The Problems of Transition Predicates Construction in Hierarchical Concurrent Controllers

Open access


The paper presents a problem of a transition predicates construction in hierarchical concurrent state oriented notation. The notation, called statechart diagrams or state machine, serves as a very convenient formalism for specification of a complex behavior of the embedded systems control unit. The controller specified in this way is discrete, deterministic and synchronous system which operates on binary values and can be implemented in programmable devices as a digital circuit. Well designed controller has conflict-free transitions and its concurrent transitions should be independent. In order to meet this requirements transition predicates must be pairwise both orthogonal and non-implicative. Computational complexities of the problems is equal to classic clique problem. The paper also suggests some statecharts syntactic structures solving these problems.

[1] D. D. Gajski, S. Abdi, A. Gerstlauer, and G. Schirner, Embedded System Design. Modeling, Synthesis and Verification. Springer, 2009.

[2] OMG Unified Modeling LanguageTM (OMG UML), Superstructure. Version 2.3, Object Management Group, OMG, 250 First Avenue, Needham, MA 02494, U.S.A., May 2010. [Online]. Available:

[3] D. D. Gajski, F. Vahid, S. Narayan, and J. Gong, Specification and Design of Embedded Systems. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1994.

[4] D. Harel, “Statecharts: A Visual Formalism for Complex Systems,” Science of Computer Programming, vol. 8, pp. 231-274, 1987.

[5] M. Adamski, “Parallel Controller Implementation using Standard PLD Software.” in FPGAs, W. Moore and W. Luk, Eds. Abingdon EE&CS Books, Oct. 1991, pp. 296-304.

[6] D. Drusinsky and D. Harel, “Using Statecharts for Hardware Description and Synthesis.” IEEE Transaction on Coputer-Aided Design, vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 798-807, Jul. 1989.

[7] D. Drusinsky-Yoresh, “A State Assignment Procedure for Single-Block Implementation of State Chart.” IEEE Transaction on Coputer-Aided Design, vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 1569-1576, Dec. 1991.

[8] S. Ramesh, “Efficient Translation of Statecharts to Hardware Circuits.” in Proceedings of Twelfth International Conference On VLSI Design, Jan. 1999, pp. 384-389.

[9] STATEMATE Magnum Code Generation Guide., I-Logix Inc., 3 Riverside Drive, Andover, MA 01810 U.S.A., 2001.

[10] K. Buchenrieder, A. Pyttel, and C. Veith, “Mapping statechart models onto an FPGA-based ASIP architecture.” in Proc. EURO-DAC ’96, Sep. 1996, pp. 184-189.

[11] G. Łabiak, “From UML statecharts to FPGA - the HiCoS approach,” in Proceedings of Forum on specification & Design Languages - FDL’03, Frankfurt am Main, Sep. 2003, pp. 354-363.

[12] HiCos, “HiCoS Homepage,”˜glabiak, 2004. [Online]. Available:˜glabiak

[13] G. Łabiak, “Transition orthogonality in statechart diagrams and inconsistencies in binary control system,” Przegla˛d Elektrotechniczny, no. 9, pp. 130-133, 2010.

[14] D. Harel and A. Naamad, “The STATEMATE Semantics of Statecharts,” ACM Trans. Soft. Eng. Method., vol. 5, no. 4, Oct. 1996.

[15] G. Łabiak, “Symbolic States Exploration of UML Statecharts for Hardware Description,” in Design of Embedded Control Systems, M. A. Adamski, A. Karatkevich, and M. W˛egrzyn, Eds. Springer, 2005, pp. 73-83.

[16] A. Maggiolo-Schettini and M. Merro, Priorities in Statecharts., ser. LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 1997, vol. 1192, pp. 404-429.

[17] G. Bazydło, “Behavioural synthesis of reconfigurable controllers based on UML state machine model,” Pomiary, Automatyka, Kontrola, no. 7, pp. 508-510, 2009, in Polish.

[18] J. W. Moon and L. Moser, “On cliques in graphs,” Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 23-28, March 1965.

[19] A. Grasselli, “A note on the derivation of maximal compatibility classes,” Calcolo, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 165-176, June 1966.

[20] W. MathWorld, “Wolfram MathWorld,”, 2010. [Online]. Available:

International Journal of Electronics and Telecommunications

The Journal of Committee of Electronics and Telecommunications of Polish Academy of Sciences

Journal Information

CiteScore 2016: 0.72

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.248
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.542


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 74 74 4
PDF Downloads 23 23 2