Advertisement

Using Ontology for Design Information and Knowledge Management: A Critical Review

  • Y. Liu
  • S.C.J. Lim
Conference paper

Abstract

Ontology has been identified as a feasible modeling solution for rich design information and knowledge representation. From previous studies, the applications of ontology in design engineering have shown promising progress. This chapter provides a critical review of the recent achievements in utilizing ontology for design information and knowledge management. The applications of ontology in the three major categories are explicitly discussed. Most importantly, a number of research issues concerning the application of ontology in design engineering have been identified and suggested. Finally, based on the current state of research, a few promising future research directions are also briefly discussed.

Keywords

Ontology Design information Knowledge management 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work described in this chapter was supported by a research grant from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China (Grant No: A-PD0C) and was supported by two GRF grants from the Research Grants Council, Hong Kong SAR, China (RGC Ref: 520208 & 520509).

References

  1. 1.
    Hicks, B.J., Culley, S.J., Allen, R.D., Mullineux, G. (2002) A framework for the requirements of capturing, storing and reusing information and knowledge in engineering design. International Journal of Information Management, 22:263–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Court, A.W., Ullman, D.G., Culley, S.J. (1998) A comparison between the provision of information to engineering designers in the UK and the USA. International Journal of Information Management, 18:409–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahmed, S., Wallace, K.M. (2004) Understanding the knowledge needs of novice designers in the aerospace industry. Design Studies, 25:155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hicks, B.J., Culley, S.J., McMahon, C.A. (2006) A study of issues relating to information management across engineering SMEs. International Journal of Information Management, 26:267–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    PricewaterhouseCoopers (2009) Technology Forecast: Spring 2009. PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, USA.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gruber, T.R. (1993) Toward Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing. KSL 93-04, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Noy, N., Hafner, C. (1997) The state of the art in ontology design. AI Magazine, 18:53–74.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gruninger, M., Fox, M.S. (1995) Methodology for the design and evaluation of ontologies. Proceedings of International Joint Conference of Artificial Intelligence Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, Montreal, Canada, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Uschold, M., King, M. (1995) Towards a methodology for building ontologies. Proceedings of International Joint Conference of Artificial Intelligence Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lopez, M.F., Gomez-Perez, A., Sierra, J.P., Sierra, A.P. (1999) Building a chemical ontology using methontology and the ontology design environment. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 14(1):37–46.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pinto, H.S., Martins, J.P. (2004) Ontologies: How can they be built? Knowledge and Information Systems, 6:441–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Noy, N.F., McGuinness, D.L. (2001) Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology. Knowledge Systems Laboratory Technical Report KSL-01-05, 1–5.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ahmed, S., Kim, S., Wallace, K.M. (2007) A methodology for creating ontologies for engineering design. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 7:132–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sarder, M.B., Ferreira, S., Rogers, J. Liles, D.H. (2007) A methodology for design ontology modeling. Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology, Portland, Oregon, pp. 1011–1018.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nanda, J., Simpson, T.W., Kumara, S.R.T., Shooter, S.B. (2006) A methodology for product family ontology development using formal concept analysis and web ontology language. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 6:103–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soininen, T., Tiihonen, J., Männistö, T., Sulonen, R. (1998) Towards a general ontology of configuration. AI EDAM, 12:357–372.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sim, S.K., Duffy, A.H.B. (2003) Towards an ontology of generic engineering design activities. Research in Engineering Design, 14:200–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liang, V.-C., Paredis, C.J.J. (2004) A port ontology for conceptual design of systems. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 4:206–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kitamura, Y., Mizoguchi, R. (2003) Ontology-based description of functional design knowledge and its use in a functional way server. Expert Systems with Applications, 24:153–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kitamura, Y., Washio, N., Koji, Y., Sasajima, M., Takafuji, S., Mizoguchi, R. (2006) An ontology-based annotation framework for representing the functionality of engineering devices. Proceedings of the ASME 2006 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (IDETC/CIE 2006), Paper DETC2006-99131, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Li, Z., Ramani, K. (2007) Ontology-based design information extraction and retrieval. AI EDAM, 21:137–154.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Catalano, C.E., Giannini, F., Monti, M., Ucelli, G. (2007) A framework for the automatic annotation of car aesthetics. AI EDAM, 21:73–90.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grosse, I.R., Milton-Benoit, J.M., Wileden, J.C. (2005) Ontologies for supporting engineering analysis models. AI EDAM, 19:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Witherell, P., Krishnamurty, S., Grosse, I.R. (2007) Ontologies for supporting engineering design optimization. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 7:141–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lim, S.C.J., Liu, Y., Lee, W.B. (2009) Multi-facet product information search and retrieval using semantically annotated product family ontology. Information Processing & Management, 46(4):479–493.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dartigues, C., Ghodous, P., Gruninger, M., Pallez, D., Sriram, R. (2007) CAD/CAPP integration using feature ontology. Concurrent Engineering, 15:237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Oh, S.-C., Yee, S.-T. (2008) Manufacturing interoperability using a semantic mediation. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 39:199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lin, H.K., Harding, J.A., Shahbaz, M. (2004) Manufacturing system engineering ontology for semantic interoperability across extended project teams. International Journal of Production Research, 42:5099–5118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cho, J., Han, S., Kim, H. (2006) Meta-ontology for automated information integration of parts libraries. Computer-Aided Design, 38:713–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bellatreche, L., Dung, N.X., Pierra, G., Hondjack, D. (2006) Contribution of ontology-based data modeling to automatic integration of electronic catalogues within engineering databases. Computers in Industry, 57:711–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhao, W., Liu, J.K. (2008) OWL/SWRL representation methodology for EXPRESS-driven product information model: Part I. Implementation methodology. Computers in Industry, 59:580–589.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ye, Y., Yang, D., Jiang, Z., Tong, L. (2008) An ontology-based architecture for implementing semantic integration of supply chain management. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 21:1–18.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ciocoiu, M., Nau, D.S., Grüninger, M. (2001) Ontologies for integrating engineering applications. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 1:12–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McGuinness, D.L., Wright, J.R. (1998) Conceptual modelling for configuration: A description logic-based approach. AI EDAM, 12:333–344.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Felfernig, A., Friedrich, G., Jannach, D., Stumptner, M., Zanker, M. (2003) Configuration knowledge representations for Semantic Web applications. AI EDAM, 17:31–50.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yang, D., Dong, M., Miao, R. (2008) Development of a product configuration system with an ontology-based approach. Computer-Aided Design, 40:863–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lim, S.C.J., Liu, Y., Lee, W.B. (2009) Product analysis and variants derivation based on a semantically annotated product family ontology. Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers And Information In Engineering Conference (IDETC/CIE 2009), Paper DETC2009-87160., (San Diego, California, USA), ASME.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Maedche, A., Volz, R. (2001) The ontology extraction and maintenance framework text-to-onto. Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Navigli, R., Velardi, P. (2006) Learning domain ontologies from document warehouses and dedicated web sites. Computational Linguistics, 30(2):151–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Choi, N., Song, I.-Y., Han, H. (2006) A survey on ontology mapping. SIGMOD Record, 35:34–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National University of SingaporeDepartment of Mechanical EngineeringSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations