Ambiguity Tolerant Commissioning Ontology: From an upper ontology to a domain specific implementation

Sorry you have no rights to view this entry!

2 Comments

  1. Hi Carsten,
    thanks a lot for your presentation. A quick question: Have you tried to make use of existing ontologies? I am just asking because it is my understanding that the Semantic Web always aims at re-using knowledge, thereby building upon existing ontologies.
    Best
    Matthias

  2. carsten.ellwein

    Hi Matthias,
    thank you for your question. We could not find any ontology that does serve our needs in regards of process and product view within an existing ontology. This is why we started to develop ATCO as an upper ontology by ourselves.

    We highly encourage users of the upper ontology ATCO to use existing ontologies within their projects. As mentioned in the presentation process and product descriptions have to be extended depending on the intended application. For our simple case studies, we extended ATCO based on the German standards DIN 8580 and VDI 2860. This standard based process and product descriptions, however, will nor fit the need of many real-world applications. We have included existing ontologies in our experiments i.e. the QUDT ontology. QUAD is developed by the NASA and does represent quantities, units and dimensions. However, we wanted to keep the experiments rather lean for the moment and therefore remained with rather small exemplars. Including a common ontology as e.g. process description was discussed and for sure will make sense for many real-world applications, but was not practices yet.

    I hope this does answer your question. If not please feel free to replay again.

    Best regards
    Carsten

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *