To make a supervisor comprehensible to a layman has been a long-lasting goal in the supervisory control community. One strategy is to reduce the size of a supervisor to generate a control equivalent version, whose size is hopefully much smaller than the original one so that a user or control designer can easily check whether a designed controller fulfils its objectives and requirements. After the first journal paper on this topic appeared in 1986 by Vaz and Wonham, which relied on the concept of control covers, in 2004 Su and Wonham proposed to use control congruences to ensure computational viability. This work is later adopted in the supervisor localization theory, which aims for a control equivalent distributed implementation of a given centralized supervisor. But after so many publications, some fundamental questions, which should have been addressed in the first place, have not been answered yet, namely what information is critical to ensure control equivalence, what information is responsible for size reduction, and whether the partial observation really makes things different. In this paper we will address these fundamental questions by showing that there does exist a unified supervisor reduction theory, which is applicable to all feasible supervisors regardless of whether they are under full observation or partial observation. Our theory provides a partial order over all control equivalent feasible supervisors based on their enabling, disabling and marking information, which can be used to categorize the corresponding reduction rates. Based on this result we can see that, given two control equivalent feasible supervisors, the one under full observation can always result in a reduced supervisor no bigger than that induced by a supervisor under partial observation.
['Rong Su']
What Information Really Matters in Supervisor Reduction