Graphical State System Operation Segmentation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional graphical modeling systems inaccurately capture system behavior and result in inefficiencies when translating models to hardware, as they require additional storage elements and do not allow for independent execution of output operations regardless of the system's enable status.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a state enabled system where output operations continue to execute independently of the system's enable status, while update operations are only executed when the system is enabled, allowing for accurate modeling and efficient hardware implementation by separating output and update operations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If conventional graphical modeling systems execute both output and update operations when a block is enabled, then the system behavior is simplified to capture, but the hardware translation becomes inefficient requiring additional storage elements

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvehardware translation efficiencyVSAvoidsystem behavior accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of manufactureVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the block operations into two independent types: output operations and update operations. Output operations execute whenever the block is enabled regardless of condition, while update operations execute only when the enabling condition is satisfied. This segmentation allows independent control of operation execution, eliminating the need for additional storage elements in hardware translation while maintaining accurate system behavior modeling.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies different execution characteristics to different operations within the same block. Output operations have continuous execution quality (execute on enable), while update operations have conditional execution quality (execute only when condition is satisfied). This local differentiation of operation quality resolves the contradiction between modeling accuracy and hardware efficiency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Device complexity

If conventional systems execute both operations when enabled, then implementation is simple, but hardware resources are wasted due to additional storage elements

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveoperation execution controlVSAvoidhardware storage elements

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

By segmenting operations into output and update types with different execution semantics, the patent eliminates the need for additional storage elements. Output operations execute continuously when enabled, while update operations execute conditionally, allowing direct hardware implementation without extra storage resources.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

3Productivity

If output operations execute only when enabled, then hardware efficiency is improved, but system behavior modeling becomes inaccurate

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvehardware implementation efficiencyVSAvoidsystem behavior capture accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The segmentation of operations allows output operations to execute independently of the enabling condition, maintaining accurate system behavior modeling. Output operations continue to execute whenever the block is enabled, while update operations respect the enabling condition, thus achieving both modeling accuracy and hardware efficiency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different execution qualities are assigned locally to different operations: output operations have continuous execution to maintain modeling accuracy, while update operations have conditional execution to optimize hardware efficiency. This local quality differentiation resolves the contradiction between productivity and measurement precision.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

4Ease of operation

If both operations are executed together, then implementation is straightforward, but signal delays increase due to sequential execution requirements

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveoperation executionVSAvoidsignal delay

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Segmenting operations into output and update types allows independent execution timing. Output operations execute immediately when enabled without waiting for condition satisfaction, while update operations execute when conditions are met. This reduces sequential execution delays and improves signal response time.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS8768658B1Configurable enablement of operations associated with state enabled systems in a graphical environment

Publication Date: 2014.07.01 MATHWORKS INC

AI summary

Exemplary embodiments allow configurable execution of operations associated with a state enabled system in a graphical modeling or graphical programming environment. In an embodiment, a state enabled system may be identified in a graphical model, or a graphical program, or both. The state enabled system may be associated with a first operation and a second operation, and may include instructions to execute the first and second operations. The state enabled system may be configured to always execute the first operation regardless of an enabling condition. The state enabled system may also be configured to prevent an execution of the second operation unless the enabling condition is satisfied.