1 / 23

Hybrid Workgroup

Hybrid Workgroup. Pam Binns Magnus Carlsson David Corman Bonnie Heck Tom Henzinger Gokhan Inalhan Gabor Karsai, co-chair Wallace Kelly Edward A. Lee, chair Brian Mendel Andrew Moran Linda Wills. Modeling Questions. Language (syntax, semantics, composition)

micheall
Télécharger la présentation

Hybrid Workgroup

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Hybrid Workgroup Pam Binns Magnus Carlsson David Corman Bonnie Heck Tom Henzinger Gokhan Inalhan Gabor Karsai, co-chair Wallace Kelly Edward A. Lee, chair Brian Mendel Andrew Moran Linda Wills

  2. Modeling Questions • Language (syntax, semantics, composition) • Modeling a distributed physical plant • Modeling the controller • Modeling faults and their effects • How are models used? • Semantics of anytime computation

  3. Uses of Hybrid Systems • Analysis • Analysis of discrete and continuous controllers interacting with a continuous plant • Simulation • Evaluation of continuous models with discrete mode transitions • Embedded modeling • Embedding of continuous models in deployed systems, integrated into the control algorithms (e.g. for fault identification)

  4. Questions What's in the OCP, and what's in the application? • Run-time support for hybrid models? at what cost? • Design-time support? (e.g. generation of software) • Anytime computation? (resource management) • QoS guarantees? Is real-time O/S the only option? • Admission control? • Support for domain-specific languages?

  5. Examples Considered • UAV helicopter control (GATech) • Free flight conflict avoidance (Rockwell) • Platooning vehicles (Berkeley) • Dragonfly – Multi-vehicle coord (Stanford) In all cases, we talked about fault detection and adaptation using modal control.

  6. Mode Transition Control (GATech)Overall Architecture Goal Mode Mode Mission Situation Selection Planning Awareness Transition Transition Start Flag Complete Flag MTC #1 Mode Flight MTC #2 Transition Controller Manager MTC #N Mode Transition Controllers Mode Transition Control Manager Helicopter States

  7. x 11 x 22 x 21 x 12 x x 2 N 1 N x x N 2 N 1 x NN x ij x ii Mode Transition Specification Mode Mode Desired 1 2 Goal Mode Transition Complete Flag Transition Mode Start Flag N ---- denotes a transition from Mode to Mode i j ---- denotes a regulation about Mode i

  8. FDI/FTC Demo in OCP (GATech) Indicates separate OCP components HighLevel Fault Detection& Identification Fault TolerantControl Manager MidLevel Set-PointController RedistributionController ReconfigurationController Interconnection Structure v1 LowLevel Subsystem Subsystem y1 r1 e1 Local Controller Local Controller

  9. Free Flight (Rockwell)

  10. Extensions • UCAVs with accurate models of one another – coordinated maneuvers rather than assuming the other aircraft will not react. • Errors in transmission, faulty/damaged UCAVs – fault identification and adaptation. • Create hybrid automaton model and use hybrid Mocha to verify that conflicts do not occur.

  11. Scenario – Vehicle Tracking Event Channel Publishes: • time • driving force • velocity • position Subscribes Implements: • fault detection • modal control

  12. Modeling Car Tracking Java Space (today) OCP (tomorrow) thanks to Jie Liu and Xiaojun Liu

  13. Execution

  14. OCP here only? Hierarchical View leader follower sensors actuators controller Br Acc Ba S PID bang-bang

  15. Styles of Publish and Subscribe Interactions • time stamped events? • globally time stamped? • reliable delivery? • ordered delivery? • signal coordination? • synchronous delivery? • blending of multiple publishers? • dynamic redirection/resourcing? • persistence? • history?

  16. OCP Domain #1 • time stamped events? yes • globally time stamped? no • reliable delivery? yes • ordered delivery? no • signal coordination? yes • globally synchronous delivery? no • blending of multiple publishers? no • dynamic redirection/resourcing? yes • persistence? no • history? no

  17. What is a Domain The definition of the interaction of components, and the software that supports this interaction. Multi-domain modeling means: • Hierarchical composition • heterogeneous models allowed • Domains can be specialized • avoid creeping featurism • enable verification • Data replication in OCP/Boldstroke is another domain • separation of communication mechanisms.

  18. leader follower sensors actuators controller Br Acc Ba S PID bang-bang What technology can be shared when building domains? • Abstract syntax • Type systems • Components • Interfaces • …

  19. Domains After Domain 1 • High-sample-rate, periodic event handling • Stream-based component interaction • Control reconfiguration management • Time-triggered, synchronous modeling • Continuous-time domain Domains need to be able to: • Share a consistent notion of time • Share signals/params across levels of the hierarchy. • Export interfaces to other domains • Import components designed in another domain

  20. Milestones • Use OCP in demonstrations in each of • Active state models • On-line control customization • Coordinated multi-modal control • Steps • Define the challenge problems that justify domains. • Work out how mode transitions and other control reconfiguration are handled in the OCP. • Work out the interaction semantics (domains) supported by the OCP (mode transition control? continuous modeling? synchronous interactions?)

  21. Architecture to Avoid Poor common infrastructure. Weak specialization. Poor resource management and sharing. Poor planning.

  22. Also to Avoid Elegant, unified, and beautiful, but rigid, inflexible, and difficult to adapt. Plus, it takes 100 years to build.

  23. Source: Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz, R. Rappaport, Rockport, 1998 Two Rodeo Drive, Kaplan, McLaughlin, Diaz Elegant Federation Elegant federation of heterogeneous models.

More Related