IDENTIFICATION OF DISCRETE EVENT

SYSTEMS USING ORDINARY PETRI NETS

Rebiha Bekrar ∗ , Nadhir Messai ∗∗ ,

Najib Essounbouli ∗ , Abdelaziz Hamzaoui ∗ ,
Bernard Riera ∗∗

∗
CReSTIC, IUT de Troyes 9 rue de Quebec BP 396,
10026 Troyes Cedex France
rebiha.bekrar@etudiant.univ-reims.fr

CReSTIC, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne,

∗∗

UFR Sciences Exactes et Naturelles, Moulin de la Housse

BP 1039, 51687 Reims cedex 2 France

Abstract: This paper presents an identification method of partially observable

Discrete Event Systems (DES) using ordinary Petri Nets. The proposed method
is absolute, sequential and multiple. It consists in building the compartmental
model, computed off-line, for a DES in a Petri Net (PN) form. The developed
method is based on the use of the input/output sequences constructed during the
system evolution. The proposed algorithm is illustrated by the help of a simulation
example.

Keywords: Discrete Event Systems, Ordinary Petri nets, Identification

1. INTRODUCTION of a controller and a plant running in a closed

Identification of a discrete event systems (DES) is
a process allows to obtain a formal model repre-
senting the DES behaviour. Most of studies deal-
ing with this task are based on using automata
(Biermann and Feldman, 1972; Choi, 1998). Gen-
erally, the objective of these studies is to find
languages in Moore or Mealy machines form
(Kella, 1971; Veelenturf, 1978). However, these
approaches could not give an explicit representa-
tion of all the system states. They are based on
the minimisation of the states number which can
lead to losing important information about the
system. Moreover, they allow either to the iden-
tification of the plant’s model or the controller’s
model but never to the identification of a DES
in a closed loop. Note that a new identification
algorithm which can deal with a DES composed
loop is proposed in (Klein, 2005). This algorithm,
specially developed for the diagnosis tasks, uses
a new automata class called Non Deterministic
Autonomous Automaton with Outputs. However,
the behaviour of the considered system can be
only modelled by a generator (i.e. produces an
output sequences that only depends on how it is
controlled internally).
Petri Nets (PN) (Murata, 1989; David and Alla,
1992) are a useful tool which has been widely in-
vestigated for the supervisory, the control (Ramadge
and Wonham, 1987; Giua and DiCesare, 1994)
and the monitoring (Zamai et al., 1998) of DES.
However, there are no studies treating the iden-
tification problem of DES using PN, except the
papers of Meda and co-workers, see for exam-
ple (Meda-Campaña and Lopez-Mellado, 2005),
where the authors propose to identify DES mod-
elled by an Interpreted Petri Net (IPN). In this
context, the developed methods associate the IPN
places with the DES output signals and the IPN
transitions with the DES input signals. Hence, in
the first study (Meda-Campaña et al., 1998), the
proposed on-line identification algorithm has been
devoted to the class of binary IPN. This algorithm
is presented as an infinite loop that reads and
processes at each time the I/O signals of the con-
sidered DES. Then, an asymptotic identification
algorithm adapted to the case of IPN with single
dependencies was proposed in (Meda-Campaña et
al., 2000). After developing the passive method
(Meda-Campaña and Lopez-Mellado, 2001), the
authors have adapted the previous asymptotic
algorithm to the case of ordinary IPN with com-
plex dependencies (Meda-Campaña and Lopez-
Mellado, 2002). Finally, the identification algo-
rithm that process concurrent DES is presented
in (Meda-Campaña and Lopez-Mellado, 2005).
Unfortunately, all these algorithms require a pri-
ori knowledge concerning the specification of the
DES, which must be modelled by at least one IPN.
Therefore, these algorithms can be considered as
validation algorithms of the IPN model more than
identification ones.
To resolve this problem, we proposed in a previous
paper (Bekrar et al., 2006) an off-line identifica-
tion method that deal with a partially observable
DES using safe PN. This method associates sys-
tem states with a PN reachable markings and a
system events with PN transitions. The aim of this
paper is to adapt this method to identify a DES
using ordinary PN. In this method a priori knowl-
edge about the system specification is not needed
and the system to be identified is considered as a
black box.
This paper is organised as follows: some basic
definitions about PN are presented in the section
2. Section 3 presents the developed identification
approach. Finally, the proposed algorithm is illus-
trated with a simulation example in section 4.
2. BASIC DEFINITIONS
A Petri net is a 5-tuple, PN = (P, T, F, A, MO )
where:
P = {p1 , p2 , ..., pm } is a finite set of places, T =
{t1 , t2 , ..., tn } is a finite set of transitions, F⊆ (P ×
T ) ∪ (T × P ) is a set of arcs (flow relation),
A: F→ (1, 2, 3, ...) is a weight function and M0 :
P→ (0, 1, 2, 3, ...) is the initial marking with P ∩
T = ∅ and P ∪ T 6= ∅.
A Petri net structure (P, T, F, A) without any
specific initial marking is denoted by N and a Petri
net with the given initial marking is denoted by
(N, MO ) (Murata, 1989).
The marking M at a given instant describes the
system state. The evolution of PN marking is
given by the following state equation:
M = M0 + W × V, (1)
where W is the incidence matrix, M0 is the initial
marking and V is the firing sequence vector.
The arc weight between a place pi and transition
tj is noted as w(pi , tj ) and between transition
ti and place pj is noted w(ti , pj ). Each place pi
has input transitions which are noted as ∗ pi and
output transitions noted as p∗i . Each transition
tj has also input places noted as ∗ tj and output
places noted as t∗j . Note that, in the case of
ordinary PN the arcs weights are equal to 1.
Since the identification problem becomes more
challenging when only partial information on the
system states and events are available. This paper
considers a partially observable DES where, no
direct measurements of some states are available,
only specified subset of possible events can be
observed and the model structure is not known.
We propose to associate, with each non observable
state a reachable estimate marking and with each
a non observable event a non observable tran-
sition. For that raison, on one hand the vector
marking of the DES to be identified will be repre-
sented as follows:
µ ¶
MO (S)
M(S) = , (2)
MŌ (S)
the first part represents the marking of the observ-
able places when, the second one represents the
marking of the non observable places. The latter
will be estimated basing on the structure of the
identified PN and the observed I/O signals.
On the other hand, the matrix W of the DES to
be identified will be represented as follows:
· ¸
WPO TO WPO TŌ
W= , (3)
WPŌ TO WPŌ TŌ
where PO (PŌ ) and TO (TŌ ) are the sets of ob-
servable (non observable) places and transitions
respectively.
3. THE DEVELOPED APPROACH
Before presenting the off-line identification ap-
proach, we consider the following assumptions un-
der which, the proposed algorithm can be used:
Assumption 1: the considered DES is cyclic and
all its cycles start from the same initial observable
state.
Assumption 2: the number of I/O signals in the
identification data set is sufficient to identify the
considered DES. This assumption is required be-
cause an infinite time horizon is generally needed
to observe all the normal behaviours of a system.
In this method we deal with a DES that can be
modelled by an ordinary PN without concurrence
nor conflict. Our identification method consists in
constructing the I/O sequences from the finite set
of identification data and uses these sequences to
build the formal model in an ordinary PN form.
Therefore, before presenting the developed identi-
fication algorithm, this section gives some details
on the construction way of the I/O sequences and
explains how we detect non observable states and
events.
3.1 Construction of the I/O sequences
The identification objective is to construct a be-
havioural model in an ordinary PN form. The
system to be identified is equipped by some ac-
tuators and sensors, whose corresponding sig-
nals are associated to the input and the output
system respectively. The PN model is obtained
by associating the output signals with the PN
reachable markings and the input ones with the
PN transitions. Since DES are generally asyn-
chronous systems, the identification data set is
updated when an observable event occurs (i.e.,
an input signal is observed) or when the system
state changes (i.e., an output signal is observed).
Hence, the identification data set, noted CS , is
an asynchronous succession of states and events:
CS =E0 ei Ei ej ...ek E0 el El Eh em Ep ...en Es . where
Ei ∈ Nm are the system states with i ∈ {0, ..s}, m
is the dimension of the state vector and ej are the
observed events with j ∈ {0, ..n}. Since the DES
to be identified is cyclic (Assumption 1 ), the
first step of the identification process consists in
segmenting the identification data set into several
sequences, which represent the observed execution
cycles. These cycles start from the same initial
vector which is the initial observable state and
will be associated with a set of I/O sequences in
the PN. Each I/O sequence can be represented as
δi = E0 e1 E1 e2 ...ek Ek with Ek = E0 . This means
that the identification data set is scanned starting
from the first I/O signal (i.e, the initial state E0 )
until the observation of the next initial state E0 .
Once E0 is observed, the I/O sequence is removed
from CS and affected to the first I/O sequence
(δ1 ). This procedure will be repeated up to the last
element of identification data set in order to ob-
tain the other I/O sequences. The I/O sequences
are used in the next step of the identification
algorithm to obtain the PN structure representing
the behavioural model of the considered DES.
3.2 Detection of non observable places and non
observable transitions
The DES to be identified is partially observable
where several states (events) are not included in
the identification data set. Therefore, some non
observable places (transitions) of the identified
PN must be associated to non observable signals.
The procedure to obtain these non observable
places (transitions) is presented as follows:
3.2.1. Detection of non observable places:
in a given I/O sequence δk and after the occur-
rence of an event ei which is observable or not,
the system changes state from Ei to Ei+1 . Thus,
if we remark that the values of some components
of the vector state Ei+1 are less than their values
in Ei and those of the remaining components are
unchanged, then we can conclude that the system
is in a non observable state. Mathematically, if we
consider Ei (x) with x is varying from 1 to m the
components values of the state vector:
e
∀Ei (x) ∈ δk , Ei →i Ei+1 ; if Ei (x) < Ei+1 (x)
∀x ∈ [1..l] and if Ei (x) = Ei+1 (x) ∀x ∈ [l..m]
then the system is in a non observable state.
In PN terms, after the firing of a transition ti
which is equivalent to the event ei , the vector
marking changes from Mi to Mi+1 . Hence, if we
remark that the marking of input places of this
transition decreases by 1 in the marking Mi+1 and
the marking of all remaining observable places is
unchanged then, we detect the existence of non
observable place. This place will be an input of
the transition associated with the event before the
state Ei+1 in the sequence δk and an output of
the transition associated with the event following
the state Ei+1 in the same sequence. Finally, the
dimension of the network marking vector will be
increased by adding a new element representing
the estimate marking of the non observable place.
We can formalised this procedure mathematically
as:
ti
Mi → Mi+1 : if [Mi+1 (∗ ti ) = Mi (∗ ti ) − 1] and
[∀pi ∈ PO , Mi+1 (pi ) = Mi (pi )] then t∗i ∈ PŌ .
3.2.2. Detection of non observable transitions:
in a given I/O sequence δk , if the system changes
its state from Ei to Ei+1 but no observable event
takes place then, we detect the occurrence of
non observable event ei . Hence, a non observable
transition ti which, represents this non observable
event, must be added to the actual structure of
PN. This transition will be an input of the place
that will receive one token after the occurrence of
this event. In PN terms, we can note:
ti
If Mi → Mi+1 such that Mi 6= Mi+1 and ti ∈
/ TO
then ti ∈ TŌ .
3.3 The identification algorithm
Input: let S be a partially observable DES and
CS its identification data set.
Output: the identified model of the considered
DES in form of an ordinary PN.
Algorithm
• Construct Ω the set of the I/O sequences
needed to identify the system from the iden-
tification data set according to the subsection
3.1.
sequentially the I/O sequences observed during
the system evolution and, beginning by the same
observable initial state. Finally, it is important to
note that the obtained PN could not produce more
states than the considered DES. These exceeding
states represent the possible wrong trajectories
that can be followed by the system. Therefore, the
transitions sequences characterising these wrong
trajectories could not firing during the system
normal functioning.
4. AN ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE

• Construct the initial model as follows:
(1) Initialise the index of the first I/O se-
quence: k=1.
(2) Build the initial model M0 using δ1 , such
that each state vector Ei is equivalent to
a reachable marking Mi and each event
ei is represented by a transition ti . The
number of observable places in M0 is
equal to the dimension of the state vector
Ei and, the number of observable transi-
tions is equal to the number of events in
δ1 . Note that the non observable places
and transitions are obtained according to
the subsection 3.2.
(3) calculate the vector marking of the initial
model.
• Updating the initial model as follows:
Repeat:
(1) Go to the next I/O sequence by increas-
ing the index sequences: k := k + 1
(2) Use the sequence δk for updating the
initial model by adding new (observable)
non observable places and transitions as
mentioned in the subsection 3.2.
(3) Update the network marking by adding
the estimate marking of non observable
places.
Until: the last sequence of Ω.
To illustrate the proposed algorithm, we consider
a manufacturing system composed of three ma-
chines MA1, MA2 and MA3 which are connected
by a bidirectional conveyor. The displacement of
pieces between machines is done using pallets.
Each piece manufactured correctly and without
manufacturing defect leaves the system by un-
loading the palette. The system restarts manu-
facturing by loading new pieces in the palettes.
The pieces manufactured in M3 can be send back
to M2 or to M1 due to a manufacturing defects.
Each arrived piece must pass firstly in M1 then
it can pass in M2 then M3 or in M3 then M2 .
The machine M1 must manufacture two pieces at
the same time but MA2 and MA3 can process
only one piece in the same time. Let us assume
that the identification data set which, has been
observed during the system evolution is:
         
2 1 1 2 1
CS =  0  e1  1  e2  0  e5  0  e1  1 
  0   0  1  0  0
1 1 2 1 1
e2  0  e6  0   0  e4  0  e3  1  e8
       1  0  
1 0 0
1 2 1 1 1 1
 0   0  e1  1  e2  0  e3  1  e2  0 
0 0 0 1 0 1
  
1 2
e6  0   0 .
0 0

The detection of the cyclic behaviour allows es-

• Calculate the incidence matrix of the identi-
tablishing the following I/O sequences from this
fied model as represented in (3).
data set:

The analysis of this algorithm show that it has the        

2 1 1 2
advantage to be absolute because a priori knowl- δ1 = 0  e1  1  e2  0  e5  0 ,
edge on the internal state of the identified model 0 0 1 0
is not needed to identify the system and DES to         
be identified is considered as a black box. We in- 2 1 1 1 2
corporate progressively the information contained δ2 = 0  e1  1  e2  0  e6  0   0 ,
in the I/O sequences to construct finally a unique 0 0 1 0 0
identified model, which can generate all the be-         
haviours of the real system. So, this method can 2 1 1 1 2
be considered constructive. We can say also that δ3 = 0  e4  0  e3  1  e8  0   0 ,
our method is multiple because it consists in using 0 1 0 0 0

         
2 1 1 1 1
δ4 = 0  e1  1  e2  0  e3  1  e2  0 
0 0 1 0 1 the system change states without occurrence of
  
1 2
e6  0   0  .
0 0
Then the set of all the I/O sequences is Ω =
{δ1 , δ2 , δ3 , δ4 }. Using these sequences, we can con-
struct the identified model of this manufacturing
system where the first step consists in building
the initial model using the first I/O sequence δ1 .
According to the latter and starting from the
first element of this sequence which is the ini-
tial state E0 , we can conclude that the initial
model contains three observable places that we
can respectively called p1 , p2 and p3 . The initial
marking of p1 is equal to 2; that indicates the
number of pieces in MA1; and those of p2 and
p3 are null. After the occurrence of the event e1
which is equivalent to the firing of the transition
t1 , the marking of p1 and p2 become equal to 1.
This indicate that the transition t1 is input of the
places p2 and output of p1 . After the occurrence
of e2 which is equivalent to the firing transition t2 ,
the marking of p1 remain unchanged, the marking
of p2 becomes null and that of p3 is equal to 1.
Therefore, t2 is an output of p2 and an input of
p3 . Finally, due to a manufacturing defect, the
piece in M3 is sent back to M1 . This explain the
occurrence of e5 which is equivalent to the firing
transition t5 . The system is turned over to its
initial state which indicates that t5 is an input
of p1 and an output of p3 . According to this first
sequence, the network initial marking consists in
the marking of observable places p1 , p2 and p3 .
The initial identified model compose of these three
observable places and the observable transitions
t1 , t2 and t5 as represented in figure 1.
t5
••
t1 t2
P1
P2 P3
Fig. 1. Initial model
The second step is to update the initial model
using the remaining sequences. According to the
second sequence, a new event e6 is occurred which
is equivalent to the firing transition t6 . After the
occurrence of this event, we remark that the first
and the second component of the vector state
remain unchanged in the same time the value of
the third component decrease by 1. Otherwise,
the sum of vector state components decrease by
1 then, we must add non observable place to the
PN structure which we can called p4 . This indicate
that the piece is correctly manufactured and it is
unloaded from the system. Hence, the transition
t6 is input of p4 and output of p3 . We see also that
any observable event. This shows the occurrence
of non observable event which we can called e7
that explain the loading operation. This event is
equivalent to the non observable firing transition
t7 . It is input of p1 and output of non observable
place p4 . In this case we update the network
marking vector by adding the estimate marking
of p4 . The update identified model is built by
adding the new detected non observable place
and observable and non observable transition as
showed in figure 2. Note that, the non observable
places (transitions) are depicted as black circles
(black bars).
t5
P4
t6
••
t1 t2
P1 P2 P3
t7
Fig. 2. Updated identified model
Using the sequence δ3 allows to detect a new ob-
servable events e3 , e4 and e8 which are equivalent
in PN term to the firing transitions t3 , t4 and
t8 . This represent the execution cycle MA1, MA3
then MA2. The transition t3 is input of p2 and
output of p3 , the transition t4 is input of p3 and
output of p1 and the transition t8 is input of the
non observable place p4 and output of p2 . The
update identified model is construct by adding the
new detected transitions as represented in figure
3.
t5
t3
P4
t6
••
t1 t2
P1 P2 P3
t7
t4 t8
Fig. 3. Identified model
The sequence δ4 allows to construct the same
identified model represented in figure 3 which is
the identified model of the considered system in
form of ordinary PN. The incidence matrix of this
identified model is:
 Meda-Campaña, M.E. and E. Lopez-Mellado
 t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t8 t7
(2001). A passive method for on-line identifi-

p1 −1 0 0 −1 1 0 0 1
WS =
p2  1 −1 1 0 0 0 −1 0  cation of discrete event systems. Proceedings
p3 of The 40th IEEE Conference on Decision
 0 1 −1 1 −1 −1 0 0 
p4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 −1
and Control 5, 4990–4995.
Meda-Campaña, M.E. and E. Lopez-Mellado
(2002). Incremental synthesis of petri net
5. CONCLUSION models for identification of discrete event sys-
tems. Proceedings of The 41th IEEE Confer-
In this work, an off-line identification approach ence on Decision and Control 1, 805–810.
for partially observable DES using ordinary PN Meda-Campaña, M.E. and E. Lopez-Mellado
is presented. This approach consists in building (2005). Identification of concurrent discrete
a formal model based only on the knowledge of event systems using petri nets. Proceeding of
the input and the output system signals. An il- the 17th IMACS World Congress.
lustrative example has been given to illustrate Murata, T. (1989). Petri nets : properties, analysis
the advantages of the proposed method: sequen- and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE
tial, constructive and multiple. Our future works 77, 541–580.
concern the generalisation of this identification Ramadge, P. J. and W. M. Wonham (1987).
algorithm in order to deal with other class of Supervisory control of a class of discrete event
PN and to study more complicate phenomena like processes. SIAM J. Cont. Opt. 25, 206–230.
concurrence and conflict. Veelenturf, L. P. J. (1978). Inference of sequential
machines from sample computations. Pro-
ceding of IEEE Transactions on Computers
REFERENCES 27, 167–170.
Bekrar, R., N. Messai, N. Essounbouli, A. Hamza- Zamai, E., A. Chaillet-subias and M. Combacau
oui and B. Reira (2006). Off-ligne idedntifica- (1998). An architecture for control and mon-
tion for a class of discrete event sytems using itoring of discrete events systems. Computers
safe petri nets. Proceeding of the 3rd IFAC in Industry 36, 95–100.
Workshop on Discrete Event System Design
(DESDes06, Poland ).
Biermann, A.W. and J.A. Feldman (1972). On
the sysnthesis of finite-state machines from
samples of their behavior. Proceding of IEEE
Transactions on Computers 21, 592–597.
Choi, C. H. Ben (1998). Automata for learning
sequential tasks. New Generation Computing
16, 23–54.
David, R. and H. Alla (1992). Du Grafcet aux
Réseaux de Petri. Hermes Sciences Publicat..
Paris, France.
Giua, A. and F. DiCesare (1994). Petri net struc-
tural analysis for supervisory control. Proced-
ing of IEEE Transactions on Robotics and
Automation 10, 185–195.
Kella, J. (1971). Sequential machine identifica-
tion. Proceding of IEEE Transactions on
Computers 20, 332–338.
Klein, S. (2005). Identification of discret event
systems for fault detection purposes. Thesis
of the University of Cachan, France.
Meda-Campaña, M.E., A. Ramirez-Treviño and
A. Malo (1998). Identification in discrete
event systems. Proceding of IEEE Interna-
tional Conference on Systems, Man and Cy-
bernetics 1, 740–745.
Meda-Campaña, M.E., A. Ramirez-Treviño and
E. Lopez-Mellado (2000). Asymptotic identi-
fication of discrete event systems. Proceedings
of the 39th IEEE Conference on Decision and
Control 3, 2266–2271.