Structural Abstraction for Strong Fault Models Diagnosis (DX 2014 BISFAI 2015) Roni SternMeir KalechOrel Elimelech Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel Department of Information Systems Engineering
Outline Introduction to Diagnosis Model-Based Diagnosis Definition & Motivation Abstraction Literature Review Research Goal Methodology Evaluation Results Conclusions Future Work 2
Outline Introduction to Diagnosis Model-Based Diagnosis Definition & Motivation Abstraction Literature Review Research Goal Methodology Evaluation Results Conclusions Future Work 3
What is a Diagnosis? Identifying the reason for a problem by examining observed symptoms. Determining which part of the system is failing. 4
Examples of Diagnosis Domains 5
Diagnosis Approaches Expert Systems. Case-Based Reasoning. Probabilistic Reasoning. Model-Based Diagnosis. And more… 6
Outline Introduction to Diagnosis Model-Based Diagnosis Definition & Motivation Abstraction Literature Review Research Goal Methodology Evaluation Results Conclusions Future Work 7
Model-Based Diagnosis 8 Car System ModelA Real Car [Raymod Reiter. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. 1987]. [Johan de Kleer and Brian C. Williams. Diagnosing multiple faults. 1987].
Model-Based Diagnosis 9 Diagnosis Engine System Model Diagnoses Diagnosis Observations
Abstraction Components
11 32 Components Faulty Abstract Diagnosis What caused this black box to fail?
12 Abstraction Input 1 Input 2 Output Inputs 3 & 4 Input 1 Input 2 Inputs 3 & 4 Output Abstraction
13 Grounding Faulty Input 1 = No Fluids Input 2 = No Fluids Expected Output = No Fluids Observed Output = Fluids Inputs 3 & 4 = No Fluids Pipe 9 is Faulty Grounding
14 Architecture & Terminology Original System Abstract System Diagnosis Engine Abstract Diagnoses Diagnoses for the Original System Find Abstraction Finds Grounding
What if we can’t ground an abstract component? 15
16 Ungroundable Abstract Diagnosis Input = No Fluids Expected Output = No Fluids Observed Output = Fluids Pipe 2 Mode: Healthy \ Blocked Healthy No Fluids Blocked No Fluids Pipe 1 Pipe 2 An abstract component of 2 pipes The grounding process fails Using abstraction here is not easy Can’t explain the observed output Faulty
17 Literature Review [Metodi, Stern, Kalech and Codish. Compiling Model-Based Diagnosis to Boolean Satisfaction. 2012] Past work assumed 2 behavior modes: Healthy \ Faulty Faulty Any desired behavior Pipe 1 Pipe 2 Abstract diagnoses will always be groundable
18 Literature Review Some have already tried to diagnose systems with multiple fault modes. Conflict-Directed with Abstraction [Feldman, Provan and van Gemund. 2010] Compilation-Based with Abstraction [Torta and Torasso. 2013]
Our goal is to find an efficient way to diagnose when grounding can fail 19
Outline Introduction to Diagnosis Model-Based Diagnosis Definition & Motivation Abstraction Literature Review Research Goal Methodology Evaluation Results Conclusions Future Work 20
Discard abstract components that may not be groundable Pessimistic Approach More components Harder to diagnose The grounding process is easier
22 Keep all abstract components and take the risk of failing during the grounding process. Less components easier to diagnose The grounding process is harder 2. Optimistic Approaches
Weak-Optimistic Approach 2.2. Strong- Optimistic Approach Grounding Fail Success Grounding Are there more abstract diagnoses? Fail Success No Yes
24 Approaches Tradeoff
Outline Introduction to Diagnosis Model-Based Diagnosis Definition & Motivation Abstraction Literature Review Research Goal Methodology Evaluation Results Conclusions Future Work 25
Evaluation Empirical evaluation. The approaches were implemented in Prolog. External SAT Solver. Modified version of the ISCAS-85 benchmark. 26
Results 27 Three systems: Diagnosis algorithm: SATbD Timeout: 20 seconds System ID|Comps.| Before Abstraction |Comps.| After Abstraction c c c X Axis – The Approaches Y Axis - Success Rate of Solved Instances
Conclusions & Summary 28 General approach for abstraction in strong-fault models. Evaluation on a modified version of the ISCAS-85 benchmark. Abstraction speeds up the diagnosis process. Mostly the (weak) optimistic approach is the best.
Schedule & Future Work 29 Find an efficient method to use abstraction in strong-fault models. Model the approaches to SAT. Evaluate the approaches (ISCAS-85 benchmark). Compare our method to Torta and Torasso. 2013, Feldman et al Optimize the approaches. Find an hybrid approach based on systems pre-process.
Questions?