skip to main content
10.1145/2883817.2883850acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescpsweekConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Computing Distances between Reach Flowpipes

Published:11 April 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

We investigate quantifying the difference between two hybrid dynamical systems under noise and initial-state uncertainty. While the set of traces for these systems is infinite, it is possible to symbolically approximate trace sets using \emph{reachpipes} that compute upper and lower bounds on the evolution of the reachable sets with time. We estimate distances between corresponding sets of trajectories of two systems in terms of distances between the reachpipes.

In case of two individual traces, the Skorokhod distance has been proposed as a robust and efficient notion of distance which captures both value and timing distortions. In this paper, we extend the computation of the Skorokhod distance to reachpipes, and provide algorithms to compute upper and lower bounds on the distance between two sets of traces. Our algorithms use new geometric insights that are used to compute the worst-case and best-case distances between two polyhedral sets evolving with time.

References

  1. H. Abbas, B. Hoxha, G.E. Fainekos, J.V. Deshmukh, J. Kapinski, and K. Ueda. Conformance testing as falsification for cyber-physical systems. CoRR, abs/1401.5200, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. H. Abbas, H. D. Mittelmann, and G. E. Fainekos. Formal property verification in a conformance testing framework. In MEMOCODE 2014, pages 155--164. IEEE, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. H. Alt and M. Godau. Computing the Fréchet distance between two polygonal curves. Int. J. Comput. Geometry Appl., 5:75--91, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. D. Avis, D. Bremner, and R. Seidel. How good are convex hull algorithms? Comput. Geom., 7:265--301, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. S. Basu, R. Pollack, and M.F. Roy. Algorithms in Real Algebraic Geometry. Springer-Verlag, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. X. Chen, E. Abrahám, and S. Sankaranarayanan. Taylor model flowpipe construction for non-linear hybrid systems. In RTSS 2012, pages 183--192. IEEE Computer Society, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. A. Chutinan and B. H. Krogh. Computational techniques for hybrid system verification. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 48(1):64--75, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. M. Colón and S. Sankaranarayanan. Generalizing the template polyhedral domain. In ESOP 2011, LNCS 6602, pages 176--195. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. V. Deshmukh, R. Majumdar, and V. S. Prabhu. Quantifying conformance using the Skorokhod metric. In CAV 2015, LNCS 9207, pages 234--250 Part(II). Springer, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. G. Frehse, C. Le Guernic, A. Donzé, S. Cotton, R. Ray, O. Lebeltel, R. Ripado, A. Girard, T. Dang, and O. Maler. Spaceex: Scalable verification of hybrid systems. In CAV 2011, LNCS 6806, pages 379--395. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. Girard. Reachability of uncertain linear systems using zonotopes. In HSCC 2005, LNCS 3414, pages 291--305. Springer, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. A. Girard and C. Le Guernic. Zonotope/hyperplane intersection for hybrid systems reachability analysis. In HSCC, LNCS 4981, pages 215--228. Springer, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. A. Girard, C. Le Guernic, and O. Maler. Efficient computation of reachable sets of linear time-invariant systems with inputs. In HSCC 2006, LNCS 3927, pages 257--271. Springer, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. G.M.Ziegler. Lectures on Polytopes. Springer, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. C. Le Guernic and A. Girard. Reachability analysis of linear systems using support functions. Nonlinear Analysis: Hybrid Systems, 4(2):250--262, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Z. Han and B. H. Krogh. Reachability analysis of large-scale affine systems using low-dimensional polytopes. In HSCC 2006, LNCS 3927, pages 287--301. Springer, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. A. B. Kurzhanski and P. Varaiya. Ellipsoidal techniques for reachability under state constraints. SIAM J. Contr. & Optim., 45(4):1369--1394, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. R. Majumdar and V. S. Prabhu. Computing the Skorokhod distance between polygonal traces. In HSCC 2015, pages 199--208. ACM, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. R. Majumdar and V.S. Prabhu. Computing distances between reach flowpipes. CoRR, 1602.03266, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. P. Prabhakar and M. Viswanathan. A dynamic algorithm for approximate flow computations. In HSCC 2011, pages 133--142. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. S. Sankaranarayanan, T. Dang, and F. Ivancic. A policy iteration technique for time elapse over template polyhedra. In HSCC 2008, LNCS 4981, pages 654--657. Springer, 200 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Computing Distances between Reach Flowpipes

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        HSCC '16: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control
        April 2016
        324 pages
        ISBN:9781450339551
        DOI:10.1145/2883817

        Copyright © 2016 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 11 April 2016

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        HSCC '16 Paper Acceptance Rate28of65submissions,43%Overall Acceptance Rate153of373submissions,41%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader