Fault Diagnosis in Discrete Event Systems Modeled by Partially Observed Petri Nets



In this paper, we study fault diagnosis in discrete event systems modeled by partially observed Petri nets, i.e., Petri nets equipped with sensors that allow observation of the number of tokens in some of the places and/or partial observation of the firing of some of the transitions. We assume that the Petri net model is accompanied by a (possibly implicit) description of the likelihood of each firing sequence. Faults are modeled as unobservable transitions and are divided into different types. Given an ordered sequence of observations from place and transition sensors, our goal is to calculate the belief (namely, the degree of confidence) regarding the occurrence of faults belonging to each type. To handle information from transition and place sensors in a unified manner, we transform a given partially observed Petri net into an equivalent (as far as state estimation and fault diagnosis is concerned) labeled Petri net (i.e., a Petri net with only transition sensors), and construct a translator that translates the sensing information from place and transition sensors into a sequence of labels in the equivalent labeled Petri net. Once this transformation is established, we focus on the computation of beliefs on faults in a given labeled Petri net and construct an online monitor that recursively produces these beliefs by tracking the existence of faulty transitions in execution paths that match the sequence of labels observed so far. Using the transformed labeled Petri net and the translated observation sequence, we can then compute the belief for each fault type in partially observed Petri nets in the same way as in labeled Petri nets.


Discrete event systems Petri nets Fault diagnosis Partial observation 



The authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers for very helpful comments on the initial submission of this paper and an earlier conference paper that included some of these results.


  1. Aghasaryan A, Fabre E, Benveniste A, Boubour R, Jard C (1998) Fault detection and diagnosis in distributed systems: An approach by partially stochastic Petri nets. Discret Event Dyn Syst Theory Appl Categ 8:203–231MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Benveniste A, Fabre E, Haar S (2003a) Markov nets: Probabilistic models for distributed and concurrent systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 48:1936–1950CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Benveniste A, Fabre E, Haar S, Jard C (2003b) Diagnosis of asynchronous discrete-event systems: A net unfolding approach. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 48:714–727CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Cassandras CG, Lafortune S (2008) Introduction to discrete event systems (2nd Edition). Springer, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Chung SL (2005) Diagnosing PN-based models with partial observable transitions. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 18:158–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Esparza J, Nielsen M (1994) Decidability issues for Petri nets—a survey. Bull Eur Assoc Theor Comput Sci 52:245–262MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Genc S, Lafortune S (2007) Distributed diagnosis of place-bordered Petri nets. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 4:206–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Giua A, Seatzu C (2005) Fault detection for discrete event systems using Petri nets with unobservable transitions. In: 44th IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, Seville, pp 6323–6328Google Scholar
  9. Giua A, Corona D, Seatzu C (2005) State estimation of λ-free labeled Petri nets with contact-free nondeterministic transitions. Discret Event Dyn Syst Theory Appl Categ 15:85–108MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Giua A, Seatzu C, Corona C (2007) Marking estimation of Petri nets with silent transitions. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 52:1695–1699CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Hadjicostis CN, Verghese GC (1999) Monitoring discrete event systems using Petri net embeddings. In: Application and Theory of Petri Nets 1999 (Series Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1639), pp 188–207Google Scholar
  12. Jiang S, Kumar R, Garcia HE (2002) Diagnosis of repeated failures in discrete event systems. In: 41st IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, Las Vegas, pp 4000–4005Google Scholar
  13. Lefebvre D, Delherm C (2007) Diagnosis of DES with Petri net models. IEEE Trans Automat Sci Eng 4:114–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li L, Ru Y, Hadjicostis CN (2006) Least-cost firing sequence estimation in labeled Petri nets. In: Proc. of 45th IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, San Diego, pp 416–421Google Scholar
  15. Murata T (1989) Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proc IEEE 77:541–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pearl J (1988) Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: networks of plausible inference. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  17. Peterson JL (1981) Petri net theory and the modelling of systems. Prentice-Hall, New JerseyMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Ramadge PJ, Wonham WM (1989) The control of discrete event systems. Proc IEEE 77:81–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ramírez-Treviño A, Ruiz-Beltrán E, Rivera-Rangel I, López-Mellado E (2007) Online fault diagnosis of discrete event systems. a Petri net-based approach. IEEE Trans Automat Sci Eng 4:31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ru Y, Hadjicostis CN (2009a) Bounds on the number of markings consistent with label observations in Petri nets. IEEE Trans Automat Sci Eng 6:334–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sampath M, Sengupta R, Lafortune S, Sinnamohideen K, Teneketzis D (1995) Diagnosability of discrete event systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 40:1555–1575MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Thorsley D, Teneketzis D (2005) Diagnosability of stochastic discrete-event systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 50:476–492CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Thorsley D, Yoo TS, Garcia HE (2008) Diagnosability of stochastic discrete-event systems under unreliable observations. In: Proc. of the 2008 American Control Conference, Seattle, pp 1158–1165Google Scholar
  24. Ushio T, Onishi I, Okuda K (1998) Fault detection based on Petri net models with faulty behaviors. In: Proc. of IEEE Int. Conf. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, San Diego, pp 113–118Google Scholar
  25. Wu Y, Hadjicostis CN (2005) Algebraic approaches for fault identification in discrete-event systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 50:2048–2053CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations