<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>On-Line Checking of Faults in Cyber-Physical Systems</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Volodymyr G. Skobelev[</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>ymyr V. Sko</string-name>
          <email>skobelevvg@gmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Glushlov Institute of Cybernetics of NAS of Ukraine</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Glushkov Ave., 40, Kyiv, 03187</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="UA">Ukraine</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Numerous applications of cyber-physical systems in safetycritical spheres of human activity are the main reason for the fact that the development of methods intended for on-line faults diagnoses in these systems is one of the actual problems. One of the essential sub-problems for this problem is elaboration of models and methods intended for online checking of faults in cyber-physical systems. In the given paper this sub-problem is investigated under the supposition that these systems can be modeled by the 1-dimensional hybrid automata defined in the given paper. On the base of this model-based approach, some completely distributed system intended for on-line monitoring and fault components isolation in cyber-physical systems is proposed. This system consists of controllers of two types. Controllers of the first type are intended for checking the dynamics of physical processes, while controllers of the second type are intended for checking switching between dynamics. The structure of both types of proposed controllers is considered in detail. Necessary and sufficient conditions that guarantee for both types of proposed controllers that they carry out correct on-line checking are established and proved.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Hybrid automata</kwd>
        <kwd>Faults</kwd>
        <kwd>On-line checking</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>Modern information technologies have stimulated penetration of cyber-physical
systems (CPS) into different spheres of mankind activity. Informally, any CPS
(see [1], for example) consists of some computer networks and/or built-in
controllers that are used for control of considered physical processes via the
feedback, i.e. the considered physical processes conduct the computations, while the
computations, in its turn, conduct the choice and the mode of these physical
processes. The state of the art in the development of CPS is presented in [2,3].</p>
      <p>At present, CPS are widely used at the research of the Space, in power,
military, transport, healthcare, and production spheres, for the design of modern
infrastructure, etc. By this reason, in the overwhelming majority of cases, these
domains are critical ones. Therefore, in the vast majority of cases, CPS are
safety-critical systems. For this reason, the development of methods intended
for faults diagnoses in CPS is one of the actual problems. Different approaches
for investigation of this problem have been presented in [4–6].</p>
      <p>The essential sub-problem for the problem of on-line faults diagnoses in CPS
is the problem of on-line monitoring and fault components isolation in these
systems. The given paper is devoted to the investigation of this problem.</p>
      <p>We propose some model-based completely distributed system intended for
on-line monitoring and fault components isolation in the analyzed CPS. This
system consists controllers of two types. Controllers of the first type are
intended for checking the dynamics of physical processes in the analyzed CPS,
while controllers of the second type are intended for checking switching between
dynamics in the analyzed CPS.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Mathematical Backgrounds</title>
      <p>It is well-known that hybrid automata (HA) are one of the most often used
mathematical models for the design of formal specification and the analysis of
CPS. Therefore, it is natural to develop any model-based algorithms or systems
intended for analysis of CPS in terms of HA.</p>
      <p>One of the first definitions for HA has been proposed in [7]. Although this
definition of HA provides to us a convenient conceptual model, it is very
difficult to apply this model for the development of algorithms for CPS. Indeed, at
the solution of specific problems for CPS by means of these or those software
tools, the researcher, as the rule, must predetermine, detail and reformulate
analyzed objects and concepts in such way that the received model can be very
problematically squeezed in this definition of HA.</p>
      <p>For the development of algorithms for analysis of CPS, much more convenient
and much more widely used is the model of HA defined in [8] in the following
way.</p>
      <p>An HA is a system</p>
      <p>H = (Q, X, I, D, f, E, G, R),
where:</p>
      <p>Q is a finite set of discrete states;
X ⊆ Rn is a set of continuous states;
f : Q × X → Rn is vector field;
I ⊆ Q × X is a set of initial states;
D : Q → B(X) is a domain;
E ⊆ Q × Q is a set of edges;
G : E → B(X) is a guard condition;
R : E × X → B(X) is a reset map.</p>
      <p>It is well-known that there is a considerable number of difficulties connected
with computations and algorithmic solvability for such general model of HA. By
this reason, at the resolving of specific problems for CPS, the researchers take
this circumstance into consideration and usually limit themselves to the analysis
of sufficiently narrow sets of HA.</p>
      <p>Due to this approach, we investigate the problem of checking of faults in CPS
under the assumption that the associated model of HA is an element of the set
H0 of 1-dimensional HA that has been defined and investigated in [9].</p>
      <p>This set H0 of 1-dimensional HA has been defined proceeding from the model
of HA offered in [8], as follows.</p>
      <p>It is assumed that for each discrete state q ∈ Q the following six conditions
hold:
1. The set D(q) = Xq ⊆ X is some finite interval.</p>
      <p>2. The set of initial values of the continuous state is the set of pair-wise
disjoint closed intervals [αq,h, Aq,h] (αq,h ≤ Aq,h), where h = 1, . . . , rq.</p>
      <p>3. The guard condition associated with the set of initial values [αq,h, Aq,h]
(h = 1, . . . , rq) is some closed interval [βq,h, Bq,h] (βq,h ≤ Bq,h), and the sets
[βq,h, Bq,h] (h = 1, . . . , rq) are pair-wise disjoint.</p>
      <p>4. For each set [αq,h, Aq,h] (h = 1, . . . , rq) of initial values the dynamics is
presented by the differential equation x˙ = fq,h(x), where Dom(fq,h) ⊇ Xq and
fq,h is some Lipschitz continuous function.</p>
      <p>5. For each set [αq,h, Aq,h] (h = 1, . . . , rq) of initial values the duration of the
dynamics is some number tq,h ∈ [θq,h, Θq,h] (where either θq,h = Θq,h = 0, or
0 &lt; θq,h &lt; Θq,h), such that x(tq,h) ∈ [βq,h, Bq,h].</p>
      <p>6. For each guard condition [βq,h, Bq,h] (h = 1, . . . , rq) there exists the single
arc (q, q′) ∈ E and the single set [αq′,m, Aq′,m] (m ∈ {1, . . . , rq′ }) of initial
values, such that the inclusion R(q,q′)([βq,h, Bq,h]) ⊆ [αq′,m, Aq′,m] holds, where
R(q,q′)(·) = R((q, q′), ·).</p>
      <p>It should be noted that when the condition θq,h = Θq,h = 0 holds, de facto
we deal not with the continuous dynamics, but with usual switching. Besides, it
is more correct to use denotation ((q, h), (q′, m)) for the elements of the set E.
This denotation will be used in what follows.</p>
      <p>The set H0 has been called the set of 1-dimensional HA, since each dynamics
is presented by a differential equation from the same variable, though the number
the different dynamics in discrete states can be different. The main aim to define
this set of HA has been to aggregate the discrete states of HA, and thus to
simplify structure of the transition graph due to reduction the number of vertices.</p>
      <p>Let Sqin,h and Sqf,ihn be the maximal relatively to the inclusion relation sets
that are defined by the following three axioms:
(i) Sqin,h ⊆ [αq,h, Aq,h]&amp;Sqf,ihn ⊆ [βq,h, Bq,h];
(ii) θq,h = Θq,h = 0 ⇒ Sqin,h = Sqf,ihn;
(iii) 0 &lt; θq,h &lt; Θq,h ⇒ (∀x(t))(x(0) ∈ Sqin,h ⇒</p>
      <p>⇒ (∃t0 ∈ [θq,h, Θq,h])(x(t0) ∈ Sqf,ihn)&amp;(∀t ∈ [0, Θq,h])(x(t) ∈ Xq))&amp;</p>
      <p>&amp;(∀b ∈ Sqf,ihn)(∃x(t))(x(0) ∈ Sqin,h&amp;(∃t0 ∈ [θq,h, Θq,h])(x(t0) = b)).</p>
      <p>It has been proved in [9] that each HA H ∈ H0 can be reduced to equivalent
model, such that the following two conditions hold:</p>
      <p>Condition 1. The equalities
and
are true for all q ∈ Q and h = 1, . . . , rq.</p>
      <p>Condition 2. The equality</p>
      <p>Sqin,h = [αq,h, Aq,h]</p>
      <p>Sqf,ihn = [βq,h, Bq,h]</p>
      <p>R((q,h),(q′,m))(Sqf,ihn) = Sqin′,m
is true for all ((q, h), (q′, m)) ∈ E.</p>
      <p>In what follows it is supposed that the Conditions 1 and 2 hold for any
considered HA.
3</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Main Results</title>
      <p>It is evident that different architectures for the system of on-line checking of
faults in CPS can be offered. The main criteria of the efficiency for this system
are the reliability, the scalability, and the minimal time for decision-making.</p>
      <p>Due to these criteria, the best solution is the completely distributed system
for on-line checking of faults in CPS. Thus, for each dynamical process, as well
as for each switching its own controller can be associated.</p>
      <p>It should be emphasized that we consider the controller as some discrete
electronic device implemented on the base of the microprocessor and RAM.</p>
      <p>Let us characterize these controllers for CPS presented by HA H ∈ H0.
3.1</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>On-Line Checking of Continuous Dynamics</title>
        <p>It is assumed that if any of physical processes in the analyzed CPS is not
activated after obtaining the relevant input data, then the special physical device
instantly blocks this process. Thus, we will deal with the situation when each
physical process in the analyzed CPS is activated after obtaining the relevant
input data.</p>
        <p>It is also assumed that the controllers which are carrying out on-line checking
of different dynamical processes in the analyzed CPS are different, and do not
interact with each other in any way. Therefore, considering the HA H ∈ H0
associated with the analyzed CPS, we conclude that the total number of controllers
intended for on-line checking of different dynamical processes in the analyzed
CPS does not exceed the integer ∑ rq.</p>
        <p>q∈Q</p>
        <sec id="sec-3-1-1">
          <title>Now we define the controller</title>
          <p>Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq}),
which for the fixed discrete state q ∈ Q of HA H ∈ H0 carries out on-line
checking of the continuous dynamics for the analyzed CPS, under assumption
that this dynamics is presented in the HA H by the differential equation
x˙ = fq,h(x) ,
where fq,h is, at least, some Lipschitz continuous function on the closed interval
[0, Θq,h].</p>
          <p>It should be noted that this assumption about the function fq,h holds for
sufficiently wide class of CPS.</p>
          <p>
            Applying the Euler method, we can transform the equation (
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
            ) into the
finitedifference equation
(
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
            )
(
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
            )
xj+1 = xj + fq,h(xj ) · ∆t (j = 0, 1, . . .),
(
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
            )
where ∆t = Lq−,1h ·Θq,h, and Lq,h is some suitably chosen sufficiently large positive
integer. It is also assumed that there exists positive integer lq,h (lq,h &lt; Lq,h),
such that the identity θq,h = lq,h · ∆t holds. This assumption does not restrict
the reasoning, but simplifies the presentation.
          </p>
          <p>
            Therefore, with each solution x(t) of the differential equation (
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
            ) can be
associated the sequence
          </p>
          <p>
            x0, x1, . . . (x0 = x(0)),
calculated in accordance with the formula (
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
            ).
          </p>
          <p>The controller Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq}) consists of the two blocks, namely
B1 and B2.</p>
          <p>The block B1 consists of two input channels, namely i1,1 and i1,2, and one
output channel, namely o1.</p>
          <p>The input channel i1,1 obtains from some sensor the information that the
initial value for the analyzed physical process in CPS is x0.</p>
          <p>
            The input channel i1,2 is a binary channel. It obtains through some sensor
the information whether the analyzed physical process in CPS presented by the
differential equation (
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
            ) in the HA is activated or is not activated.
          </p>
          <p>It is assumed that the symbol 1 is associated with the situation that analyzed
physical process in the analyzed CPS is activated, the symbol 0 is associated
with the situation that this physical process is not activated, the impulse 0 → 1
activates the block B1 and the impulse 1 → 0 deactivates this block.</p>
          <p>
            As soon as the block B1 is activated, it carries out calculation of the sequence
(
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
            ) sequentially, symbol by symbol.
          </p>
          <p>It is assumed that the symbol x0 and each calculated symbol xj (j = 1, 2, . . .)
at once appears on the output channel o1 of the block B1.</p>
          <p>The block B2 consists of three input channels, namely i2,1, i2,2 and i2,2, and
one output channel, namely o2.</p>
          <p>The input channel i2,1 is identical with the input channel i1,2. Thus, the
input channels i2,1 and i1,2 can be treated as the branching of the same line
connected with the same sensor.</p>
          <p>Similarly, to destination of the input channel i1,2, the input channel i2,1
activates the block B2 by the impulse 0 → 1.</p>
          <p>The input channel i2,2 of the block B2 is connected with the output channel
o1 of the block B1.</p>
          <p>The input channel i2,3 of the block B2 obtains from some sensor, symbol
by symbol, the information that the analyzed physical process generates the
sequence</p>
          <p>y0, y1, . . . (y0 = x0)
of its output values.</p>
          <p>The output channel o2 of the block B2 is a binary channel connected with the
physical device Dq,h that can immediately deactivate and isolate the analyzed
physical process in CPS.</p>
          <p>It is assumed that the symbol 1 is associated with the situation when the
device Dq,h must be activated and the symbol 0 is associated with the situation
when this device is deactivated.</p>
          <p>As soon as the block B2 is activated, the value of the signal on its output
channel o2 is equal to 0.</p>
          <p>When the block B2 obtains the symbols xj and yj, respectively, on its input
channels i2,2 and i2,3, where j = 1, 2, . . ., it carries out the following calculations.</p>
          <p>The block B2 computes the value</p>
          <p>tj = tj−1 + ∆t (t0 = 0),
and checks whether the inequality
holds.</p>
          <p>Let
and the value of the signal on the input channel i2,1 is equal to 1. Then the
signal 1 is generated on the output channel o2 of the block B2, and the block
B2 deactivates itself.</p>
          <p>Let
and the value of the signal on the input channel i2,1 is equal to 1. Then the block
B2 checks, whether the condition</p>
          <p>Otherwise (i.e. when the condition yj ∈ Xq holds), the condition
is checked, where ε is some sufficiently small properly chosen positive number.</p>
          <p>If this condition is violated, then the signal 1 is generated on the output
channel o2 of the block B2, and the block B2 deactivates itself.</p>
          <p>Let
and the impulse 1 → 0 is applied to the input channel i2,1 of the block B2. Then
this block checks whether the inequality
|xj − yj| ≤ ε
holds.</p>
          <p>If tj &lt; θq,h then the signal 1 is generated on the output channel o2 of the
block B2, and the block B2 deactivates itself.</p>
          <p>Otherwise (i.e. when tj ≥ θq,h), the block B2 deactivates itself.</p>
          <p>It is evident that the time spent by the block B2 on the considered above
calculations is insignificant in the comparison with the time spent by the block
B1 on its calculations. By this reason, the time spent by the block B2 on the
considered above calculations can be neglected at all.</p>
          <p>Therefore, it can be assumed that the calculations of the block B2 are carried
out instantly.</p>
          <p>The controller Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq}) offered above can be characterized
as follows.</p>
          <p>Theorem 1. It can be guaranteed that the controller</p>
          <p>Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq})
carries out correct on-line checking of the analyzed physical process in the
analyzed CPS if and only if the equality</p>
          <p>
            TB1 = TB2
(
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
            )
holds, where TB1 is the time necessary for the block B1 to calculate any value xj
(j ∈ {0, 1, . . . , Lq,h}) and TB2 is the time necessary for the block B2 to obtain
from some sensor any value yj (j ∈ {0, 1, . . . , Lq,h}).
          </p>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-1-2">
          <title>Proof. Let us suppose that the equality (4) holds.</title>
          <p>From the definition of the controller Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq}) we get that
if this controller is activated then on the input channels i2,2 and i2,3 of the block
B2 the signals xj and yj, associated to each other, are obtained in each instant
of time.</p>
          <p>Besides, from the definition of the block B2 it follows that the signal 1 can
be produced on its output channel o2 if and only if this block is activated, and
some fault in the analyzed physical process in the analyzed CPS reveals itself
at the current instant of time. In this case the device Dq,h is activated, and the
analyzed physical process in the analyzed CPS is deactivated and isolated.</p>
          <p>Thus, it can be guaranteed that the controller Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq})
carries out correct on-line checking of the analyzed physical process in the
analyzed CPS.</p>
          <p>
            Let us suppose that the equality (
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
            ) isn’t met, i.e. the inequality
|TB1 − TB2 | &gt; 0
holds.
          </p>
          <p>From the definition of the controller Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq}) it follows
that if this controller is activated then there can exist some instant of time such
that on the input channels i2,2 and i2,3 of the block B2 are obtained the signals
xj1 and yj2 , where j1 ̸= j2. Starting from this instant of time the functioning of
the controller Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq}) can be incorrect.</p>
          <p>Thus, there is no guarantee that the controller Cq,h (q ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq})
carries out correct on-line checking of the analyzed physical process in the
analyzed CPS.</p>
          <p>Q.E.D.
3.2</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>On-Line Checking of Switching</title>
        <p>It is assumed that with each switching between dynamics in the analyzed CPS
its own controller is associated, and different non-interacting with each other
controllers are associated with different switching. Therefore, there is a
oneto-one correspondence between non-interacting controllers intended for on-line
checking of switching between dynamics in the analyzed CPS and the elements of
the set E in the associated HA H ∈ H0, i.e. the total number of these controllers
is equal to |E|.</p>
        <p>It is also assumed that for the analyzed CPS the time needed to carry out
any switching between dynamics is some sufficiently small positive number τ .
This assumption reflects the fact that in real systems switching are made not
instantly, but with some delay.</p>
        <p>Now we define the controller</p>
        <p>C((q,h),(q′,m)) (q, q′ ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq}; m ∈ {1, . . . , rq′ }),
intended for on-line checking of switching in the analyzed CPS, defined by the
arc ((q, h), (q′, h′)) ∈ E in the associated HA H ∈ H0.</p>
        <p>The controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) consists of three input channels i1, i2, i3 and one
output channel o.</p>
        <p>The input channel i1 of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) is a binary channel, and
through some sensor obtains the information whether the physical process in
the analyzed CPS, associated with the dynamics x˙ = fq,h(x) in the HA H, is
activated or is not activated.</p>
        <p>It is assumed that the symbol 1 is associated with the situation when the
physical process in the analyzed CPS, associated with the dynamics x˙ = fq,h(x)
in the HA H, is activated, the symbol 0 is associated with the situation when
this process is deactivated, and the impulse 1 → 0 activates the controller
C((q,h),(q′,m)).</p>
        <p>The input channel i2 of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) is connected with the
output channel of the block B1 of the controller Cq,h, which is intended for
online checking of the dynamics x˙ = fq,h(x), and obtains, symbol by symbol, the
sequence
computed by this block.</p>
        <p>The input channel i3 of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) through some sensor
obtains, symbol by symbol, the values
x0, x1, . . . , xtq,h
y0, y1, . . . , ytq,h
produced by the physical process in the analyzed CPS, associated with the
dynamics x˙ = fq,h(x) in the HA H.</p>
        <p>The output channel o of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) is a binary channel
connected with the physical device S((q,h),(q′,m)). This device carries out in the
analyzed CPS the switching between the physical process associated with the
dynamics x˙ = fq,h(x) in the HA H and the physical process associated with the
dynamics x˙ = fq′,m(x) in the HA H.</p>
        <p>It is assumed that the symbol 1 on the output channel o of the controller
C((q,h),(q′,m)) is associated with the situation when the device S((q,h),(q′,m)) is
activated, and the symbol 0 is associated with the situation when this physical
device is deactivated.</p>
        <p>It is also assumed that initially the value of the signal on the output channel
o of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) is equal to 1.</p>
        <p>In the instance of time when the impulse 1 → 0 is applied to the input
channel i1, the values of the symbols on the input channels i2 and i3 are equal
to xtq,h and ytq,h respectively, where tq,h ∈ [θq,h, Θq,h].</p>
        <p>The controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) is activated, and carries out checking of the truth
value of the following condition</p>
        <p>
          |xtq,h − ytq,h | ≤ ε&amp;ytq,h ∈ [βq,h, Bq,h]&amp;
&amp;R(((q, h), (q′, m)), ytq,h ) ∈ [αq′,m, Aq′,m],
(
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
          )
where ε is some sufficiently small positive number designating the size of
admissible absolute difference between the associated with each other the model and
the real values of the analyzed physical process in the CPS.
        </p>
        <p>
          If the condition (
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
          ) holds then the value of the signal on the output channel
o of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) remains be equal to 1, and a violation of this
condition changes this value on 0.
        </p>
        <p>The controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) offered above can be characterized as follows.
Theorem 2. It can be guaranteed that the controller</p>
        <p>
          C((q,h),(q′,m)) (q, q′ ∈ Q; h ∈ {1, . . . , rq}; m ∈ {1, . . . , rq′ })
carries out correct on-line checking of the switching in the analyzed CPS, defined
by the arc ((q, h), (q′, h′)) ∈ E in the HA H ∈ H0, if and only if the inequality
T|x−y|≤ε + Ty∈[βq,h,Bq,h] + TR &lt; τ
(
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
          )
is true, where T|x−y|≤ε is the time necessary for checking the condition |x−y| ≤ ε,
Ty∈[βq,h,Bq,h] is the time necessary for checking the condition y ∈ [βq,h, Bq,h], TR
is the total time necessary for calculating the value z = R(((q, h), (q′, m)), y)
and checking the condition z ∈ [αq′,m, Aq′,m], and τ is the time necessary for
the physical device S((q,h),(q′,m)) to carry out switching between dynamics in the
analyzed CPS.
        </p>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-1">
          <title>Proof. Let us suppose that the inequality (6) holds.</title>
          <p>From the definition of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) we get that at the instance
when this controller is activated, the symbols on its input channels i2 and i3 are
equal to xtq,h and ytq,h respectively, where tq,h ∈ [θq,h, Θq,h], and the value of
the signal on the output channel o of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) is equal to 1.</p>
          <p>Besides, from the definition of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) it follows that the
signal 0 can be produced on its output channel o if and only if this controller is
activated, and some fault in the analyzed physical process in CPS reveals itself.
In this case the physical device S((q,h),(q′,m)) is deactivated.</p>
          <p>
            Due to the inequality (
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
            ), the deactivation of the physical device S((q,h),(q′,m))
is occurred in time, smaller than τ , and the analyzed switching in the analyzed
CPS is blocked.
          </p>
          <p>Thus, it can be guaranteed that the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) carries out correct
on-line checking of the analyzed switching in the analyzed CPS.</p>
          <p>
            Let us suppose that the inequality (
            <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
            ) is false, i.e. the inequality
          </p>
          <p>T|x−y|≤ε + Ty∈[βq,h,Bq,h] + TR ≥ τ
holds.</p>
          <p>From the definition of the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) it follows that it is possible
such situation that some fault reveals itself on the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) on
the expiration of time τ . In this case the physical device S((q,h),(q′,m)) is
deactivated later than in the analyzed CPS has occurred, perhaps incorrect, switching
between the considered physical processes.</p>
          <p>Thus, there is no guarantee that the controller C((q,h),(q′,m)) carries out correct
on-line checking of the analyzed switching in the analyzed CPS.</p>
          <p>Q.E.D.
4</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p>The given paper is a theoretic one. Its main aim consisted in the developing some
structure of a completely distributed system intended for on-line monitoring and
fault components isolation in CPS. The proposed system is developed on the
model-based approach under the supposition that 1-dimensional HA of special
type is used as the mathematical model for the analyzed CPS. The use for
the analyzed CPS of different controllers for checking the dynamics of physical
processes and for checking switching between dynamics, gave the possibility to
establish the necessary and sufficient conditions guaranteeing correct on-line
checking of faults in the analyzed CPS.</p>
      <p>The detailed analysis of the structure of these controllers shows that the
offered completely distributed system intended for on-line monitoring and fault
components isolation in CPS can be easily generalized on the more general case of
CPS, when multi-dimensional HA are used. To achieve this aim, it is sufficient
to demand that the restrictions on the time spent by the controllers on their
calculations that are similar to the restrictions that have been established in
theorems 1 and 2 were carried out.</p>
      <p>The main direction of further researches is the specification of the proposed
general completely distributed system for on-line monitoring and fault
components isolation in specific CPS.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Cyber physical systems: design challenges</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Symposium on Object Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>363</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>369</lpage>
          . Orlando, FL, USA (
          <year>2008</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gunes</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Peter</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Givargis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vahid</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>A survey on concepts, applications, and challenges in cyber-physical systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems</source>
          ,
          <volume>8</volume>
          (
          <issue>12</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>4242</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>4268</lpage>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Liu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Peng</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yao</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Liu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Review on cyber-physical systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica</source>
          ,
          <volume>4</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>27</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>40</lpage>
          (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Asadollah</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Inam</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hansson</surname>
          </string-name>
          , H.:
          <article-title>A survey on testing for cyber physical system</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of IFIP International Conference ”Testing Software and Systems”</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>194</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>207</lpage>
          . Sharjah and Dubai, United Arab Emirates (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gao</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ding</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.X.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cecati</surname>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Real-time fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics</source>
          ,
          <volume>62</volume>
          (
          <issue>6</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>3752</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>3756</lpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Severson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chaiwatanodom</surname>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Braatz</surname>
          </string-name>
          , R.D.:
          <article-title>Perspectives on process monitoring of industrial systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>Annual Reviews in Control</source>
          ,
          <volume>42</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>190</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>200</lpage>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Henzinger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>The theory of hybrid automata</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>278</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>292</lpage>
          . New Brunswick, NJ, USA (
          <year>1996</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lygeros</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <source>J.: Lecture notes on hybrid systems</source>
          . University of Cambridge, Cambridge (
          <year>2004</year>
          ). https://fenix.tecnico.ulisboa.pt/downloadFile/3779579688470/lygeros.pdf.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Skobelev</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Skobelev</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Some problems of analysis of hybrid automata</article-title>
          .
          <source>Cybernetics and Systems Analysis</source>
          ,
          <volume>54</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>517</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>526</lpage>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>