An Analysis of Description Logic Augmented with Domain Rules for the Development of Product Models

Xenia Fiorentini1, Sudarsan Rachuri1, Hyo-Won Suh1, Jaehyun Lee1, Ram D. Sriram1
1Manufacturing Systems Integration Division, Design Process Group, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD 20899

Tóm tắt

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.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

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.

2008, STEP PDM Schema, http://www.wikistep.org/index.php/PDM_Usage_Guide

Sudarsan, Information Models for Product Representation: Core and Assembly Models, International Journal of Product Development, 2, 207

2005, Web Ontology Language (OWL), http://www.w3.org/2004/OWL/

2004, SWRL, W3C Member Submission, http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/

Burkett, Product Data Markup Language: A New Paradigm for Product Data Exchange and Integration, Comput.-Aided Des., 33, 489, 10.1016/S0010-4485(01)00048-3

1994, ISO 10303-1, Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 1: Overview and Fundamental Principles.

Gorti, From Symbol to Form: A Framework for Conceptual Design, Comput.-Aided Des., 28, 853, 10.1016/0010-4485(95)00088-7

Gorti, An Object-Oriented Representation for Product and Design Processes, Comput.-Aided Des., 30, 489, 10.1016/S0010-4485(97)00087-0

Sudarsan, A Product Information Modeling Framework for Product Lifecycle Management, Comput.-Aided Des., 37, 1399, 10.1016/j.cad.2005.02.010

Melody Stokes, Managing Engineering Knowledge: MOKA Methodology for Knowledge Based Engineering Applications

Brimble, The MOKA Modelling Language, 49

Fenves, CPM2: A Revised Core Product Model for Representing Design Information, NISTIR 7185

Lin, A Requirement Ontology for Engineering Design, Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl., 4, 279, 10.1177/1063293X9600400307

Borst, Engineering Ontologies, Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud., 46, 365, 10.1006/ijhc.1996.0096

2006, “KIF—Knowledge Interchange Format,” http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/kif.html

Kitamura, A Functional Concept Ontology and Its Application to Automatic Identification of Functional Structures, Adv. Eng. Inf., 16, 145, 10.1016/S1474-0346(02)00006-X

Kim, Ontology-Based Assembly Design and Information Sharing for Collaborative Product Development, Comput.-Aided Des., 38, 1233, 10.1016/j.cad.2006.08.004

Taivalsaari, On the Notion of Inheritance, ACM Comput. Surv., 28, 438, 10.1145/243439.243441

Artale, Part-Whole Relations in Object-Centered Systems: An Overview, Data Knowl. Eng., 20, 347, 10.1016/S0169-023X(96)00013-4

Rachuri, Information Sharing and Exchange in the Context of Product Lifecycle Management: Role of Standards, Comput.-Aided Des., 40, 789, 10.1016/j.cad.2007.06.012

2007, “Semantic Web Technologies and Data Management,” http://www.w3.org/2007/03/RdfRDB/papers/ma.pdf

2007, “Scalable Semantic Retrieval Through Summarization and Refinement,” http://domino.research.ibm.com/comm/research_projects.nsf/pages/iaa.index.html/$FILE/techReport2007.pdf

2008, “Opening, Closing Worlds—On Integrity Constraints,” http://clarkparsia.com/files/pdf/ic-owled2008-eu.pdf

Baader, The Description Logic Handbook, 10.1017/CBO9780511711787

2008, Protégé, http://protege.stanford.edu/

2008, RacerPro, http://www.racer-systems.com/index.phtml

2008, Jess Engine, http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/

Fiorentini, Towards an Ontology for Open Assembly Model, 445

2005, “Representing Specified Values in OWL, “Value Partitions” and “Value Sets”,” http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-specified-values/

Liebig, T. , 2006, “Reasoning With OWL: System Support and Insights,” Technical Report No. 2006-04, Computer Science Faculty, ULM University.

2007, OWL 1.1, http://www.webont.org/owl/1.1/overview.html

Brachman, Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Artificial Intelligence

Kifer, Nonmonotonic Reasoning in FLORA-2, 10.1007/11546207_1

2004, “SWRL, Extensibility and Interoperability Cautions,” http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/#7.1

2003, “Rules Usage Suggestions,” http://www.daml.org/listarchive/joint-committee/1491.html

Jarrar, Scalability and Knowledge Reusability in Ontology Modeling

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=245