The languages and logical formalisms developed by information scientists and logicians concentrate on the theory of languages and logical theorem proving. These languages, when used by domain experts to represent their domain of discourse, most often have issues related to the level of expressiveness and need specific extensions. In this paper, we first analyze the requirements for the development of structured knowledge representation models for manufacturing products. We then explore how these requirements can be satisfied through the levels of logical formalisms and expressivity of a structured knowledge representation model. We report our analysis of description logic (DL) and domain-specific rules with respect to the requirements by giving an example of a product ontology developed with ontology web language-description logic (OWL) and augmented with semantic web rule language (SWRL) rules. Clearly, increasing the expressivity of a product ontology also improves that of domain-specific rules, but there exits the usual tradeoff between the expressivity of languages and the complexity of their reasoning tasks. We present a case study of an electromechanical product to validate the analysis and further show how the OWL-DL reasoner together with the rule engine can enable reasoning about the product ontology. We finally discuss the open issues such as capabilities and limitations related to the usage of DL, OWL, and SWRL for product modeling.
1.
1994, ISO 10303-203, Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 203: Application Protocol: Configuration Controlled 3D Design of Mechanical Parts and Assemblies.
2.
3.
Sudarsan
, R.
, Baysal
, M. M.
, Roy
, U.
, Foufou
, S.
, Bock
, C.
, Fenves
, S. J.
, Subrahmanian
, E.
, Lyons
, K. W.
, and Sriram
, R. D.
, 2005, “Information Models for Product Representation: Core and Assembly Models
,” International Journal of Product Development
, 2
(3
), pp. 207
–235
.4.
2005, Web Ontology Language (OWL), http://www.w3.org/2004/OWL/http://www.w3.org/2004/OWL/
5.
2004, SWRL, W3C Member Submission, http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/
6.
Burkett
, W. C.
, 2001, “Product Data Markup Language: A New Paradigm for Product Data Exchange and Integration
,” Comput.-Aided Des.
0010-4485, 33
(7
), pp. 489
–500
.7.
1994, ISO 10303-1, Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 1: Overview and Fundamental Principles.
8.
Gorti
, S. R.
, and Sriram
, R. D.
, 1996, “From Symbol to Form: A Framework for Conceptual Design
,” Comput.-Aided Des.
0010-4485, 28
(11
), pp. 853
–870
.9.
Gorti
, S. R.
, Gupta
, A.
, Kim
, G. J.
, Sriram
, R. D.
, and Wong
, A.
, 1998, “An Object-Oriented Representation for Product and Design Processes
,” Comput.-Aided Des.
0010-4485, 30
(7
), pp. 489
–501
.10.
Sudarsan
, R.
, Fenves
, S. J.
, Sriram
, R. D.
, and Wang
, F.
, 2005, “A Product Information Modeling Framework for Product Lifecycle Management
,” Comput.-Aided Des.
0010-4485, 37
(13
), pp. 1399
–1411
.11.
Melody Stokes
, 2001, Managing Engineering Knowledge: MOKA Methodology for Knowledge Based Engineering Applications
, American Society of Mechanical Engineers
, New York
.12.
Brimble
, R.
, and Sellini
, F.
, 2000, “The MOKA Modelling Language
,” Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management
, London, UK, pp. 49
–56
.13.
Fenves
, S.
, Foufou
, S.
, Bock
, C.
, Bouillon
, N.
, and Sriram
, R. D.
, 2004, CPM2: A Revised Core Product Model for Representing Design Information, NISTIR 7185
, National Institute of Standards and Technology
, Gaithersburg, MD
.14.
Lin
, J. X.
, Fox
, M. S.
, and Bilgic
, T.
, 1996, “A Requirement Ontology for Engineering Design
,” Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl.
1063-293X, 4
(3
), pp. 279
–291
.15.
Borst
, P.
, Akkermans
, H.
, and Top
, J.
, 1997, “Engineering Ontologies
,” Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud.
1071-5819, 46
(2–3
), pp. 365
–406
.16.
2006, “
KIF—Knowledge Interchange Format
,” http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/kif.htmlhttp://logic.stanford.edu/kif/kif.html17.
Kitamura
, Y.
, 2002, “A Functional Concept Ontology and Its Application to Automatic Identification of Functional Structures
,” Adv. Eng. Inf.
1474-0346, 16
(2
), pp. 145
–163
.18.
Kim
, K. Y.
, Manley
, D. G.
, and Yang
, H.
, 2006, “Ontology-Based Assembly Design and Information Sharing for Collaborative Product Development
,” Comput.-Aided Des.
0010-4485, 38
(12
), pp. 1233
–1250
.19.
Taivalsaari
, A.
, 1996, “On the Notion of Inheritance
,” ACM Comput. Surv.
0360-0300, 28
(3
), pp. 438
–479
.20.
Artale
, A.
, Franconi
, E.
, Guarino
, N.
, and Pazzi
, L.
, 1996, “Part-Whole Relations in Object-Centered Systems: An Overview
,” Data Knowl. Eng.
0169-023X, 20
(3
), pp. 347
–383
.21.
Rachuri
, S.
, Subrahmanian
, E.
, Bouras
, A.
, Fenves
, S. J.
, Foufou
, S.
, and Sriram
, R. D.
, 2008, “Information Sharing and Exchange in the Context of Product Lifecycle Management: Role of Standards
,” Comput.-Aided Des.
0010-4485, 40
(7
), pp. 789
–800
.22.
2007, “
Semantic Web Technologies and Data Management
,” http://www.w3.org/2007/03/RdfRDB/papers/ma.pdfhttp://www.w3.org/2007/03/RdfRDB/papers/ma.pdf23.
2007, “
Scalable Semantic Retrieval Through Summarization and Refinement
,” http://domino.research.ibm.com/comm/research_projects.nsf/pages/iaa.index.html/$FILE/techReport2007.pdfhttp://domino.research.ibm.com/comm/research_projects.nsf/pages/iaa.index.html/$FILE/techReport2007.pdf24.
2008, “
Opening, Closing Worlds—On Integrity Constraints
,” http://clarkparsia.com/files/pdf/ic-owled2008-eu.pdfhttp://clarkparsia.com/files/pdf/ic-owled2008-eu.pdf25.
Baader
, F.
, Calavanese
, D.
, McGuinnes
, D.
, Nardi
, D.
, and Patel-Schneider
, P. F.
, eds., 2003, The Description Logic Handbook
, Cambridge University Press
, Cambridge, England
.26.
2008, Protégé, http://protege.stanford.edu/http://protege.stanford.edu/
27.
28.
2008, Jess Engine, http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/
29.
Fiorentini
, X.
, Gambino
, I.
, Liang
, V.
, Foufou
, S.
, Rachuri
, S.
, Bock
, C.
, and Mahesh
, M.
, 2007, “Towards an Ontology for Open Assembly Model
,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management
, pp. 445
–456
.30.
2005, “
Representing Specified Values in OWL, “Value Partitions” and “Value Sets”
,” http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-specified-values/http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-specified-values/31.
Liebig
, T.
, 2006, “Reasoning With OWL: System Support and Insights
,” Technical Report No. 2006-04, Computer Science Faculty, ULM University.33.
Brachman
, R. J.
, and Levesque
, H. J.
, 2004, “Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
,” The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Artificial Intelligence
, Morgan Kaufmann
, San Francisco, CA
.34.
Kifer
, M.
, 2005, “Nonmonotonic Reasoning in FLORA-2
,” Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference in Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
, Diamante, Italy.35.
2004, “
SWRL, Extensibility and Interoperability Cautions
,” http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/#7.1http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/#7.136.
2003, “
Rules Usage Suggestions
,” http://www.daml.org/listarchive/joint-committee/1491.htmlhttp://www.daml.org/listarchive/joint-committee/1491.html37.
Jarrar
, M.
, and Meersman
, R.
, 2002, “Scalability and Knowledge Reusability in Ontology Modeling
,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Infrastructure for e-Business, e-Education, e-Science, and e-Medicine
, Rome, Italy.38.
Wache
, H.
, Serafini
, L.
, and Gracia-Castro
, R.
, 2004, “Survey of Scalability Techniques for Reasoning With Ontologies
,” http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/results/browse/deliverables/details/?uid=245http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/results/browse/deliverables/details/?uid=245Copyright © 2010
by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
You do not currently have access to this content.
