Modern real-world engineering systems exhibit complex hybrid behaviors, which are composed of continuous nonlinear plant dynamics interspersed with discrete mode switching. State estimation of hybrid systems for accurate and timely online monitoring and diagnosis applications is a difficult task. A number of different methods have been proposed, and we develop a conceptual framework to perform a comparative study of four different hybrid state estimation algorithms in this paper: (1) the switched extended Kalman filter; (2) focused hybrid estimation; (3) multiple-modal particle filtering; and (4) the one-step look-ahead particle filtering. The conceptual comparison is followed by an empirical evaluation, where we study the effectiveness of these algorithms in tracking the behaviors of a Reverse Osmosis Subsystem of an Advanced Water Recovery System that was developed at the NASA Johnson Space Center. We discuss our results, which show the strengths and weaknesses of each of these algorithms, and propose topics for further research into this important problem.
Travé-MassuyèsL.Bridging control and artificial intelligence theories for diagnosis: a survey. Eng Appl Artif Intell2014; 27: 1–16.
4.
HofbaurMWWilliamsBC.Hybrid estimation of complex system. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern2004; 34: 2178–2191
5.
NarasimhanSDeardenRBenazeraE. Combining particle filters and consistency-based approaches for monitoring and diagnosis of stochastic hybrid systems. In: The 15th international workshop on principles of diagnosis, 2004.
6.
CocquempotVEI MezyaniTStaroswieckiM. Fault detection and isolation for hybrid systems using structured parity residuals. In: The Asian control conference (IEEE/IFAC-ASCC), 2004, vol. 2, pp.1204–1212.
7.
VentoJPuigVSarrateR. Fault detection and isolation of hybrid system using diagnosers that combine discrete and continuous dynamics. In: IEEE conference on control and fault-tolerant systems, 2010, pp.149–154.
8.
PouliezosAStavrakakisGLefasC.Fault detection using parameter estimation. Qual Reliab Eng Int1985; 5: 283–290.
9.
JiangTKhorasaniKTafazoliS.Parameter estimation-based fault detection, isolation and recovery for nonlinear satellite models. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol2008; 16: 799–808.
10.
AlurRCourcoubetisCHenzingerTA. Hybrid automata: An algorithmic approach to the specification and verification of hybrid systems. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 1993.
11.
MostermanPJBiswasG.A theory of discontinuities in physical system models. J Franklin Inst1998; 335: 401–439.
12.
MostermanPJBiswasG.Behavior generation using model switching a hybrid bond graph modeling technique. Simulat Ser1994; 27: 177–177.
13.
RoychoudhuryIDaigleMJBiswasG. Efficient simulation of hybrid systems: A hybrid bond graph approach. Simulation2010; 87: 467–498.
14.
LevyRArogetiSAWangD.An integrated approach to mode tracking and diagnosis of hybrid systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2014; 61: 2024–2040.
15.
LernerUParrRKollerD. Bayesian fault detection and diagnosis in dynamic systems. In: Proceedings of AAAI, 2000, pp.531–537.
16.
RienmüllerTHofbaurMWTravé-MassuyèsL.Mode set focused hybrid estimation. Int J Appl Math Comput Sci2013; 23: 131–144.
17.
NarasimhanSBiswasG.Model-based diagnosis of hybrid systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst Hum2007; 37: 348–361.
18.
BlomHAPBar-ShalomY. The interacting multiple model algorithm for systems with Markovian switching coefficients. IEEE Trans Autom Contr1988; 33: 780–783.
19.
DeardenRWillekeTHutterF. Real-time fault detection and situational awareness for rovers: report on the Mars technology program task. In: Proceedings of IEEE aerospace conference, 2004, Vol. 2, pp.826–840.
20.
KoutsoukosXKurienJZhaoF. Monitoring and diagnosis of hybrid systems using particle filtering methods. In: Proceedings of the fifteenth international symposium on the mathematical theory of networks and systems, 2002.
21.
HofbaurMWWilliamsBC. Mode estimation of probabilistic hybrid systems. In: International conference on hybrid systems: computation and control, 2002, Vol. 2289, pp.253–266.
22.
RussellSNorvigP.Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall (Pearson), 2010.
23.
FuniakSWilliamsBC. Multi-modal particle filtering for hybrid systems with autonomous mode transitions. In: 15th international workshop on principles of diagnosis, 2004
24.
WangMDeardenR.Detecting and learning unknown fault states in hybrid diagnosis. In: 20th international workshop on the principles of diagnosis, 2009.
25.
KarnoppDCMargolisDLRosenbergRC. System dynamics: modeling, simulation, and control of mechatronic systems. New York, NY: Wiley, 2012.
26.
PodgurskyBBiswasGKoutsoukosX. Efficient tracking of behavior in complex hybrid systems via hybrid bond graphs. In: Proceedings of the annual conference of the prognostics and Health Management Society, Portland, OR, 2010.
27.
GelbA.Applied optimal estimation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1974.
28.
BlomHAPBar-ShalomY. The interacting multiple model algorithm for systems with Markovian switching coefficients. IEEE Trans Autom Contr1988; 33: 780–783.
29.
LiXR.Multiple-model estimation with variable structure. II. Model-set adaptation. IEEE Trans Autom Contr2000; 45: 2047–2060.
30.
BlackmoreLFuniakSWilliamsBC.A combined stochastic and greedy hybrid estimation capability for concurrent hybrid models with autonomous mode transitions. Rob Auton Syst2006; 56: 105–129.
31.
WilliamsBCNayakP.A model-based approach to reactive self-configuring systems. In: Proceedings of the national conference on artificial intelligence, 1996, pp.971–978.
32.
TafazoliSSunX.Hybrid system state tracking and fault detection using particle filters. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol2006; 14: 1078–1087.
33.
Morales-MenéndezRFreitasNDPooleD. Real-time monitoring of complex industrial processes with particle filters. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2002, pp.1433–1440.
34.
HutterFDeardenR. Efficient on-line fault diagnosis for nonlinear systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on artificial intelligence, robotics and automation in space, 2003.
35.
NarasimhanSBiswasG. An approach to model based diagnosis of hybrid systems. In: international conference on hybrid systems: computation and control, 2002, pp.308–322.
36.
MartinOBWilliamsBCInghamMD. Diagnosis as approximate belief state enumeration for probabilistic concurrent constraint automata. In: Proceedings of AAAI, 2005, pp.9–13.
37.
ZhouGFengWBiswasG. A comparison of state estimation algorithms for hybrid systems. In: 29th European conference on modelling and simulation, 2015, pp.312–319.
38.
Peter BonassoRKortenkampDThronesberyC. Intelligent control of a water-recovery system: three years in the trenches. AI Mag2003; 24: 19–44.
39.
DaigleMJRoychoudhuryIBiswasG. A comprehensive diagnosis methodology for complex hybrid systems: a case study on spacecraft power distribution systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst Hum2010; 40: 917–931.
