding whether a goal state is reachable. Systems with random parameters: computing probability of reachability. Nondeterministic parameters introduce a probability reachability function. 2 / 41
4 Introduction ProbReach tool for probabilistic reachability analysis in uncertain hybrid systems. Uncertain hybrid systems: random and nondeterministic parameters. Reachability = deciding whether a goal state is reachable. Systems with random parameters: computing probability of reachability. Nondeterministic parameters introduce a probability reachability function. ProbReach implements two approaches: formal and statistical. Formal approach: stronger guarantees (absolute vs. statistical). Statistical approach: lower complexity with respect to the number of parameters (constant vs. exponential). 2 / 41
5 Introduction ProbReach tool for probabilistic reachability analysis in uncertain hybrid systems. Uncertain hybrid systems: random and nondeterministic parameters. Reachability = deciding whether a goal state is reachable. Systems with random parameters: computing probability of reachability. Nondeterministic parameters introduce a probability reachability function. ProbReach implements two approaches: formal and statistical. Formal approach: stronger guarantees (absolute vs. statistical). Statistical approach: lower complexity with respect to the number of parameters (constant vs. exponential). ProbReach can be applied to realistic models. Artificial pancreas model. 2 / 41
6 Hybrid Systems reset (q1,q 2 ) jump (q1,q 2 ) init q 1 flow q1 invt q1 q 2 flow q2 invt q2 reset (q2,q 1 ) jump (q2,q 1 ) 3 / 41
7 Hybrid Systems reset (q1,q 2 ) jump (q1,q 2 ) init q 1 flow q1 invt q1 q 2 flow q2 invt q2 reset (q2,q 1 ) jump (q2,q 1 ) init and reset computable functions, flow Lipschitz-continuous ODEs, invt and jump Boolean logic formula m {>, }, f i,j computable function. i=1 ( ki j=1 ( fi,j (x) 0 )), 3 / 41
8 Bounded Reachability Reachability is undecidable even for linear hybrid systems (Alur, Courcoubetis, Henzinger, Ho. 1993). 4 / 41
9 Bounded Reachability Reachability is undecidable even for linear hybrid systems (Alur, Courcoubetis, Henzinger, Ho. 1993). Bounded reachability: computable goal predicate, and finite reachability depth, and bounded time domain in each mode. Does the hybrid system reach a goal state within a finite number of (discrete) steps? 4 / 41
10 Bounded Reachability Reachability is undecidable even for linear hybrid systems (Alur, Courcoubetis, Henzinger, Ho. 1993). Bounded reachability: computable goal predicate, and finite reachability depth, and bounded time domain in each mode. Does the hybrid system reach a goal state within a finite number of (discrete) steps? Nonlinear arithmetics (with trigonometric functions) over the reals is undecidable (Tarski, 1951). 4 / 41
11 Bounded Reachability Reachability is undecidable even for linear hybrid systems (Alur, Courcoubetis, Henzinger, Ho. 1993). Bounded reachability: computable goal predicate, and finite reachability depth, and bounded time domain in each mode. Does the hybrid system reach a goal state within a finite number of (discrete) steps? Nonlinear arithmetics (with trigonometric functions) over the reals is undecidable (Tarski, 1951). Bounded reachability is δ-decidable. δ-complete decision procedure (Gao, Avigad, Clarke. LICS 2012). 4 / 41
12 Uncertain Hybrid Systems reset (q1,q 2 )(p) jump (q1,q 2 ) (p) init(p) q 1 flow q1 (p) invt q1 (p) q 2 flow q2 (p) invt q2 (p) reset (q2,q 1 )(p) jump (q2,q 1 ) (p) 5 / 41
13 Uncertain Hybrid Systems reset (q1,q 2 )(p) jump (q1,q 2 ) (p) init(p) q 1 flow q1 (p) invt q1 (p) q 2 flow q2 (p) invt q2 (p) Parametric Hybrid System (PHS): p P parameter, P parameter space, dp dt = 0. reset (q2,q 1 )(p) jump (q2,q 1 ) (p) 5 / 41
14 Uncertain Hybrid Systems reset (q1,q 2 )(p) jump (q1,q 2 ) (p) init(p) q 1 flow q1 (p) invt q1 (p) q 2 flow q2 (p) invt q2 (p) Parametric Hybrid System (PHS): p P parameter, P parameter space, dp dt = 0. reset (q2,q 1 )(p) jump (q2,q 1 ) (p) Stochastic PHS (SPHS): PHS with random parameters. 5 / 41
15 Uncertain Hybrid Systems reset (q1,q 2 )(p) jump (q1,q 2 ) (p) init(p) q 1 flow q1 (p) invt q1 (p) q 2 flow q2 (p) invt q2 (p) Parametric Hybrid System (PHS): p P parameter, P parameter space, dp dt = 0. reset (q2,q 1 )(p) jump (q2,q 1 ) (p) Stochastic PHS (SPHS): PHS with random parameters. init and reset computable functions, flow Lipschitz-continuous ODEs, invt and jump Boolean logic formula m {>, }, f i,j computable function. i=1 ( ki j=1 ( fi,j (x, p) 0 )), 5 / 41
16 SPHS: Running Example 10 S y 5 υ 0 α S x 6 / 41
17 SPHS: Running Example 10 S y 5 υ 0 α S x Parameters: Random: υ 0 N (25, 3) initial speed, α = { : 0.9, : 0.09, : 0.01} angle to horizon, Nondeterministic: K [0.5, 0.9] speed loss coefficient. 6 / 41
18 Bounded Reachability Probability What is the probability that the system reaches a goal state in a finite number of steps? 7 / 41
19 Bounded Reachability Probability What is the probability that the system reaches a goal state in a finite number of steps? Let P = P N P R P R is the domain of random parameters, P N is the domain of nondeterministic parameters 7 / 41
20 Bounded Reachability Probability What is the probability that the system reaches a goal state in a finite number of steps? Let P = P N P R P R is the domain of random parameters, P N is the domain of nondeterministic parameters The bounded reachability probability function is: Pr : P N [0, 1]. If P N = then Pr is constant. 7 / 41
21 Computing Bounded Reachability Probability Approach Formal Statistical Principle Formal Reasoning Monte Carlo Sampling Probability dp E[X ] 1 N N i=1 X i G G = {p P : goal(p)}, X i = 1 if goal(p), G C = P \ G. X i = 0 otherwise. Guarantees Absolute Statistical Complexity Exponential Constant (number of parameters) 8 / 41
22 Computing Bounded Reachability Probability Approach Formal Statistical Principle Formal Reasoning Monte Carlo Sampling Probability dp E[X ] 1 N N i=1 X i G G = {p P : goal(p)}, X i = 1 if goal(p), G C = P \ G. X i = 0 otherwise. Guarantees Absolute Statistical Complexity Exponential Constant (number of parameters) Both approaches need a procedure which given a non-empty B P identifies whether B G or B G C. 8 / 41
23 Evaluation Procedure (I) Given a non-empty B P we define two formulae Reach(H, l, B), and Reach (H, l, B). 9 / 41
24 Evaluation Procedure (I) Given a non-empty B P we define two formulae Reach(H, l, B), and Reach (H, l, B). Reach(H, l, B) true if H satisfies goal in l steps for some p B, Reach (H, l, B) := B p : Reach(H, l, {p}). Reach (H, l, B) Reach(H, l, {p}). 9 / 41
25 Evaluation Procedure (I) Given a non-empty B P we define two formulae Reach(H, l, B), and Reach (H, l, B). Reach(H, l, B) true if H satisfies goal in l steps for some p B, Reach (H, l, B) := B p : Reach(H, l, {p}). Reach (H, l, B) Reach(H, l, {p}). Reach and Reach are bounded L R -sentences Can be verified by the δ-complete decision procedure 9 / 41
26 Evaluation Procedure (I) Given a non-empty B P we define two formulae Reach(H, l, B), and Reach (H, l, B). Reach(H, l, B) true if H satisfies goal in l steps for some p B, Reach (H, l, B) := B p : Reach(H, l, {p}). Reach (H, l, B) Reach(H, l, {p}). Reach and Reach are bounded L R -sentences Can be verified by the δ-complete decision procedure Remember!!! Only unsat answer can be trusted and δ-sat is subject to over-approximation δ. 9 / 41
27 Evaluation Procedure (II) Based on the unsat (trusted) answer of δ-decision procedures Algorithm 1: evaluate(h, l, B, δ) ( ) 1 if δ-decision Reach(H, l, B) ( == δ-sat then ) 2 if δ-decision Reach (H, l, B) == δ-sat then 3 return undet; 4 return sat; 5 return unsat; sat goal is reached for all parameter values in B, unsat goal is reached for no parameter values in B, undet goal is reached for some parameter values in B, 10 / 41
28 Evaluation Procedure (II) Based on the unsat (trusted) answer of δ-decision procedures Algorithm 2: evaluate(h, l, B, δ) ( ) 1 if δ-decision Reach(H, l, B) ( == δ-sat then ) 2 if δ-decision Reach (H, l, B) == δ-sat then 3 return undet; 4 return sat; 5 return unsat; sat goal is reached for all parameter values in B, unsat goal is reached for no parameter values in B, undet goal is reached for some parameter values in B, OR undet one of the formulae is not robust for the given δ. 10 / 41
29 Computing Bounded Reachability Probability Approach Formal Statistical Principle Formal Reasoning Monte Carlo Sampling Probability dp E[X ] = 1 N N i=1 X i G G = {p P : goal(p)}, X i = 1 if goal(p), G C = P \ G. X i = 0 otherwise. Guarantees Absolute Statistical Complexity Exponential Constant (number of parameters) 11 / 41
30 Formal Approach: In a nutshell The bounded reachability probability is a function of nondeterministic parameters obtained as: Pr(p N ) = dp G(p N ) P - probability measure of random parameters, G(p N ) - system s goal set for the given p N. 12 / 41
31 Formal Approach: In a nutshell The bounded reachability probability is a function of nondeterministic parameters obtained as: Pr(p N ) = dp G(p N ) P - probability measure of random parameters, G(p N ) - system s goal set for the given p N. How to compute Pr(p N )??? 12 / 41
32 Formal Approach: In a nutshell The bounded reachability probability is a function of nondeterministic parameters obtained as: Pr(p N ) = dp G(p N ) P - probability measure of random parameters, G(p N ) - system s goal set for the given p N. How to compute Pr(p N )??? Identify G(p N ) already solved! Partition P R with boxes B, Evaluate each {p N } B using procedure evaluate. 12 / 41
33 Formal Approach: In a nutshell The bounded reachability probability is a function of nondeterministic parameters obtained as: Pr(p N ) = dp G(p N ) P - probability measure of random parameters, G(p N ) - system s goal set for the given p N. How to compute Pr(p N )??? Identify G(p N ) already solved! Partition P R with boxes B, Evaluate each {p N } B using procedure evaluate. Compute B dp for each box with desired precision ˆɛ > 0. Find an estimate which is at most ˆɛ far from B dp. 12 / 41
34 Formal Approach: Algorithm We reason about parameter boxes B N P N for which we compute enclosures [ P over [B N ], P under [B N ] ] such that: p N B N : Pr(p N ) [ P over [B N ], P under [B N ] ]. 13 / 41
35 Formal Approach: Algorithm We reason about parameter boxes B N P N for which we compute enclosures [ P over [B N ], P under [B N ] ] such that: p N B N : Pr(p N ) [ P over [B N ], P under [B N ] ]. 1 B N = P N ; B R = P R ; 2 P over [B N ] = 1; P under [B N ] = 0; 3 while for each B N : (P over [B N ] P under [B N ] > ɛ) or (B N > ρ) do 4 switch evaluate(h, l, B R B N, B R ) do 5 case unsat do P over [B N ] = P over [B N ] B R dp ; 6 case sat do P under [B N ] = P under [B N ] + B R dp ; 7 case undet do bisect B R, B N ; Fedor Shmarov and Paolo Zuliani, PlanHS / 41
36 Formal Approach: Running Example 10 S y 5 υ 0 α S x Parameters: Random: υ 0 N (25, 3) initial speed, α = { : 0.9, : 0.09, : 0.01} angle to horizon, Nondeterministic: K [0.5, 0.9] speed loss coefficient. 14 / 41
37 Formal Approach: Running Example 10 S y 5 υ 0 α S x Parameters: Random: υ 0 N (25, 3) initial speed, α = { : 0.9, : 0.09, : 0.01} angle to horizon, Nondeterministic: K [0.5, 0.9] speed loss coefficient. Compute the probability (Pr : [0.5, 0.9] [0, 1]) of landing further than 100 metres (S x 100) after bouncing once (l = 1). 14 / 41
38 Formal Approach: Running Example (II) The probability reachability function Pr(K) can be obtained as: Pr(K) = [ ] 3 i=1 f α (α i ) f υ0 (x)dx sin(2α i )(K 2 +1) Pr(K) K 15 / 41
39 Formal Approach: Running Example (III) Pr(K) Probability enclosure precision ɛ = Red boxes computed for ρ = Blue boxes computed for ρ = K 16 / 41
40 Formal Approach: ɛ-guarantee Size of probability enclosures depends on nondeterministic parameter precision ρ, solver precision δ. 17 / 41
41 Formal Approach: ɛ-guarantee Size of probability enclosures depends on nondeterministic parameter precision ρ, solver precision δ. Probability enclosures can be arbitrarily tight (up to the required ɛ > 0) if formulae Reach and Reach are robust for all p P, reachability probability function is continuous, at least one continuous random parameter. 17 / 41
42 Formal Approach: ɛ-guarantee Size of probability enclosures depends on nondeterministic parameter precision ρ, solver precision δ. Probability enclosures can be arbitrarily tight (up to the required ɛ > 0) if formulae Reach and Reach are robust for all p P, reachability probability function is continuous, at least one continuous random parameter. 1 B N = P N ; B R = P R ; 2 P over [B N ] = 1; P under [B N ] = 0; 3 while for each B N : (P over [B N ] P under [B N ] > ɛ) or (B N > ρ) do 4 switch evaluate(h, l, B R B N, B R ) do 5 case unsat do P over [B N ] = P over [B N ] B R dp ; 6 case sat do P under [B N ] = P under [B N ] + B R dp ; 7 case undet do bisect B R, B N ; 17 / 41
43 Formal Approach: Running Example (IV) Pr(K) Probability enclosure precision ɛ = Nondeterministic parameter precision ρ is ignored. K 18 / 41
44 Computing Probabilistic Bounded Reachability Approach Formal Statistical Principle Formal Reasoning Monte Carlo Sampling Probability dp E[X ] = 1 N N i=1 X i G G = {p P : goal(p)}, X i = 1 if goal(p), G C = P \ G. X i = 0 otherwise. Guarantees Absolute Statistical Complexity Exponential Constant (number of parameters) 19 / 41
45 Statistical Approach: In a nutshell For each p N P N and p R P R let: { 1 if goal is reached for (p N, p R ), X (p N, p R ) = 0 otherwise. Then Pr(p N ) = E[X (p N )] = G(p N ) dp. 20 / 41
46 Statistical Approach: In a nutshell For each p N P N and p R P R let: { 1 if goal is reached for (p N, p R ), X (p N, p R ) = 0 otherwise. Then Pr(p N ) = E[X (p N )] = G(p N ) dp. How to compute Pr(p N )??? 20 / 41
47 Statistical Approach: In a nutshell For each p N P N and p R P R let: { 1 if goal is reached for (p N, p R ), X (p N, p R ) = 0 otherwise. Then Pr(p N ) = E[X (p N )] = G(p N ) dp. How to compute Pr(p N )??? Sample p R using the parameters distribution. Evaluate X (p N, p R ). 20 / 41
48 Statistical Approach: In a nutshell For each p N P N and p R P R let: { 1 if goal is reached for (p N, p R ), X (p N, p R ) = 0 otherwise. Then Pr(p N ) = E[X (p N )] = G(p N ) dp. How to compute Pr(p N )??? Sample p R using the parameters distribution. Evaluate X (p N, p R ). We CANNOT evaluate X (p N, p R ) (undecidability!!!) 20 / 41
49 Statistical Approach: Confidence Intervals We define two random variables: { 1 if evaluate(h, l, {p N, p R }, δ) = sat, X sat (p N, p R ) = 0 otherwise. { 0 if evaluate(h, l, {p N, p R }, δ) = unsat, X usat (p N, p R ) = 1 otherwise. 21 / 41
50 Statistical Approach: Confidence Intervals We define two random variables: { 1 if evaluate(h, l, {p N, p R }, δ) = sat, X sat (p N, p R ) = 0 otherwise. { 0 if evaluate(h, l, {p N, p R }, δ) = unsat, X usat (p N, p R ) = 1 otherwise. X sat (p N, p R ) and X usat (p N, p R ) can be sampled, X sat (p N, p R ) X (p N, p R ) X usat (p N, p R ). E[X sat (p N )] E[X (p N )] = Pr(p N ) E[X usat (p N )] 21 / 41
51 Statistical Approach: Confidence Intervals (II) Given accuracy ξ > 0 and confidence c (0, 1) compute intervals [p sat ξ, p sat + ξ] and [p usat ξ, p usat + ξ]. ( ) Probability E[X sat (p N, p R )] [p sat ξ, p sat + ξ] c, ( ) Probability E[X usat (p N, p R )] [p usat ξ, p usat + ξ] c. 22 / 41
52 Statistical Approach: Confidence Intervals (II) Given accuracy ξ > 0 and confidence c (0, 1) compute intervals [p sat ξ, p sat + ξ] and [p usat ξ, p usat + ξ]. ( ) Probability E[X sat (p N, p R )] [p sat ξ, p sat + ξ] c, ( ) Probability E[X usat (p N, p R )] [p usat ξ, p usat + ξ] c. ( ) Probability Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] c. The size of [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] can be greater than 2ξ non-robustness for the given δ, or undecidability in general. Shmarov and Zuliani. HVC / 41
53 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm We compute maximum/minimum reachability probability. approximate value p N where the minimum/maximum probability is achieved, Probability ( Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] ) c. 23 / 41
54 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm We compute maximum/minimum reachability probability. approximate value p N where the minimum/maximum probability is achieved, Probability ( Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] ) c. CE aims at obtaining the optimal parameter distribution [Rubinstein and Kroese, 2008]. 23 / 41
55 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm We compute maximum/minimum reachability probability. approximate value p N where the minimum/maximum probability is achieved, Probability ( Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] ) c. CE aims at obtaining the optimal parameter distribution [Rubinstein and Kroese, 2008]. Step 0 start with nondeterministic parameters distributed with PDF f ( ; v). 23 / 41
56 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm We compute maximum/minimum reachability probability. approximate value p N where the minimum/maximum probability is achieved, Probability ( Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] ) c. CE aims at obtaining the optimal parameter distribution [Rubinstein and Kroese, 2008]. Step 0 start with nondeterministic parameters distributed with PDF f ( ; v). Step 1 generate samples p N using f ( ; v). 23 / 41
57 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm We compute maximum/minimum reachability probability. approximate value p N where the minimum/maximum probability is achieved, Probability ( Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] ) c. CE aims at obtaining the optimal parameter distribution [Rubinstein and Kroese, 2008]. Step 0 start with nondeterministic parameters distributed with PDF f ( ; v). Step 1 generate samples p N using f ( ; v). Step 2 update v using the fittest (probability-wise) samples. 23 / 41
58 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm We compute maximum/minimum reachability probability. approximate value p N where the minimum/maximum probability is achieved, Probability ( Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] ) c. CE aims at obtaining the optimal parameter distribution [Rubinstein and Kroese, 2008]. Step 0 start with nondeterministic parameters distributed with PDF f ( ; v). Step 1 generate samples p N using f ( ; v). Step 2 update v using the fittest (probability-wise) samples. Step 3 go to Step 1 if f ( ; v) variance is greater than the desired ˆσ / 41
59 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm We compute maximum/minimum reachability probability. approximate value p N where the minimum/maximum probability is achieved, Probability ( Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] ) c. CE aims at obtaining the optimal parameter distribution [Rubinstein and Kroese, 2008]. Step 0 start with nondeterministic parameters distributed with PDF f ( ; v). Step 1 generate samples p N using f ( ; v). Step 2 update v using the fittest (probability-wise) samples. Step 3 go to Step 1 if f ( ; v) variance is greater than the desired ˆσ 2. There must be v such that f ( ; v) approximates single-point distributions arbitrarily well. 23 / 41
60 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm We compute maximum/minimum reachability probability. approximate value p N where the minimum/maximum probability is achieved, Probability ( Pr(p N ) [p sat ξ, p usat + ξ] ) c. CE aims at obtaining the optimal parameter distribution [Rubinstein and Kroese, 2008]. Step 0 start with nondeterministic parameters distributed with PDF f ( ; v). Step 1 generate samples p N using f ( ; v). Step 2 update v using the fittest (probability-wise) samples. Step 3 go to Step 1 if f ( ; v) variance is greater than the desired ˆσ 2. There must be v such that f ( ; v) approximates single-point distributions arbitrarily well. Cross-Entropy can fall into a local extremum. 23 / 41
61 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm (II) CE terminates when the user-defined variance ˆσ 2 is reached. 24 / 41
62 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm (II) CE terminates when the user-defined variance ˆσ 2 is reached. 24 / 41
63 Statistical Approach: Cross-Entropy Algorithm (II) CE terminates when the user-defined variance ˆσ 2 is reached. 24 / 41
64 Statistical Approach: Running Example Pr(K) can be obtained analytically Pr(K) K K K min max K Confidence Interval Pr(K) min [ , ] max [ , ] / 41
65 Statistical Approach: CE Result Quality Number of samples per iteration of CE algorithm, the more the better. 26 / 41
66 Statistical Approach: CE Result Quality Number of samples per iteration of CE algorithm, the more the better. Terminal variance value, the smaller the better. 26 / 41
67 Statistical Approach: CE Result Quality Number of samples per iteration of CE algorithm, the more the better. Terminal variance value, the smaller the better. Initial distribution parameters, need to provide sufficient initial coverage to avoid local extrema. 26 / 41
68 Statistical Approach: CE Result Quality Number of samples per iteration of CE algorithm, the more the better. Terminal variance value, the smaller the better. Initial distribution parameters, need to provide sufficient initial coverage to avoid local extrema. Accuracy for estimating the confidence intervals, the higher the better. 26 / 41
69 ProbReach Implemented in C++. Uses OpenMP for parallelisation. Uses several libraries CAPD, IBEX, GSL / 41
70 ProbReach Implemented in C++. Uses OpenMP for parallelisation. Uses several libraries CAPD, IBEX, GSL. Any SAT ODE solver supporting δ-decisions can be used. dreal 1 [Sicun Gao, Soonho Kong] isat3 2 [Martin Fränzle et al.] Available at Shmarov and Zuliani. HSCC / 41
71 Demonstration 28 / 41
72 Discussion We presented ProbReach tool for probabilistic bounded reachability in uncertain hybrid system. It features formal and statistical approaches. Formal approach: computes probability enclosures containing the range of the probability reachability function. Complexity grows exponentially with the number of system parameters. Statistical approach: computes confidence intervals containing the approximate maximum/minimum probability value. Complexity remains constant with respect to the number of system parameters. ProbReach is publicly available at 29 / 41
73 Automated Synthesis of Safe and Robust PID Controllers for Stochastic Hybrid Systems Fedor Shmarov 1, Nicola Paoletti 2, Ezio Bartocci 3, Shan Lin 2, Scott A. Smolka 2, Paolo Zuliani 1 1 Newcastle University, UK, 2 Stony Brook University, NY, USA, 3 TU Wien, Austria 30 / 41
74 Artificial Pancreas Closed-loop (with feedback) control of insulin treatment for Type 1 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitor Control algorithm Insulin pump basal constant dose (automatic) bolus single high dose (manual) MINIMED 670G by Medtronic / 41
75 Artificial Pancreas Closed-loop (with feedback) control of insulin treatment for Type 1 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitor Control algorithm Insulin pump basal constant dose (automatic) bolus single high dose (manual) Objective MINIMED 670G by Medtronic 3 Design automatic closed-loop control of bolus insulin for keeping blood glucose level between 4-12 mmol/l. Temporary hyperglycemia is allowed while hypoglycemia should be avoided / 41
76 Automatic Control Control Objective Given an external disturbance reduce the difference between the measured system output and the desired value by adjusting the control variable. System output Time disturbance: amount of carbohydrates (D G ) system output: blood glucose level (G(t)) desired level (set-point): G sp = 6.11 [mmol/l] control variable: insulin admission (u(t) + u b ) difference (error): e(t) = G sp G(t) 32 / 41
77 PID Controller P I PLANT PHS D P roportional - present value of the error, I ntegral - past errors, D erivative - predicted future errors. 33 / 41
78 PID Controller P I PLANT PHS D P roportional - present value of the error, I ntegral - past errors, D erivative - predicted future errors. Synthesis Objective Find values of K p, K i and K d (gains) minimising e(t). 33 / 41
79 Stochastic Parametric Hybrid Systems Meal ( Flow G(t), u(t) + u }{{ b, G } sp insulin }{{} glucose }{{} desired value, D G }{{} meal size PID(K p, K i, K d, G(t), u(t) + u b, G sp ) ) a. a Hovorka, R.: Closed-loop insulin delivery: from bench to clinical practice. Nature Reviews Endocrinology 7(7), (2011) 34 / 41
80 Stochastic Parametric Hybrid Systems (II) D G := D G1 (D G := D G2 ) (t := 0) (D G := D G3 ) (t := 0) Meal 1 Meal 2 Meal 3 t = T1 t = T 2 Size of each meal: D G1 N (40, 10), D G2 N (90, 10), D G3 N (60, 10). Parameters: Time between the meals: T 1 N (300, 10), T 2 N (300, 10). 35 / 41
81 Safety and Robustness Safety An unsafe state should be reached with very small probability. Unsafe: G(t) [4, 16]. 36 / 41
82 Safety and Robustness Safety An unsafe state should be reached with very small probability. Unsafe: G(t) [4, 16]. Robustness (not in the sense of δ-robustness) Difference between the system output and the desired value should be small. Fundamental Index: FI (t) = t 0 (e(τ))2 dτ System output should converge to the steady-state. Weighted Fundamental Index: FI w (t) = t 0 τ 2 (e(τ)) 2 dτ Non-robust: (FI (t) > ) (FI w (t) > ). 36 / 41
83 Automated Synthesis Safety and robustness analysis is performed through bounded reachability. Bounded Reachability Can the unsafe state be reached within: finite number of discrete steps, and bounded time interval. Bounds: 3 meals, 24 hours. 37 / 41
84 Automated Synthesis Safety and robustness analysis is performed through bounded reachability. Bounded Reachability Can the unsafe state be reached within: finite number of discrete steps, and bounded time interval. Bounds: 3 meals, 24 hours. Automated Synthesis Objective Synthesise a PID controller minimizing the probability of reaching an unsafe state or violating the robustness constraint during 3 meals within 24 hour period. 37 / 41
85 Results Insulin Administration u(t) }{{} + u }{{} b PID(K p, K i, K d, e(t)) basal rate Both safety and robustness were taken into account 38 / 41
86 Results Insulin Administration u(t) }{{} + u }{{} b PID(K p, K i, K d, e(t)) basal rate Basal rate synthesis (formal): with G(0) = G sp and no external disturbances G(t) reaches [G sp 0.05, G sp ] in 2000 minutes and remains there for another 1000 minutes. Domain Result Chosen Value u b [0,1] [ , ] Both safety and robustness were taken into account 38 / 41
87 Results Insulin Administration u(t) }{{} + u }{{} b PID(K p, K i, K d, e(t)) basal rate Basal rate synthesis (formal): with G(0) = G sp and no external disturbances G(t) reaches [G sp 0.05, G sp ] in 2000 minutes and remains there for another 1000 minutes. Domain Result Chosen Value u b [0,1] [ , ] PID controller synthesis (statistical): # K d K i K p CI C [ , ] C [ , 1] C [ , ] C [ , ] C [0.3324, ] Both safety and robustness were taken into account 38 / 41
88 One-day Scenario 50 grams, 100 grams, 70 grams in 5 hour intervals. 25 C 0 Glucose Level (mmol/l) C 1 C 2 C 3 sp Time (min) 0.3 C 0 Insulin Administration (U) C 1 C 2 C 3 # Safety FI 10 6 FI w 10 9 C0 1, C 0 2 Unsafe C 1 Safe C 2 Unsafe C 3 Safe Time (min) 39 / 41
89 Discussion Conclusions: We presented a technique for the automated synthesis of safe and robust PID controllers using ProbReach. The presented approach was applied to an artificial pancreas model. Future work: PID controllers with nonlinear gains. Discrete-time PID controllers. 40 / 41
90 Thank you Questions? 41 / 41
Nonlinear Real Arithmetic and δ-satisfiability. Paolo Zuliani
Nonlinear Real Arithmetic and δ-satisfiability Paolo Zuliani School of Computing Science Newcastle University, UK (Slides courtesy of Sicun Gao, UCSD) 1 / 27 Introduction We use hybrid systems for modelling
More informationBounded Model Checking with SAT/SMT. Edmund M. Clarke School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University 1/39
Bounded Model Checking with SAT/SMT Edmund M. Clarke School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University 1/39 Recap: Symbolic Model Checking with BDDs Method used by most industrial strength model checkers:
More informationδ-complete Analysis for Bounded Reachability of Hybrid Systems
δ-complete Analysis for Bounded Reachability of Hybrid Systems Sicun Gao Soonho Kong Wei Chen Edmund M. Clarke July 16, 2014 CMU-CS-14-111 School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh,
More informationarxiv: v1 [cs.sy] 10 Jan 2019
Automated Synthesis of Safe Digital Controllers for Sampled-Data Stochastic Nonlinear Systems Fedor Shmarov School of Computing, Newcastle University, UK Sadegh Soudjani School of Computing, Newcastle
More informationNonlinear Control as Program Synthesis (A Starter)
Nonlinear Control as Program Synthesis (A Starter) Sicun Gao MIT December 15, 2014 Preliminaries Definition (L RF ) L RF is the first-order language over the reals that allows arbitrary numerically computable
More informationAPPROXIMATE SIMULATION RELATIONS FOR HYBRID SYSTEMS 1. Antoine Girard A. Agung Julius George J. Pappas
APPROXIMATE SIMULATION RELATIONS FOR HYBRID SYSTEMS 1 Antoine Girard A. Agung Julius George J. Pappas Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 1914 {agirard,agung,pappasg}@seas.upenn.edu
More informationUsing Theorem Provers to Guarantee Closed-Loop Properties
Using Theorem Provers to Guarantee Closed-Loop Properties Nikos Aréchiga Sarah Loos André Platzer Bruce Krogh Carnegie Mellon University April 27, 2012 Aréchiga, Loos, Platzer, Krogh (CMU) Theorem Provers
More informationSet- membership es-ma-on of hybrid dynamical systems.
Set- membership es-ma-on of hybrid dynamical systems. Towards model- based FDI for hybrid systems Prof. Nacim RAMDANI Université d Orléans, Bourges. France. nacim.ramdani@univ- orleans.fr!! ECC14 Pre-
More informationComputable Analysis, Hybrid Automata, and Decision Procedures (Extended Thesis Abstract)
Computable Analysis, Hybrid Automata, and Decision Procedures (Extended Thesis Abstract) Sicun Gao 1 Introduction 1.1 Overview Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) are systems that integrate digital computation
More informationONR MURI AIRFOILS: Animal Inspired Robust Flight with Outer and Inner Loop Strategies. Calin Belta
ONR MURI AIRFOILS: Animal Inspired Robust Flight with Outer and Inner Loop Strategies Provable safety for animal inspired agile flight Calin Belta Hybrid and Networked Systems (HyNeSs) Lab Department of
More informationAutomata-theoretic analysis of hybrid systems
Automata-theoretic analysis of hybrid systems Madhavan Mukund SPIC Mathematical Institute 92, G N Chetty Road Chennai 600 017, India Email: madhavan@smi.ernet.in URL: http://www.smi.ernet.in/~madhavan
More informationTuning PI controllers in non-linear uncertain closed-loop systems with interval analysis
Tuning PI controllers in non-linear uncertain closed-loop systems with interval analysis J. Alexandre dit Sandretto, A. Chapoutot and O. Mullier U2IS, ENSTA ParisTech SYNCOP April 11, 2015 Closed-loop
More informationVerification of Nonlinear Hybrid Systems with Ariadne
Verification of Nonlinear Hybrid Systems with Ariadne Luca Geretti and Tiziano Villa June 2, 2016 June 2, 2016 Verona, Italy 1 / 1 Outline June 2, 2016 Verona, Italy 2 / 1 Outline June 2, 2016 Verona,
More informationDiscrete abstractions of hybrid systems for verification
Discrete abstractions of hybrid systems for verification George J. Pappas Departments of ESE and CIS University of Pennsylvania pappasg@ee.upenn.edu http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~pappasg DISC Summer School
More informationFormal methods in analysis
Formal methods in analysis Jeremy Avigad Department of Philosophy and Department of Mathematical Sciences Carnegie Mellon University May 2015 Sequence of lectures 1. Formal methods in mathematics 2. Automated
More informationTutorial 1: Modern SMT Solvers and Verification
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Tutorial 1: Modern SMT Solvers and Verification Sayan Mitra Electrical & Computer Engineering Coordinated Science Laboratory University of Illinois at Urbana
More informationSpecification Mining of Industrial-scale Control Systems
100 120 Specification Mining of Industrial-scale Control Systems Alexandre Donzé Joint work with Xiaoqing Jin, Jyotirmoy V. Deshmuck, Sanjit A. Seshia University of California, Berkeley May 14, 2013 Alexandre
More informationAbstraction-based synthesis: Challenges and victories
Abstraction-based synthesis: Challenges and victories Majid Zamani Hybrid Control Systems Group Electrical Engineering Department Technische Universität München December 14, 2015 Majid Zamani (TU München)
More informationVerification of Hybrid Systems with Ariadne
Verification of Hybrid Systems with Ariadne Davide Bresolin 1 Luca Geretti 2 Tiziano Villa 3 1 University of Bologna 2 University of Udine 3 University of Verona An open workshop on Formal Methods for
More informationReachability Analysis of Nonlinear and Hybrid Systems using Zonotopes May 7, / 56
Reachability Analysis of Nonlinear and Hybrid Systems using Zonotopes Matthias Althoff Carnegie Mellon Univ. May 7, 2010 Reachability Analysis of Nonlinear and Hybrid Systems using Zonotopes May 7, 2010
More informationMonitoring Bounded LTL Properties UsingIntervalAnalysis
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 317 (2015) 85 100 www.elsevier.com/locate/entcs Monitoring Bounded LTL Properties UsingIntervalAnalysis Daisuke
More informationSReach: Combing SMT-based Model Checking and Statistical Tests* Presented by Qinsi Wang
SReach: Combing SMT-based Model Checking and Statistical Tests* Presented by Qinsi Wang *Qinsi Wang, Paolo Zuliani, Soonho Kong, Sicun Gao, and Edmund Clarke. SReach: Combining Statistical Tests and Bounded
More informationDisturbance Attenuation Properties for Discrete-Time Uncertain Switched Linear Systems
Disturbance Attenuation Properties for Discrete-Time Uncertain Switched Linear Systems Hai Lin Department of Electrical Engineering University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA Panos J. Antsaklis
More informationStochastic Tube MPC with State Estimation
Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems MTNS 2010 5 9 July, 2010 Budapest, Hungary Stochastic Tube MPC with State Estimation Mark Cannon, Qifeng Cheng,
More informationStatic-Dynamic Analysis of Security Metrics
Static-Dynamic Analysis of Security Metrics for Cyber-Physical Systems Sayan Mitra (PI), Geir Dullerud (co-pi), Swarat Chaudhuri (co-pi) University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign NSA SoS Quarterly meeting,
More informationFormally Analyzing Adaptive Flight Control
Formally Analyzing Adaptive Flight Control Ashish Tiwari SRI International 333 Ravenswood Ave Menlo Park, CA 94025 Supported in part by NASA IRAC NRA grant number: NNX08AB95A Ashish Tiwari Symbolic Verification
More informationSAT Modulo ODE: A Direct SAT Approach to Hybrid Systems
Welcome ATVA 2008 SAT Modulo ODE: A Direct SAT Approach to Hbrid Sstems Andreas Eggers, Martin Fränzle, and Christian Herde DFG Transregional Collaborative Research Center AVACS Outline Motivation Bounded
More informationSymbolic Verification of Hybrid Systems: An Algebraic Approach
European Journal of Control (2001)71±16 # 2001 EUCA Symbolic Verification of Hybrid Systems An Algebraic Approach Martin v. Mohrenschildt Department of Computing and Software, Faculty of Engineering, McMaster
More informationUser s Manual of Flow* Version 2.0.0
User s Manual of Flow* Version 2.0.0 Xin Chen University of Colorado, Boulder 1 Introduction Flow* is a tool for safety verification of hybrid systems. Given a real-valued interval, a natural number m,
More informationNonlinear and robust MPC with applications in robotics
Nonlinear and robust MPC with applications in robotics Boris Houska, Mario Villanueva, Benoît Chachuat ShanghaiTech, Texas A&M, Imperial College London 1 Overview Introduction to Robust MPC Min-Max Differential
More informationStability and Stabilization of polynomial dynamical systems. Hadi Ravanbakhsh Sriram Sankaranarayanan University of Colorado, Boulder
Stability and Stabilization of polynomial dynamical systems Hadi Ravanbakhsh Sriram Sankaranarayanan University of Colorado, Boulder Proving Asymptotic Stability: Lyapunov Functions Lyapunov Function:
More informationSynthesizing Switching Logic using Constraint Solving
Synthesizing Switching Logic using Constraint Solving Ankur Taly 1, Sumit Gulwani 2, and Ashish Tiwari 3 1 Computer Science Dept., Stanford University ataly@stanford.edu 2 Microsoft Research, Redmond,
More informationGradient-based Adaptive Stochastic Search
1 / 41 Gradient-based Adaptive Stochastic Search Enlu Zhou H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology November 5, 2014 Outline 2 / 41 1 Introduction
More informationLinear and nonlinear optimization with CasADi
Numerical optimization course computer exercise inear and nonlinear optimization with CasADi Prof. Dr. Moritz Diehl 1, Prof. Dr. Angelika Altmann-Dieses 2, Adrian Bürger 1,2 1 Systems Control and Optimization
More informationComplexity Issues in Automated Addition of Time-Bounded Liveness Properties 1
Complexity Issues in Automated Addition of Time-Bounded Liveness Properties 1 Borzoo Bonakdarpour and Sandeep S. Kulkarni Software Engineering and Network Systems Laboratory, Department of Computer Science
More informationSynthesizing Switching Logic using Constraint Solving
Synthesizing Switching Logic using Constraint Solving Ankur Taly 1, Sumit Gulwani 2, and Ashish Tiwari 3 1 Computer Science Dept., Stanford University ataly@stanford.edu 2 Microsoft Research, Redmond,
More informationModels for Control and Verification
Outline Models for Control and Verification Ian Mitchell Department of Computer Science The University of British Columbia Classes of models Well-posed models Difference Equations Nonlinear Ordinary Differential
More informationApproximate model checking of stochastic hybrid systems
Approximate model checking of stochastic hybrid systems A. Abate, J.-P. Katoen, J. Lygeros, and M. Prandini Abstract A method for approximate model checking of stochastic hybrid systems with provable approximation
More informationCEGAR:Counterexample-Guided Abstraction Refinement
CEGAR: Counterexample-guided Abstraction Refinement Sayan Mitra ECE/CS 584: Embedded System Verification November 13, 2012 Outline Finite State Systems: Abstraction Refinement CEGAR Validation Refinment
More informationModeling and Verifying a Temperature Control System using Continuous Action Systems
Modeling and Verifying a Temperature Control System using Continuous Action Systems Ralph-Johan Back Cristina Cerschi Turku Centre for Computer Science (TUCS), Lemminkäisenkatu 14 A, FIN-20520, Turku,
More informationFormally Correct Monitors for Hybrid Automata. Verimag Research Report n o TR
Formally Correct Monitors for Hybrid Automata Goran Frehse, Nikolaos Kekatos, Dejan Nickovic Verimag Research Report n o TR-2017-5 September 20, 2017 Verimag, University of Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.
More informationDryVR: Data-driven verification and compositional reasoning for automotive systems
DryVR: Data-driven verification and compositional reasoning for automotive systems Chuchu Fan, Bolun Qi, Sayan Mitra, Mahesh Viswannathan University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign CAV 2017, Heidelberg,
More informationStructural Reliability
Structural Reliability Thuong Van DANG May 28, 2018 1 / 41 2 / 41 Introduction to Structural Reliability Concept of Limit State and Reliability Review of Probability Theory First Order Second Moment Method
More informationGradient Sampling for Improved Action Selection and Path Synthesis
Gradient Sampling for Improved Action Selection and Path Synthesis Ian M. Mitchell Department of Computer Science The University of British Columbia November 2016 mitchell@cs.ubc.ca http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~mitchell
More informationOnline Horizon Selection in Receding Horizon Temporal Logic Planning
Online Horizon Selection in Receding Horizon Temporal Logic Planning Vasumathi Raman 1 and Mattias Fält 2 and Tichakorn Wongpiromsarn 3 and Richard M. Murray 1 Abstract Temporal logics have proven effective
More informationStochastic Hybrid Systems: Applications to Communication Networks
research supported by NSF Stochastic Hybrid Systems: Applications to Communication Networks João P. Hespanha Center for Control Engineering and Computation University of California at Santa Barbara Talk
More informationThe algorithmic analysis of hybrid system
The algorithmic analysis of hybrid system Authors: R.Alur, C. Courcoubetis etc. Course teacher: Prof. Ugo Buy Xin Li, Huiyong Xiao Nov. 13, 2002 Summary What s a hybrid system? Definition of Hybrid Automaton
More informationCompositionally Analyzing a Proportional-Integral Controller Family
2 5th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference (CDC-ECC) Orlando, FL, USA, December 2-5, 2 Compositionally Analyzing a Proportional-Integral Controller Family Ashish Tiwari
More informationHybrid Control and Switched Systems. Lecture #1 Hybrid systems are everywhere: Examples
Hybrid Control and Switched Systems Lecture #1 Hybrid systems are everywhere: Examples João P. Hespanha University of California at Santa Barbara Summary Examples of hybrid systems 1. Bouncing ball 2.
More informationADVANCED ROBOTICS. PLAN REPRESENTATION Generalized Stochastic Petri nets and Markov Decision Processes
ADVANCED ROBOTICS PLAN REPRESENTATION Generalized Stochastic Petri nets and Markov Decision Processes Pedro U. Lima Instituto Superior Técnico/Instituto de Sistemas e Robótica September 2009 Reviewed April
More informationIvy: Safety Verification by Interactive Generalization
Ivy: Safety Verification by Interactive Generalization Oded Padon Verification Day 1-June-2016 [PLDI 16] Oded Padon, Kenneth McMillan, Aurojit Panda, Mooly Sagiv, Sharon Shoham. Ivy: Safety Verification
More informationCompositional Synthesis with Parametric Reactive Controllers
Compositional Synthesis with Parametric Reactive Controllers Rajeev Alur University of Pennsylvania alur@seas.upenn.edu Salar Moarref University of Pennsylvania moarref@seas.upenn.edu Ufuk Topcu University
More informationUncertainty modeling for robust verifiable design. Arnold Neumaier University of Vienna Vienna, Austria
Uncertainty modeling for robust verifiable design Arnold Neumaier University of Vienna Vienna, Austria Safety Safety studies in structural engineering are supposed to guard against failure in all reasonable
More informationDeciding Safety and Liveness in TPTL
Deciding Safety and Liveness in TPTL David Basin a, Carlos Cotrini Jiménez a,, Felix Klaedtke b,1, Eugen Zălinescu a a Institute of Information Security, ETH Zurich, Switzerland b NEC Europe Ltd., Heidelberg,
More informationEE C128 / ME C134 Feedback Control Systems
EE C128 / ME C134 Feedback Control Systems Lecture Additional Material Introduction to Model Predictive Control Maximilian Balandat Department of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science University of
More informationas support functions [18] and polynomials [34].
Decomposed Reachability Analysis for Nonlinear Systems Xin Chen University of Colorado, Boulder, CO xinchen@colorado.edu Sriram Sankaranarayanan University of Colorado, Boulder, CO srirams@colorado.edu
More informationTime-Constrained Temporal Logic Control of Multi-Affine Systems
Time-Constrained Temporal Logic Control of Multi-Affine Systems Ebru Aydin Gol Calin Belta Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA e-mail: {ebru,cbelta}@bu.edu Abstract: We consider the problem of controlling
More information540 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 43, NO. 4, APRIL Algorithmic Analysis of Nonlinear Hybrid Systems
540 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VOL. 43, NO. 4, APRIL 1998 Algorithmic Analysis of Nonlinear Hybrid Systems Thomas A. Henzinger, Pei-Hsin Ho, Howard Wong-Toi Abstract Hybrid systems are digital
More informationHIERARCHICAL CONTROL FOR A CLASS OF UNCERTAIN PIECEWISE LINEAR HYBRID DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS. Hai Lin,1 Xenofon D. Koutsoukos Panos J.
HIERARCHICAL CONTROL FOR A CLASS OF UNCERTAIN PIECEWISE LINEAR HYBRID DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS Hai Lin,1 Xenofon D. Koutsoukos Panos J. Antsaklis,1 EE. Dept. Univ. of Notre Dame, Notre Dame IN-46556, USA Xerox
More informationGramians based model reduction for hybrid switched systems
Gramians based model reduction for hybrid switched systems Y. Chahlaoui Younes.Chahlaoui@manchester.ac.uk Centre for Interdisciplinary Computational and Dynamical Analysis (CICADA) School of Mathematics
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.oc] 11 Jan 2018
From Uncertainty Data to Robust Policies for Temporal Logic Planning arxiv:181.3663v1 [math.oc 11 Jan 218 ABSTRACT Pier Giuseppe Sessa* Automatic Control Laboratory, ETH Zürich Zürich, Switzerland sessap@student.ethz.ch
More informationVerification of analog and mixed-signal circuits using hybrid systems techniques
FMCAD, November 2004, Austin Verification of analog and mixed-signal circuits using hybrid systems techniques Thao Dang, Alexandre Donze, Oded Maler VERIMAG Grenoble, France Plan 1. Introduction 2. Verification
More informationPoint and Interval Estimation for Gaussian Distribution, Based on Progressively Type-II Censored Samples
90 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, VOL. 52, NO. 1, MARCH 2003 Point and Interval Estimation for Gaussian Distribution, Based on Progressively Type-II Censored Samples N. Balakrishnan, N. Kannan, C. T.
More informationReceding Horizon Temporal Logic Planning
1 Receding Horizon Temporal Logic Planning Tichaorn Wongpiromsarn, Ufu Topcu, and Richard M. Murray Abstract We present a methodology for automatic synthesis of embedded control software that incorporates
More informationLecture 8 Receding Horizon Temporal Logic Planning & Finite-State Abstraction
Lecture 8 Receding Horizon Temporal Logic Planning & Finite-State Abstraction Ufuk Topcu Nok Wongpiromsarn Richard M. Murray AFRL, 26 April 2012 Contents of the lecture: Intro: Incorporating continuous
More informationAlgorithmic Verification of Stability of Hybrid Systems
Algorithmic Verification of Stability of Hybrid Systems Pavithra Prabhakar Kansas State University University of Kansas February 24, 2017 1 Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) Systems in which software "cyber"
More informationVerifying Safety Properties of Hybrid Systems.
Verifying Safety Properties of Hybrid Systems. Sriram Sankaranarayanan University of Colorado, Boulder, CO. October 22, 2010. Talk Outline 1. Formal Verification 2. Hybrid Systems 3. Invariant Synthesis
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.oc] 27 Aug 2018
From Uncertainty Data to Robust Policies for Temporal Logic Planning arxiv:181.3663v2 [math.oc 27 Aug 218 ABSTRACT Pier Giuseppe Sessa Automatic Control Laboratory, ETH Zurich Zurich, Switzerland sessap@student.ethz.ch
More informationDeductive Verification of Continuous Dynamical Systems
Deductive Verification of Continuous Dynamical Systems Dept. of Computer Science, Stanford University (Joint work with Ashish Tiwari, SRI International.) 1 Introduction What are Continuous Dynamical Systems?
More informationCross Entropy. Owen Jones, Cardiff University. Cross Entropy. CE for rare events. CE for disc opt. TSP example. A new setting. Necessary.
Owen Jones, Cardiff University The Cross-Entropy (CE) method started as an adaptive importance sampling scheme for estimating rare event probabilities (Rubinstein, 1997), before being successfully applied
More informationFAULT-TOLERANT CONTROL OF CHEMICAL PROCESS SYSTEMS USING COMMUNICATION NETWORKS. Nael H. El-Farra, Adiwinata Gani & Panagiotis D.
FAULT-TOLERANT CONTROL OF CHEMICAL PROCESS SYSTEMS USING COMMUNICATION NETWORKS Nael H. El-Farra, Adiwinata Gani & Panagiotis D. Christofides Department of Chemical Engineering University of California,
More informationActive Fault Diagnosis for Uncertain Systems
Active Fault Diagnosis for Uncertain Systems Davide M. Raimondo 1 Joseph K. Scott 2, Richard D. Braatz 2, Roberto Marseglia 1, Lalo Magni 1, Rolf Findeisen 3 1 Identification and Control of Dynamic Systems
More informationParameter iden+fica+on with hybrid systems in a bounded- error framework
Parameter iden+fica+on with hybrid systems in a bounded- error framework Moussa MAIGA, Nacim RAMDANI, & Louise TRAVE- MASSUYES Université d Orléans, Bourges, and LAAS CNRS Toulouse, France.!! SWIM 2015,
More informationDynamic and Adversarial Reachavoid Symbolic Planning
Dynamic and Adversarial Reachavoid Symbolic Planning Laya Shamgah Advisor: Dr. Karimoddini July 21 st 2017 Thrust 1: Modeling, Analysis and Control of Large-scale Autonomous Vehicles (MACLAV) Sub-trust
More informationBounded Synthesis. Sven Schewe and Bernd Finkbeiner. Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany
Bounded Synthesis Sven Schewe and Bernd Finkbeiner Universität des Saarlandes, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany Abstract. The bounded synthesis problem is to construct an implementation that satisfies a given
More informationHybrid Systems Modeling, Analysis and Control
Hybrid Systems Modeling, Analysis and Control Radu Grosu Vienna University of Technology Lecture 6 Continuous AND Discrete Systems Control Theory Continuous systems approximation, stability control, robustness
More informationSymbolic Reachability Analysis of Lazy Linear Hybrid Automata. Susmit Jha, Bryan Brady and Sanjit A. Seshia
Symbolic Reachability Analysis of Lazy Linear Hybrid Automata Susmit Jha, Bryan Brady and Sanjit A. Seshia Traditional Hybrid Automata Traditional Hybrid Automata do not model delay and finite precision
More informationDisturbance Attenuation in Classes of Uncertain Linear Hybrid Systems
Disturbance Attenuation in Classes of Uncertain Linear Hybrid Systems Hai Lin and Panos J. Antsaklis Abstract In this paper, we study the disturbance attenuation properties for some classes of discrete-time
More informationCompositionally Analyzing a Proportional-Integral Controller Family
Compositionally Analyzing a Proportional-Integral Controller Family Ashish Tiwari Abstract We define always eventually region stability and then formulate the absolute always eventually region stability
More informationSafety Verification of Fault Tolerant Goal-based Control Programs with Estimation Uncertainty
2008 American Control Conference Westin Seattle Hotel, Seattle, Washington, USA June 11-13, 2008 WeAI01.6 Safety Verification of Fault Tolerant Goal-based Control Programs with Estimation Uncertainty Julia
More informationParametric Verification and Test Coverage for Hybrid Automata Using the Inverse Method
Parametric Verification and Test Coverage for Hybrid Automata Using the Inverse Method Laurent Fribourg and Ulrich Kühne LSV ENS de Cachan, 94235 Cachan, France {kuehne,fribourg}@lsv.ens-cachan.fr Abstract.
More informationProbabilistic Planning. George Konidaris
Probabilistic Planning George Konidaris gdk@cs.brown.edu Fall 2017 The Planning Problem Finding a sequence of actions to achieve some goal. Plans It s great when a plan just works but the world doesn t
More informationH-Infinity Controller Design for a Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor
International Journal of Electronic and Electrical Engineering. ISSN 974-2174 Volume 7, Number 8 (214), pp. 767-772 International Research Publication House http://www.irphouse.com H-Infinity Controller
More informationPrashant Mhaskar, Nael H. El-Farra & Panagiotis D. Christofides. Department of Chemical Engineering University of California, Los Angeles
HYBRID PREDICTIVE OUTPUT FEEDBACK STABILIZATION OF CONSTRAINED LINEAR SYSTEMS Prashant Mhaskar, Nael H. El-Farra & Panagiotis D. Christofides Department of Chemical Engineering University of California,
More informationSReach: A Probabilistic Bounded δ-reachability Analyzer for Stochastic Hybrid Systems
SReach: A Probabilistic Bounded δ-reachability Analyzer for Stochastic Hybrid Systems Qinsi Wang 1, Paolo Zuliani 2, Soonho Kong 1, Sicun Gao 3, Edmund M. Clarke 1 1 Computer Science Department, Carnegie
More informationComplexity Issues in Automated Addition of Time-Bounded Liveness Properties 1
Complexity Issues in Automated Addition of Time-Bounded Liveness Properties 1 Borzoo Bonakdarpour and Sandeep S. Kulkarni Software Engineering and Network Systems Laboratory, Department of Computer Science
More informationStochastic Hybrid Systems: Modeling, analysis, and applications to networks and biology
research supported by NSF Stochastic Hybrid Systems: Modeling, analysis, and applications to networks and biology João P. Hespanha Center for Control Engineering and Computation University of California
More informationVerification of Annotated Models from Executions
Verification of Annotated Models from Executions ABSTRACT Simulations can help enhance confidence in system designs but they provide almost no formal guarantees. In this paper, we present a simulation-based
More informationScalable Underapproximative Verification of Stochastic LTI Systems using Convexity and Compactness. HSCC 2018 Porto, Portugal
Scalable Underapproximative Verification of Stochastic LTI Systems using ity and Compactness Abraham Vinod and Meeko Oishi Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of New Mexico April 11, 2018 HSCC
More informationFalsification of Temporal Properties of Hybrid Systems Using the Cross-Entropy Method
Falsification of Temporal Properties of Hybrid Systems Using the Cross-Entropy Method Sriram Sankaranarayanan University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA. srirams@colorado.edu Georgios Fainekos Arizona State
More informationFormal verification of One Dimensional Time Triggered Velocity PID Controllers Kenneth Payson 12/09/14
Formal verification of One Dimensional Time Triggered Velocity PID Controllers 12/09/14 1: Abstract This paper provides a formal proof of the safety of a time triggered velocity PID controller that are
More informationTowards Mechanical Derivation of Krylov Solver Libraries
Towards Mechanical Derivation of Krylov Solver Libraries Victor Eijkhout Texas Advanced Computing Center with Paolo Bientinesi and Robert van de Geijn support: National Science Foundation award #0917096
More informationFormal verification of complex systems: model-based and data-driven methods. Alessandro Abate
Formal verification of complex systems: model-based and data-driven methods Alessandro Abate Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford MEMOCODE - Sept 30, 2017 Alessandro Abate, CS, Oxford Model-based
More informationHierarchical Control of Piecewise Linear Hybrid Dynamical Systems Based on Discrete Abstractions Λ
Hierarchical Control of Piecewise Linear Hybrid Dynamical Systems Based on Discrete Abstractions Λ Xenofon D. Koutsoukos Xerox Palo Alto Research Center 3333 Coyote Hill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA Tel.
More informationStatistical Model Checking Applied on Perception and Decision-making Systems for Autonomous Driving
Statistical Model Checking Applied on Perception and Decision-making Systems for Autonomous Driving J. Quilbeuf 1 M. Barbier 2,3 L. Rummelhard 3 C. Laugier 2 A. Legay 1 T. Genevois 2 J. Ibañez-Guzmán 3
More informationStep Simulation Based Verification of Nonlinear Deterministic Hybrid System
Step Simulation Based Verification of Nonlinear Deterministic Hybrid System Ratnesh Kumar, Professor, IEEE Fellow PhD Student: Hao Ren Electrical and Computer Engineering Iowa State University Verification
More informationDISTINGUING NON-DETERMINISTIC TIMED FINITE STATE MACHINES
DISTINGUING NON-DETERMINISTIC TIMED FINITE STATE MACHINES Maxim Gromov 1, Khaled El-Fakih 2, Natalia Shabaldina 1, Nina Yevtushenko 1 1 Tomsk State University, 36 Lenin Str.. Tomsk, 634050, Russia gromov@sibmail.com,
More informationRandomized Complexity Classes; RP
Randomized Complexity Classes; RP Let N be a polynomial-time precise NTM that runs in time p(n) and has 2 nondeterministic choices at each step. N is a polynomial Monte Carlo Turing machine for a language
More informationHybrid Automata and ɛ-analysis on a Neural Oscillator
Hybrid Automata and ɛ-analysis on a Neural Oscillator A. Casagrande 1 T. Dreossi 2 C. Piazza 2 1 DMG, University of Trieste, Italy 2 DIMI, University of Udine, Italy Intuitively... Motivations: Reachability
More informationApproximate dynamic programming for stochastic reachability
Approximate dynamic programming for stochastic reachability Nikolaos Kariotoglou, Sean Summers, Tyler Summers, Maryam Kamgarpour and John Lygeros Abstract In this work we illustrate how approximate dynamic
More information