Information control in networked discrete event systems and its application to battery management systems


Opacity is an important property in control of information flow among networked agents. In this paper, we investigate information control problems in networked discrete event systems using opacity. In a networked discrete event system, communication among agents is via a shared communication network. Since delays and losses are unavoidable in networked discrete event systems, they must be considered in investigating opacity. We call opacity under communication delays and losses network opacity. We first define three network opacities: strong network opacity, weak network opacity, and network non-opacity. We derive necessary and sufficient conditions for network opacities and develop methods to check network opacities. We then apply network opacity to solve a problem in battery management systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12


  1. Andres ME, Palamidessi C, Smith G (2015) Preface to the special issue on quantitative information flow. Math Struct Comput Sci 25(2):203–206

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Badouel E, Bednarczyk M, Borzyszkowski A, Caillaud B, Darondeau P (2007) Concurrent secrets. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications 17(4):425–446

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ben-Kalefa M, Lin F (2011) Supervisory control for opacity of discrete event systems, proceedings of 49th annual allerton conference on communication. Control, and Computing:1113–1119

  4. Bérard B, Mullins J, Sassolas M (2015a) Quantifying opacity. Math Struct Comput Sci 25(2):361–403

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bérard B, Chatterjee K, Sznajder N (2015b) Probabilistic opacity for Markov decision processes. Inf Process Lett 115(1):52–59

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bérard B, Haddad S, Lefaucheux E (2017) Probabilistic disclosure: Maximisation vs. minimisation. In: Proceedings of 37th IARCS annual conference on foundations of software technology and theoretical computer science (FSTTCS 2017), Kanpur, India

  7. Bryans JW, Koutny M, Ryan P (2005) Modeling opacity using petri nets. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 121:101–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bryans JW, Koutny M, Mazaré L, Ryan PY (2008) Opacity generalised to transition systems. Int J Inf Secur 7(6):421–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Carvalho LK, Basilio JC, Moreira MV (2012) Robust diagnosis of discrete event systems against intermittent loss of observations. Automatica 48(9):2068–2078

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cassandras CG, Lafortune S (2008) Introduction to discrete event systems. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cassez F, Dubreil J, Marchand H (2012) Synthesis of opaque systems with static and dynamic masks. Formal Methods in System Design 40(1):88–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Debouk R, Lafortune S, Teneketzis D (2003) On the effect of communication delays in failure diagnosis of decentralized discrete event systems. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications 13(3):263–289

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dubreil J, Darondeau P, Marchand H (2010) Supervisory control for opacity. IEEE Trans Autom Control 55(5):1089–1100

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jacob R, Lesage J-J, Faure J -M (2016) Overview of discrete event systems opacity: models, validation, and quantification. Annu Rev Control 41:135–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Keroglou C, Hadjicostis CN (2018) Probabilistic system opacity in discrete event systems. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications

  16. Lafortune S, Lin F (2017) From diagnosability to opacity: A brief history of diagnosability or lack thereof. In: Proceedings of 20th IFAC world congress, pp 3022–3027

  17. Lakhnech Y, Mazaré L (2005) Probabilistic opacity for a passive adversary and its application to chaum’s voting scheme. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive: 98

  18. Lin F (2011) Opacity of discrete event systems and its applications. Automatica 47(3):496–503

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lin F (2014) Control of networked discrete event systems: dealing with communication delays and losses. SIAM J Control Optim 52(2):1276–1298

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Nunes CE, Moreira MV, Alves MV, Carvalho LK, Basilio JC (2018) Codiagnosability of networked discrete event systems subject to communication delays and intermittent loss of observation. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: 1–32

  21. Ryan PY, Peacock T (2007) Opacity-further insights on an information flow property. Technical Report Series-University of Newcastle Upon Tyne Computing Science 958

  22. Saboori A, Hadjicostis CN (2007) Notions of security and opacity in discrete event systems. In: Proceedings of the 46th IEEE conference on decision and control (CDC), pp 5056–5061

  23. Saboori A, Hadjicostis CN (2011) Verification of k-step opacity and analysis of its complexity. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 8(3):549–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Saboori A, Hadjicostis CN (2008) Opacity-enforcing supervisory strategies for secure discrete event systems. In: Proceedings of the 47th IEEE conference on decision and control (CDC), pp 889–894

  25. Saboori A, Hadjicostis CN (2014) Current-state opacity formulations in probabilistic finite automata. IEEE Trans Autom Control 59(1):120–133

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Shu S, Lin F (2011) Generalized detectability for discrete event systems. Systems & Control Letters 60:310–317

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shu S, Lin F (2014) Decentralized control of networked discrete event systems with communication delays. Automatica 50(8):2108–2112

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Shu S, Lin F (2017) Predictive networked control of discrete event systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 62(9):4698–4705

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Tong Y, Li Z, Seatzu C, Giua A (2017) Verification of state-based opacity using petri nets. IEEE Trans Autom Control 62(6):2823–2837

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tong Y, Li Z, Seatzu C, Giua A (2017) Decidability of opacity verification problems in labeled petri net systems. Automatica 80:48–53

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wonham WM (2017) Design Software: TCT, available at University of Toronto,

  32. Wu YC, Lafortune S (2013) Comparative analysis of related notions of opacity in centralized and coordinated architectures. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems 23(3):307–339

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhang B, Shu S, Lin F (2012) Polynomial algorithm to check opacity in discrete event system. Proceedings of 24th Chinese Control and Decision Conference:763–769

  34. Zhang B, Shu S, Lin F (2015) Maximum information release while ensuring opacity in discrete event systems. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 12(3):1067–1079

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation of U.S.A. under Grant 1507096, the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants 61673297 and 61374058.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Feng Lin.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lin, F., Wang, L.Y., Chen, W. et al. Information control in networked discrete event systems and its application to battery management systems. Discrete Event Dyn Syst 30, 243–268 (2020).

Download citation


  • Opacity
  • Information flow
  • Networked systems
  • Discrete event systems
  • Battery management systems