Acquiring Configuration Knowledge Bases in the Semantic Web Using UML
The Semantic Web will provide the conceptual infrastructure to allow new forms of business application integration. This paper outlines our approach for integrating Web-based sales systems for highly complex customizable products and services (configuration systems) making use of descriptive representation formalisms of the Semantic Web. The evolving trend towards highly specialized solution providers cooperatively offering configurable products and services to their customers requires the extension of current (standalone) configuration technology with capabilities of knowledge sharing and distributed configuration problem solving. On the one hand, a standardized representation language is needed in order to tackle the challenges imposed by heterogeneous representation formalisms of state-of-the-art configuration environments (e.g. description logic or predicate logic based configurators), on the other hand it is important to integrate the development and maintenance of configuration systems into industrial software development processes. We show how to support both goals by demonstrating the applicability of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) for configuration knowledge acquisition and by providing a set of rules for transforming UML models into configuration knowledge bases specified by languages such as OIL or DAML+OIL which represent the foundation for potential future description standards for Web services.
KeywordsDescription Logic Component Type Translation Rule IEEE Intelligent System Generalization Hierarchy
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- A. Felfernig, G. Friedrich, and D. Jannach. Generating product configuration knowledge bases from precise domain extended UML models. In Proceedings of the 12 th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE’2000), pages 284–293, Chicago, USA, 2000.Google Scholar
- A. Felfernig, G. Friedrich, D. Jannach, M. Stumptner, and M. Zanker. A Joint Foundation for Configuration in the Semantic Web. Proceedings of the Workshop on Configuration (ECAI’2002), 2001.Google Scholar
- A. Felfernig, G. Friedrich, D. Jannach, M. Stumptner, and M. Zanker. Transforming UML domain descriptions into Configuration Knowledge Bases for the Semantic Web. Lyon, France, 2002.Google Scholar
- A. Felfernig, G. Friedrich, D. Jannach, and M. Zanker. Semantic Configuration Web Services in the CAWICOMS Project. Sardinia, Italy, 2002.Google Scholar
- A. Felfernig, G. Friedrich, D. Jannach, and M. Zanker. Web-based Configuration of Virtual Private Networks with Multiple Suppliers. Cambridge, UK, 2002. Kluwer Academic Publisher.Google Scholar
- T. Gruber. Ontolingua: A mechanism to support portable ontologies. Technical Report KSL 91-66, 1992.Google Scholar
- E.W. Jüngst M. Heinrich. A resource-based paradigm for the configuring of technical systems from modular components. In Proceedings of the 7 th IEEE Conference on AI applciations (CAIA), pages 257–264, Miami, FL, USA, 1991.Google Scholar
- S. Mittal and F. Frayman. Towards a Generic Model of Configuration Tasks. In Proceedings 11 th International Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1395–1401, Detroit, MI, 1989.Google Scholar
- J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson, and G. Booch. The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, 1998.Google Scholar
- D. Sabin and R. Weigel. Product Configuration Frameworks-A Survey. In B. Faltings and E. Freuder, editors, IEEE Intelligent Systems, Special Issue on Configuration, volume 13, pages 50–58. IEEE, 1998.Google Scholar
- U. Sattler. Description Logics for the Representation of Aggregated Objects. In Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), pages 239–243, Berlin, Germany, 2000.Google Scholar
- T. Soininen, J. Tiihonen, T. Männistö, and R. Sulonen. Towards a General Ontology of Configuration. AI Engineering Design Analysis and Manufacturing Journal, Special Issue: Configuration Design, 12(4):357–372, 1998.Google Scholar
- M. Stumptner. An overview of knowledge-based configuration. AI Communications, 10(2), June, 1997.Google Scholar
- F. vanHarmelen, P.F. Patel-Schneider, and I. Horrocks. A Model-Theoretic Semantics for DAML+OIL. http://www.daml.org, March 2001.
- J. Warmer and A. Kleppe. The Object Constraint Language-Precise Modeling with UML. Addison Wesley Object Technology Series, 1999.Google Scholar
- J.R. Wright, E. Weixelbaum, G.T. Vesonder, K.E. Brown, S.R. Palmer, J.I. Berman, and H.H. Moore. A Knowledge-Based Configurator that supports Sales, Engineering, and Manufacturing at AT&T Network Systems. AI Magazine, 14(3):69–80, 1993.Google Scholar