Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Semantic Interoperability in InteliGrid Ž. Turk and P. Katranuschkov with input from the inteliGrid consortium

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Semantic Interoperability in InteliGrid Ž. Turk and P. Katranuschkov with input from the inteliGrid consortium"— Presentation transcript:

1 Semantic Interoperability in InteliGrid Ž. Turk and P. Katranuschkov with input from the inteliGrid consortium

2 Semantic interoperability in context Business process are: material and information Information processes include: Value-adding activities Communication activities / cooperation activities Communication and cooperation are possible when humans / software actors: can ‘talk’ to each other  syntactic interoperability can ‘understand’ each other  semantic interoperability can properly ‘respond’ to changes in the environment  knowledgeable interoperability

3 inteliGrid “stack” business process dynamic VO semantics schemas conceptual models ontologies technology CORBA, DCOM Web Services,.net Grid


5 60's 70's 80's 70's Engineering Design FEM Prefabricated component modelling 90's Structural analysis Parametric design Great Information Barrier Reef 80's 90's 3D visualization 3D visualization Building Use & Maintenance FMFM EDI 60's 70's 80's 90's 80's Construction Production Planning Production Automation Accounting & data mgt Under construction: IFC GATE Will be ready real soon now PDM Product data bases Architectural Design Quantity calculation DXF ferry Information brokers CAD Internet 2D 2DDraughting Draughting VO Spanning Islands of Automation Matti Hannus, VTT

6 Human Centred VO ENGINEER 1 Project A Project N Project A Engineer 1 Engineer n project centered user centered R.J.Scherer, TUD

7 Dynamic VO need to go in and out of a VO fast how? if you carry your own not bring much luggage small semantic footprint files, documents costs down the road if you have some help lots of semantic luggage big semantic footprint objects savings down the road


9 Footnote on Semantics does this have meaning?    how about this? ziga turk inteliGrid it’s the same, just the font is different so where is meaning?

10 I, too, am a line location dimensions material description performance characteristics quality interrelationsh ips Structured vs. unstructured traditional unstructured low-level semantic document based sequential work modern structured high-level semantics shared databases distributed coordinated teamwork I’m a line So am I I’m a wall I’m a window

11 Ontological roots form-function-behaviour fu-ts RATAS

12 Form, function, behaviour model – legacy of Aristotle products or their parts have: form or structure function... the purpose they server behaviour... how they react to environment for example a wall: form: x,y,z,w,d,h function: load bearing, heat insulating, sound insulating behaviour w h d x,y,z

13 GARM: FU/TS Example

14 RATAS Building System Sub-system Part Detail STRUCTURAL SYSTEM ID:frame 01 Concrete volume: 1800 m3 Bearing qk:4 kN/m2 Bearing Fk:2 kN BUILDING SLAB FIELD 01.01 SLAB FIELD 01.02

15 Before ontology engineering: Conceptual product modeling NIAM ISO 10303 Express, Express-g UML XML Schema RDF Schema DAML/OIL, OWL, OWL-S ACL/KIF, KL1 family ??? … nodes and arcs

16 1980s Wall Concept (NIAM)

17 1990s Wall Express-G, Express

18 2000s Wall (XML)... EoWall02 Wall instance based on the Engineering Ontology Definitions. rectangle 0.3 2.8...

19 The real problem not the current fashion of encoding the nodes and arches but what are the nodes and arches what is a wall what is the wing of an airplane what is a keel of a ship

20 Continuous research efforts: C. K. Ogden (1923) The Meaning of Meaning A. Tarski (1944) The Semantic Conception of Truth, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research A. Newell (1982) The Knowledge Level C. Hewitt (1985) Open Systems C. Eastman (1992) Modelling of Building: Evolution and Concepts T. Gruber (1993) Towards Principles of the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing J. Benjamin (1998) Ontology Construction in Technical Domains footnote: but is the world really built out of objects with properties

21 The answer to the problem ISO DPAS 12006-2 Classification System ISO 10303 STEP Standard for the Exchange of Product Data 10 3 classes automotive, aerospace, shipbuilding ISO PAS 16739 IFC 2.x Industry Foundation Classes 10 3 classes AEC

22 Software support

23 ontology classification IFC STEP The conceptual onion application shema service shema application shema


25 ISO STEP reference architecture for manufacturing Enterprise Product Model Business Object Proprietary Environment Proprietary Knowledge Proprietary Environment Proprietary Knowledge Requirements/ feasibility DesignSimulationManufacturingProduct support Proprietary Environment Proprietary Knowledge defines Integrated schema Product model dataReference data library Inter-disciplinary collaboration Intra-disciplinary collaboration PDM schema Open Data Standards ISO15926 Life-cycle AP233 AP203e2 AP214 AP210 AP209 AP237 AP233 AP238 AP239

26 Business Object Data completion Methods Data validation Data conversion Check-in/check-out Versioning/history Configurations Origin/rights Design Intent Business Object Enterprise Product Model Reference Data Library Application Aspect Represents a subset of the product model population e.g. transmission, door, wing, landing gear, etc. Represents a view of the product model, e.g. structural, electrical, etc. Methods for accessing/updating the underlying data contained in the business object. Rules

27 The meaning triangle interpretedConceptRepository Proxy representation reference Designation Denotation Terms Terms contained in design/construction documents and in the heads of the designers – eng. knowledge (“site ”, “building”, “storey” …) Business objects (IFC product model data ) Business objects (IFC product model data ) contained e.g. in CAD drawings (IfcSite, IfcBuilding, IfcBuildingStorey …) IfcProject IfcProcess IfcProduct IfcBuilding IfcSite IfcElement IfcSpatialElement IfcObject IfcRoot Real world objects Fuzzy, ambiguous Difficult to realise completely Complex

28 Current Web Services Architectures file services database services web services thick client application IFC database thin client application thin client application thick client application FEM services project Web services links set up through UDDI, WSDL, effort … OK if static, permanent links ontology 1 ontology 2

29 Proposed Architecture – a view thick client application thin client application thin client application thick client application file services database services web services IFC database FEM services project Web services client-side grid sw server side grid sw committed ontology complex semantic grid

30 Middleware Extensions – a possibility ogsa-dai ifo-oi

31 The Ontology Layer Suggested in inteliGrid Provide an ontology-committed view to grid information and services Ontology used as formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualisation -formal  ontology should be machine readable -explicit  explicit definition of concept types and constraints -shared  used to define a common standard in the domain Needed for improvements in -data/service discovery -data/service integration (for disparate sources) -data/service quality improvement (management of consistency) -flexibility and maintainability of the grid -IFC based semantic interoperability through I-OWL -possibly ontology-enabled user interfaces  intelligent semantic interoperability

32 OGSA-DAI Product Data and Ontology Framework OWL (RDF/XSD/XML) ontology tools -editors -parsers -reasoners -servers generic ontology specifications (generic definitions/ specifications) AEC specific ontology (ifcOWL) ifcXML databases IFC / ISO standard product data models engineering applications (application access) defined by specialization of ontology def. data access guided by guided by product servers existing tools (CAD,etc.)

33 Ontology Augmented Data Access Scenario  Information request by client  Interpret information need  Request list of available information  Transform information request  Retrieve & transform model based info  Fill A-box based with available information  Specify required information resources  Request information resources  Deliver information resources  offer information to client Ontology Information Logistic Info Server I Info Server II Info Server III Ontology Server Taxonomy Assertions … Basic Assertions What resources, where                  

34 Geometry view Ontology-Enabled GUI

35 Challenges

36 Challenges: Research, Development, Migration can grids compete with web services as interoperability platform? what are the advantages, disadvantages? Is WSRF the right solution? ontology committed semantics not one service of the grid but a feature of the grid as a whole what kind of ontology? lean or fat, one – hardwired, one – exchangeable for documents or for objects several competing ontologies

37 Challenges: Research, Development, Migration grid toolkits are de-facto “distributed processing job” biased immaturity of the technologies: OGSI, WSRF, what’s next?

38 Challenges: Research, Development, Migration business model: one AEC grid with several project Web/portal providers or one grid or portals evolve to grids? does this work for software developers and service providers, how can they be motivated for grid-based solutions does this simplify the IT access for an VO

39 The end

40 Does it work on the grid

Download ppt "Semantic Interoperability in InteliGrid Ž. Turk and P. Katranuschkov with input from the inteliGrid consortium"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google