Two ontology-driven formalisations of functions and their comparison

In this paper, we give formalisations of two engineering concepts of technical function and present in more general terms the project of supporting functional description translation by ontological analysis. The formalisations are given within the foundational dolce ontology and the concepts formalised are as follows: (1) the function as defined in the Functional Representation approach by Chandrasekaran and Josephson and (2) the function as defined in the Functional Basis approach by Stone and Wood. These two concepts represent two main ways of understanding functions in engineering: the first by means of the behaviour of artefacts, and the second by means of operations on flows as performed by artefacts. We analyse the similarities and differences between these concepts by means of the formalisations and show how the formalisations support the automated translation between functional descriptions based on these two concepts. In addition, we compare our strategy of formalising different engineering concepts of function within one foundational ontology with other strategies in the ontology-driven formalisation, such as defining a single formalised concept of function, either for replacing existing engineering concepts, or for use as a reference by which such existing concepts can be related. We compare these strategies and sketch the merits and shortcomings of our strategy.

[1]  Wolfgang Beitz,et al.  Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach , 1984 .

[2]  W. Sander,et al.  Experimental phased array radar ELRA with extended flexibility , 1990 .

[3]  John S. Gero,et al.  Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design , 1990, AI Mag..

[4]  Ashok K. Goel.  Representation of Design Functions in Experience-Based Design , 1991, IntCAD.

[5]  B. Chandrasekaran,et al.  Functional Representation and Causal Processes , 1994, Adv. Comput..

[6]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Discovery of physical principles from design experiences , 1994, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[7]  Mitsuru Ikeda,et al.  FBRL: A Function and Behavior Representation Language , 1995, IJCAI.

[8]  Tetsuo Tomiyama,et al.  Supporting conceptual design based on the function-behavior-state modeler , 1996, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[9]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  Special Issue: Representing functionality in design , 1996, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[10]  Michael Uschold,et al.  Ontologies: principles, methods and applications , 1996, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[11]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Learning Generic Mechanisms for Innovative Strategies in Adaptive Design , 1997 .

[12]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  Supporting two views of function in mechanical design , 1998 .

[13]  Michael A. Rosenman,et al.  Purpose and function in design: from the socio-cultural to the techno-physical , 1998 .

[14]  Luca Chittaro,et al.  Reasoning about function and its applications to engineering , 1998, Artif. Intell. Eng..

[15]  Ram D. Sriram,et al.  The Representation of Function in Computer-Based Design , 1999 .

[16]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Functional Interdependence and Product Similarity Based on Customer Needs , 1999 .

[17]  Balakrishnan Chandrasekaran,et al.  What are ontologies, and why do we need them? , 1999, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[18]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Development of a Functional Basis for Design , 2000 .

[19]  B. Chandrasekaran,et al.  Function in Device Representation , 2000, Engineering with Computers.

[20]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  A functional concept ontology and its application to automatic identification of functional structures , 2002, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[21]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  WonderWeb Deliverable D17. The WonderWeb Library of Foundational Ontologies and the DOLCE ontology , 2002 .

[22]  John S. Gero,et al.  The Situated Function - Behaviour - Structure Framework , 2002, AID.

[23]  Simon Szykman,et al.  A functional basis for engineering design: Reconciling and evolving previous efforts , 2002 .

[24]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Won-derWeb Deliverable D17: The WonderWeb Library of Foundational Ontologies , 2002 .

[25]  Yasushi Umeda,et al.  FBS Modeling : Modeling Scheme of Function for Conceptual Design , 2003 .

[26]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  Ontology-based description of functional design knowledge and its use in a functional way server , 2003, Expert Syst. Appl..

[27]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  Ontology-based systematization of functional knowledge , 2004 .

[28]  John S. Gero,et al.  The Situated Function — Behaviour — Structure Framework , 2004 .

[29]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  Deployment of an ontological framework of functional design knowledge , 2004, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[30]  Ken M. Wallace,et al.  A Methodology for Creating Ontologies for Engineering Design , 2007, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[31]  Balasubramanian Chandrasekaran,et al.  Representing function: Relating functional representation and functional modeling research streams , 2005, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[32]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  Special Issue: Engineering applications of representations of function, Part 1 , 2005, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[33]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  An ontological model of device function: industrial deployment and lessons learned , 2006, Appl. Ontology.

[34]  Paul Witherell,et al.  Ontologies for Supporting Engineering Design Optimization , 2006, DAC 2006.

[35]  L Nagel Robert,et al.  A Representation of Carrier Flows for Functional Design , 2007 .

[36]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  Towards a Reference Ontology for Functional Knowledge Interoperability , 2007, DAC 2007.

[37]  Ch Kees Dorst,et al.  On the conceptual framework of John Gero's FBS-model and the prescriptive aims of design methodology , 2007 .

[38]  Stefano Borgo,et al.  How Formal Ontology can help Civil Engineers , 2007, Ontologies for Urban Development.

[39]  Robert Arp,et al.  Function, Role and Disposition in Basic Formal Ontology , 2008 .

[40]  Stefano Borgo,et al.  A formal ontological perspective on the behaviors and functions of technical artifacts , 2008, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[41]  Tetsuo Tomiyama,et al.  A review of function modeling: Approaches and applications , 2008, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[42]  Pieter E. Vermaas,et al.  The Flexible Meaning of Function in Engineering , 2009 .

[43]  Patryk Burek,et al.  Ontological Analysis of Functional Decomposition , 2009, SoMeT.

[44]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  Sapphire – an Approach to Analysis and Synthesis , 2009 .

[45]  Stefano Borgo,et al.  Towards an Ontological Representation of Functional Basis in DOLCE , 2009 .

[46]  Dingmar Van Eck,et al.  On relating functional modeling approaches: abstracting functional models from behavioral models , 2009 .

[47]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  A device-oriented definition of functions of artifacts and its perspectives , 2009 .

[48]  Pieter E. Vermaas,et al.  TECHNICAL FUNCTIONS: TOWARDS ACCEPTING DIFFERENT ENGINEERING MEANINGS WITH ONE OVERALL ACCOUNT , 2010 .

[49]  Stefano Borgo,et al.  FORMALIZATIONS OF FUNCTIONS WITHIN THE DOLCE ONTOLOGY , 2010 .

[50]  Massimiliano Carrara,et al.  If engineering function is a family resemblance concept: Assessing three formalization strategies , 2011, Appl. Ontology.