Ontology-based projects in industry - INF3580 guest lecture · Provided by IHS under license with...

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

OIL & GAS

Ontology-based projects in industryINF3580 guest lecture

Johan W. KlüwerMay 23, 2016

Security and Information Risk Management (SIRM)

Information ManagementRight information to the right people at the right time – with theright quality

Integration and InteroperabilityAccessible and consistent life cycle information

Information and Cyber SecuritySecuring business, investments, and assets

Systems and Software ReliabilityImproving performance of complex integrated software dependentsystems

2 / 58 DNV GL © 2016 May 23, 2016 Ontology-based projects in industry

O&G project: Material Master Data @ Aibel

WhoEPC contractor Aibel supported by DNV GL SIRM

WhatUniform information management across all EPC project phases:Requirements, designs, and products

Why� Better quality� Higher efficiency

HowOntology-based management of requirements, designs, and physicalassets. Semantic technology for exchange and reasoning services.


Johan Sverdrup Drilling Platform (JSDP)

MMD is Aibel’s material master for piping bulk and structural steel at JSDP


Health domain project: Optique pilot @ AHUSWhoAkershus University Hospital (AHUS) supported by DNV GL SIRM incollaboration with Logic and Intelligent Data (LogID), U. of Oslo

WhatOptique project commercial pilot. Integrated access to patientinformation across domains and specialist roles: diseases,diagnoses, tests, procedures

Why� Better quality� Higher efficiency

HowOntology based data access (OBDA) for medical conditions,diagnoses, and clinical processes. Integration across data sourcesand semantic document search.


Relevance to industrial information in general

WhoEvery industry is subject to complex requirements

WhatSmart management of requirements, rules, solutions, andknowledge in complex scenarios. Data access, informationexchange, documentation, experience transfer.

Why� Better quality – validated basis for decisions� Higher efficiency – simplified and faster work processes

HowApply ontology based methods and semantic technologies toimplement Enterprise Semantics


Computers are unsophisticated (tabloid version)

1. Everyone values precise language and consistent rules.

2. Our information systems ought to implement them.

3. No one believes 2. is possible.


Timeline: SIRM in semantic technology

2000 2005 2010 2015

PoscCaesar

ISO15926

IIP IDS

DDR

IOHNRosatom

EPIM

Optique

Aibel MMD

BYTE

Ahus

20 years of innovation in enterprise semantics – sample projects

2000 2005 2010 2015

UML 1.0

XML 1.0

RDF,OW

L 1, D2RQ

BFO

LinkedDataproposal

SPARQL

R2RML,OW

L 2

Semantic technology standards – mature enough to deliver great value


Enterprise semantics supporting analytics


Analysis – Pulling insights from data

A basic pattern: We interpret data to obtain a suitable set of facts as a body ofevidence, then analyze for general, higher-level facts – insight.

interpretation facts insight

Our interpretation applies domain knowledge to data, mapping database recordsinto facts that are suitable for analytic methods.

Domain knowledge: Standards, regulations, best practice, experience.Databases: Relational (SQL), hierarchical (XML), other (NoSQL).Analytic methods: Statistics, machine learning.


The traditional, case-by-case approach to finding facts

Using our domain knowledge, we program transformations to produce anintermediate data set to which analytic tools can be applied.

Workflows tend to be one-off: tailor made for a limited scope, and difficult tovalidate, extend or compare with other analytic setups.

domain knowledge schema

interpretation

records analytic methods

facts insight


The enterprise semantic, uniform approachWe separate the representation of domain knowledge from any particularinterpretation challenge, producing a generic ontology that can be applied to arange of databases in the same problem domain.The ontology serves as a common language and rule base – verifiable, reusable,and extendable – but requires more work up-front.

semantic

non-semantic

domain knowledge schema

interpretation

ontology

records

interpretation

analytic methods

facts

facts

insight

insight


Competing with algorithms.

Finansavisen, November 09, 2015:


Competing with algorithms..



Competing with algorithms…



Documentation cost

Increasing complexity is driving development cost in offshore O&G.


Complexity cost

Teknisk Ukeblad, March 13, 2016:

“Over to år forsinket. … Goliat har støtt på enorme problemer, med storeteknologiske utfordringer, med tre dødsfall på verftet i Sør-Korea, samt stadigeutsettelser og budsjettoverskridelser på over 16 milliarder kroner.”


Understanding requirements – optimizing execution

� Domain standards� Regulations� Customer/company requirements� Best practice

Industrial ontologies provide the only candidate for a way out.


Aibel’s Material Master Data (MMD) project


About Aibel

� Energy service enterprise� Oil & Gas� Renewable energy

� Process industry lifecycle� engineering� construction� upgrading� maintenance

� 5000 employees� Norway, Thailand, Singapore,UK, Denmark


The EPC project

Projectdefinition

Systemengineering

Area engineering Procurement Construction

handover handover handover handover


The need for efficient information flows

A typical EPC project at Aibel requires work in 100 different specialist ITapplications.

Every major company today relies on application mappings written on acase-by-case basis. These are typically costly to maintain, extend, or validate. Youhave a web of ad hoc interfaces that is both fragile (don’t touch, it might break) andan impediment to evolving business processes (don’t touch, we rely on this).

MMD provides a common language for the information that needs to be exchangedbetween some crucial specialist systems.

� mappings can be validated against a common schema� information from different project phases is consolidated


The need for intelligent services

Any EPC project involves complex requirements, across 20+ major disciplines� Customer specifications� Public rules and regulations� Standards� Best practice

MMD provides a rule base that supports automated reasoning to assist experts inquickly and correctly identifying optimal engineering choices within the complex ofproject constraints.


The need for end-user access

Experts are wasting their time withinefficient information services

� searching for data� consolidating information oncethey get it

� validating, updating

Non-standard information needs arehandled ad hoc, by busy IT experts,with little regard for re-use of theaccess methods.

“A quite common situation in several or all myprojects so far, I’ve had the need to check and crosscheck data which in our current tool was quitedifficult, perhaps combine the data between tablesand hopefully not having to do it in Excel all thetime.

However, the program had an option to do SQLbased searches. As few or none of the engineersknow SQL coding, I had the IT support or systemsupport make me the SQL string that was needed inorder to make a specific search, and I then copied itinto a text field so that I could use it later or try tomodify it.”

(Aibel engineer)


The MMD solution

Material Master Data (MMD) supports project execution from end to end, based onan enterprise ontology:

� a common language for communication and exchange� a knowledge base of engineering and business rules

A shared language across project stages – and across projects


Uniform project data with enterprise semantics

� Interface applications by way of the ontology� Automated validation of solutions vs. requirements


MMD as part of an enterprise architecture

� Enterprise semantics is architecture, not a function� Expert knowledge that the computer can process� A unified library of requirements and solutions

� Designs, Customer requirements, Standards, Regulations� Products, manufactured items, and facilities

� Enabled by state of the art automated reasoning software� Existing applications and databases are largely untouched� Support coherence through project phases� Documentation for operations and maintenance


Where can MMD be useful?

� Business Process improvement by master data� Success at Aibel for project execution� Operations should offer many possibilities� Governance in general can benefit

� Knowledge Management� Capturing expert knowledge� Knowledge sharing

� (Big) Data� Integration of specialist applications and databases� Validation, data quality


MMD collaboration opportunity

� Aibel developed MMD with help from DNV GL� Standards based – relevant across O&G domains and roles� They will share it for a reasonable return� The whole industry could benefit

→ Re-implementation would be wasteful


Value of MMD

� Not one business model, but many� An extension of standardization that can benefit all players

� Quality – due to better control of complex content� Speed/efficiency/agility – respond to changing requirements� Reliability – trace changes, find original design basis� Transparency – less room for glossing over irregularities


Timeline: Aibel MMD project

2013 2014 2015 2016

Life of aWell

Enterprise registryconcept

Process andpiping

modelling

Aibel PoCdemo

SemanticDayspresentation

Webapplicationfor pipingspecs

Extendintonewdomains

Aveva PDMSintegration

SAP integration

OptiquesummitHøvik

JohanSverdrupDP

piping, structural

Extendinto new

domains

A dedicated team of specialists has developed the 2012 semantic enterpriseconcept into a material master system that is in production for the Johan SverdrupDrilling Platform project (8 BNOK).


Semantics for the EPC project


Master data in a modular ontology

AL-PROFILES_DIM

structural-geometry

structural-coreS-Working

DIN_1025-1_DIM

DIN_1026-2_DIM

EN_10056-1_DIM

EN_10210-2_DIM

EN_10219-2_DIM

EURONORM_19_DIM

EURONORM_53_DIM

NS_1911_DIM

STR_AIBEL_DIM

STR_BAR_DIM

STR_FASTENER_DIM

STR_HP_DIM

STR_NUT_DIM

STR_PLATE_DIM

STR_THREAD_FEA

STR_TUB_FEA

STR_WASHER_DIM

core-collect

ALLOY_MAT ASTM_BOLT_MATASME_B16_5_MAT

ASME_B31_3_MAT

ASTM_MAT

API_594

piping-valve

piping-collect

API_600_VALVES

API_602_VALVES

API_609

API_6D_DESIGN

API_6D_DIM

ASME_B16_10_DIM

ASME_B16_11_DIMS-Proposed

ASME_B16_11_MOD

ASME_B16_20_DIMS-Working


ASME_B16_34_VALVES

ASME_B16_36_DIM

ASME_B16_36_MOD_DIM

ASME_B16_47_DIM


ASME_B16_9_DIMS-Working

ASME_PCC_1_DIM

BOLTING_DIM

BOLTING_DIM_2HH0W

BOLTING_DIM_2HH1W

BOLTING_DIM_2HH2W

ELBOW_5D_DIM

FLANGE_TAPER_B_DIM

MANIFOLD_FIT_DIM

MANUFACTURER_VALVES

MECH_J_DIM

NORSOK_L_005_DIM

OLET_DIMS-Working

STATOIL_ENSS-Proposed

STATOIL_SBR3_DIM

STATOIL_SLBNS-Proposed

domains-collect

API_MATNORSOK_M630_MAT

materials-coreS-Working

ASME_B16_20_MATS-Proposed

ASME_B16_21_MATS-Proposed

EN_10025_MAT

EN_10210_MAT

EN_10219_MAT

EN_10225_MAT

EN_485_MAT

EN_755_MAT

TR2000_COMMODITY

ASME_B16_11_CAD_ATTRS-Working

piping-bulk

ASME_B16_11_MOD_CAD_AT

ASME_B16_20_CAD_ATTR

materials-collect


ASME_B16_25_FEA

piping-coreS-Working

ASME_B16_47_FEA

ASME_B16_5_FEAS-Proposed

ASME_B36_10_19_FEAS-Proposed

END_PREP_FEA

FITTING_PATTERN_FEA

ISO_4200_FEA

MECH_J_FEA

NORSOK_L_005_FEA

OLET_FEA


ASME_B16_5_CAD_ATTRS-Proposed

ASME_B16_9_CAD_ATTRS-Working

ASME_B36_10_19_CAD_ATT

BOLTING_MAT_CAD_ATTR

STR_FASTENER_MAT

BOLTING_INTERNAL_DIMPIP_BOLT_CAD_ATTR

statoil-spec

STATOIL_MAT

MDS_TEST_CRIT_STATOIL

ELBOW_5D_CAD_ATTR

NORSOK_M120_MAT

NORSOK_M121_MAT

MANIFOLD_FIT_CAD_ATTR

VALVE_COMMODITY

commodity

MECH_J_CAD_ATTR

NORSOK_L_005_CAD_ATTR

OLET_CAD_ATTRS-Working

statoil-client

STR_STOCK_NO

STATOIL_SLBN_CAD_ATTRS-Working

structural-collect

STR_TUB_DIM

SYSTEMSYSCODE_MMD

TR2000_VDS

UNSPSC_REF

client-core

admin

manuf-core

client-spec da-core

controlS-Proposed

coreS-Working

MMD_USERS

WCO_HSS-Working

disciplinesS-Working

skos-MMDS-Official

standardsS-Working

ANNULUS

IEC_60079_EX

IEC_60529_IP

MMD_UOM

PLATE_DIM

RAL_COD

UNSPSCS-Working

da-collect

pdc

PIP_DA

STR_DA

manuf-data

manufacturers

prod-core

UNS_MAT

pav-MMDS-Official

iso15926-2S-Official

PDC_PIP_0000000100

PDC_PIP_0000000180

PDC_STR_0000000323

PDC_STR_0000000324

PDC_STR_0000000325

PDC_STR_0000000326

product

PIP_QN

STR_QN

statoil-plants


Customer requirements

(Datasheet from Statoil’s TR2000 Piping Class Specification repository)


The disciplines

� Architecture and Building� Civil Engineering� Drilling� Electrical� Engineering Management andAdministration

� Geoscience� Health, Safety andEnvironment

� HVAC� Instrumentation� Marine Engineering� Material Technology� Mechanical� Multidiscipline� Operation andMaintenance

� Pipelines

� Piping� Process� Procurement� Reservoir� Structural� Subsea� Telecommunication� Weight and QuantityControl

(NORSOK)


The standards

LargeRJiameterSteelRjlangesNPSR8VRThroughRNPSRVWMetrick ånchRStandard

3NR 3M =Rå Y3N R N3Tå ON 3LR S T3NJ3RJ

3SM=R@:V,yU98W::-RevisionRofR3SM=R@:V,yU98WWV(

YopyrightR3SM=RånternationalProvidedRbyRåqSRunderRlicenseRwithR3SM= Licensee5VetcoR3ibelkzH8zUb::WU)RUser5=lsfjordstrand)RStian

NotRforRResale)RWzk8pk8W:bRW8´:y´zpRMJTNoRreproductionRorRnetworkingRpermittedRwithoutRlicenseRfromRåqS

--`,`,`,``,``,,,,,,,``,`````,`,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

3NR 3M =Rå Y3N R N3Tå ON 3LR S T3NJ3RJ

3SM=R@:V,::98W::-RevisionRofR3SM=R@:V,::98WWH(

jorgedRjittings)Socket9WeldingandRThreaded

Lopyright T5P[5TbyTtheTRmericanTSocietyTofTMechanicalT:ngineers9No reproductionTmayTbeTmadeTofTthisTmaterialTwithoutTwrittenTconsentTofTRSM:9

cYopyrightR3SM=RånternationalProvidedRbyRåqSRunderRlicenseRwithR3SM= Licensee5VetcoR3ibelkzH8zUb::WU)RUser5=lsfjordstrand)RStian

NotRforRResale)RWzk8pk8W:bRW8´:z´yHRMJTNoRreproductionRorRnetworkingRpermittedRwithoutRlicenseRfromRåqS

--`,`,`,``,``,,,,,,,``,`````,`,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Jesignation´ 3:p8k3:p8M − :8b =ndorsed by Manufacturers StandardizationSociety of the Valve and jittings åndustry

Used in USJO=9N= Standards

Standard Specification forjorged or Rolled 3lloy and Stainless Steel Pipe jlanges)jorged jittings) and Valves and Parts for qigh9TemperatureService:

This standard is issued under the fixed designation R[“53R[“5MD the number immediately following the designation indicates the yearof original adoption or4 in the case of revision4 the year of last revision9 R number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval9R superscript epsilon )´ I indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval9

This standard has been approved for use by agencies of the Department of Defense.

1. Scope*

[9[ This specification5 covers forged low alloy and stainlesssteel piping components for use in pressure systems9 Includedare flanges4 fittings4 valves4 and similar parts to specifieddimensions or to dimensional standards4 such as the RSM:specifications that are referenced in Section 59

[95 _or bars and products machined directly from bar )otherthan those directly addressed by this specificationD see q9]I4refer to Specifications R]H”3R]H”M and RHk” for the similargrades available in those specifications9 Products made to thisspecification are limited to a maximum weight of [P PPP lb[]-]P kg]9 _or larger products and products for otherapplications4 refer to Specifications Rkkq3RkkqM and R”q-3R”q-M for the similar ferritic and austenitic grades4respectively4 available in those specifications9

[9k Several grades of low alloy steels and ferritic4martensitic4 austenitic4 and ferritic7austenitic stainless steelsare included in this specification9 Selection will depend upondesign and service requirements9 Several of the ferritic3austenitic )duplexI grades are also found in SpecificationR[P]”3R[P]”M9

[9] Supplementary requirements are provided for use whenadditional testing or inspection is desired9 These shall applyonly when specified individually by the purchaser in the order9

[9- This specification is expressed in both inch7pound unitsand in SI units9 ’owever4 unless the order specifies theapplicable “M” specification designation )SI unitsI4 the mate7rial shall be furnished to inch7pound units9

[9q The values stated in either SI units or inch7pound unitsare to be regarded separately as the standard9 Within the text4the SI units are shown in brackets9 The values stated in eachsystem may not be exact equivalentsD therefore4 each systemshall be used independently of the other9 Lombining valuesfrom the two systems may result in non7conformance with thestandard9

2. Referenced Documents

59[ In addition to the referenced documents listed in Speci7fication R”q[3R”q[M4 the following list of standards apply tothis specification9

595 ASTM Standards:k

R5q5 Practices for –etecting Susceptibility to IntergranularRttack in Rustenitic Stainless Steels

R5H-3R5H-M Practice for Magnetic Particle :xamination ofSteel _orgings

Rkkq3RkkqM Specification for Rlloy Steel _orgings forPressure and ’igh7Temperature Parts

Rk““3Rk““M Practice for Ultrasonic :xamination of Steel_orgings

R]H”3R]H”M Specification for Stainless Steel jars andShapes for Use in joilers and Other Pressure Vessels

R]“]3R]“]M Specification for @eneral Requirements forStainless Steel jars4 jillets4 and _orgings

RHk” Specification for Steel jars4 Rlloy4 ’ot7Wrought4 for:levated Temperature or Pressure7Lontaining Parts4 orjoth

RHqk Practices for –etecting Susceptibility to IntergranularRttack in _erritic Stainless Steels

RH““3RH““M Specification for Steel _orgings4 @eneral Re7quirements

R”q[3R”q[M Specification for Lommon Requirements for[ This specification is under the jurisdiction of RSTM Lommittee RP[ on Steel4

Stainless Steel and Related Rlloys and is the direct responsibility of SubcommitteeRP[955 on Steel _orgings and Wrought _ittings for Piping Rpplications and joltingMaterials for Piping and Special Purpose Rpplications9

Lurrent edition approved Nov9 [4 5P[59 Published –ecember 5P[59 Originallyapproved in [”k-9 Last previous edition approved in 5P[5 as R[“53R[“5M–[5a9–OIW [P9[-5P3RP[“5_RP[“5M7[5b9

5 _or RSM: joiler and Pressure Vessel Lode applications see related Specifi7cation SR7[“5 in Section II of that Lode9

k _or referenced RSTM standards4 visit the RSTM website4 www9astm9org4 orcontact RSTM Lustomer Service at serviceGastm9org9 _or Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information4 refer to the standard’s –ocument Summary page onthe RSTM website9

*A Summary of Changes section appears at the end of this standard

Yopyright © 3STM ånternational) :WW @arr qarbor Jrive) PO @ox YUWW) West Yonshohocken) P3 :Hy8p98HzH, United States

[YopyrightR3STMRånternationalProvidedRbyRåqSRunderRlicenseRwithR3STM Licensee5VetcoR3ibelkzH8zUb::WU)RUser5=lsfjordstrand)RStian

NotRforRResale)RWbk8Vk8W:bRWH´zb´zbRMJTNoRreproductionRorRnetworkingRpermittedRwithoutRlicenseRfromRåqS

--`,,`,`,,`,`,,```,`,,,`,```,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

NEK:TS:606:2009=ngelskRversjon

Utg,Ry,WR8WWH

NorskRelektrotekniskRnorm

Kabler:for:offshore:installasjonerhalogenfrie:og/eller:borevæskebestandigeTeknisk:spesifikasjon

NorwegianRelectrotechnicalRstandard

Cables:for:offshore:installationshalogen-free:and/or:mud:resistantTechnical:specification

NORSKR=L=KTROT=KNåSKRKOMåT=NorskRnasjonalkomiteRforånternationalR=lectrotechnicalRYommission)Rå=YYomitéR=uropéenRdeRNormalisationR=lectrotechnique)RY=N=L=Y© N=KRharRopphavsrettRtilRdenneRpublikasjon

Pro

vide

dRby

RSta

ndar

dRO

nlin

eR3

SRfo

rRS

tato

ilqyd

roR3

S3

R9R3

bonn

emen

tRpåR

web

R8WW

H9Wz

98z,

RRep

rodu

ctio

nRis

Rnot

Rallo

wed

,

ThisRNORSOKRstandardRisRdevelopedRwithRbroadRpetroleumRindustryRparticipationRbyRinterestedRpartiesNorwegianRpetroleumRindustryRandRisRownedRbyRtheRNorwegianRpetroleumRindustryRrepresentedRbyRTheOilRåndustryR3ssociationR-OLj(RandRTheRjederationRofRNorwegianRåndustry,RPleaseRnoteRthatRwhilstRevebeenRmadeRtoRensureRtheRaccuracyRofRthisRNORSOKRstandard)RneitherROLjRnorRTheRjederationRofRNoråndustryRorRanyRofRtheirRmembersRwillRassumeRliabilityRforRanyRuseRthereof,RStandardsRNorwayRisRresponadministrationRandRpublicationRofRthisRNORSOKRstandard,

StandardsRNorwayR Telephone´RfRyURVURpbRpVRWWStrandveienR:p)RP,O,R@oxR8y8R jax´RfRyURVURpbRpVRW:N9:b8VRLysakerR =mail´Rpetroleum+standard,noNORW3YR Website´Rwww,standard,nokpetroleum

YopyrightsRreserved

NORSOK:STANDARD:Editio

Architectural:components:and:equipment

Specification:for:Line:Pipe

3PåRSP=YåjåY3TåONRzLjORTY9jåjTqR=JåTåON)RJ=Y=M@=RR8W:8

=jj=YTåV=RJ3T=´RJULYR:)R8W:b

--`,,,`,````````,`,`,`,````,,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---


Many standards!

� Shapes and Dimensions� Just for Piping, around 90 standards listed in ASME B31.3

� Materials and Fabrication� around 150

� Standards have a long life� Revisions are issued on a regular basis

� The body of standards grows with introduction of new technologies� Standards bodies include ASME, ASTM, API, ISO, and NORSOK


Revisions of standards


Representing a standard as an ontology module

� What to include?� Tabular material listing standard-compliant variants� Reading the text� Rules to calculate commonly used attributes

� Example: Inner diameter from OD and WT� Separate out generic classes as “core”


Reference data in standards

� Geometry

� Attributes� NPS� Outside diameter� Center-to-End

� A “standard class”� Elbow 90 Long RadiusASME B16.9 NPS 4

Table 1 Dimensions of Long Radius ElbowsA

A

B

B

Center6to6EndNominalPipe Outside 906deg 456degSize Diameter Elbows8 Elbows8vNPS2 at Bevel A B

1⁄2 2173 38 163⁄4 2677 38 191 3374 38 2211⁄4 4272 48 2511⁄2 4873 57 29

2 6073 76 3521⁄2 7370 95 443 8879 114 5131⁄2 10176 133 574 11473 152 64

(ASME B16.9)


Standard classes in ontology

(Protégé 4.3)


Compositional definition

(OWLViz, Protégé 4.3)


Levels of specificity: The design article

generic class Pipe Flange

core class Pipe Flange and’has Flanged End’ some ’Annulus 21.3 x 2.77’ and’has Pipe End’ some ’Annulus 21.3 x 2.77’

standard class ASME B16.5 Pipe Flange NPS 1/2 CL 1500 Weld Neck Ring type joint

design article class FLG WN NPS 1/2 CL 1500 WT 2.77 MDS DF101

product class (compliant product – vendor numbering scheme)


Compact flange with connectivity


Query across standards

� DL Query fits the engineering task of identifying components� Combine with SPARQL for data retrieval


Query across standards

� Find duplex steel components in nominal size 4


Validating project data against requirements


Integrating PDMS and SAP with MMD

� Aveva PDMS: Leading 3D CAD tool� Get rich non-geometric object information from MMD� Maintain and update with changing project requirements

� SAP: The inventory� Get product type identifiers from MMD� Refer to MMD for full content and link back to requirements


Tabular sources for bulk classes

� Engineers know how to work with spreadsheets� “Lifting” with rules in SPARQL


Architecture overview

� Oracle semantic server� SQL, XML, RDF, …� Access control� Code on the server

� ETL for populating ontology� R2RML� Linked Data� Mediawiki� Spring Java wizards� VCS

Standards SQLOntology

core

standard

design

product

Maintainer apps End user/project apps

Look up

Visualize

Exchange

Verify

Extend


Ontology development


Team composition

DNVDevelopers:

� Ontology� Linked Data� Web application� Database application

Aibel� Discipline specialist engineers

� Deep knowledge of governing standards� Experience from project work

� IT developers� Deep knowledge of specialist applications� Deep knowledge of enterprise IT architecture

� Training and communcation staff


Development process

� Traditional development: Domain experts hand over specifications, programmersprogram

� Semantic development: Domain experts work with ontology designers.� Identify core notions� Find the governing standards� Identify what to model� Build a skeleton core� Build and test some examples� Set up spreadsheets for data capture� Rules for lifting tables to ontology� Consolidation with other modules� Test, rinse, repeat


Ontology metadata

� SKOS for various code books� Provenance: POV, based on PROV-O� VoID� Revision histories� Permissions� Status proposed/approved/etc.


Bad tooling

� OWL Full is still favored by some� Reasoner support

Example, TBC faq:How can I run OWL 2 inferences in TopBraid Composer?To configure TopBraid Composer for RDFS/OWL 2 reasoning using TopSPIN, go tothe Profile sub-tab of the Ontology Home (see figure below). Choose the reasoningprofile you wish to use.It’s crucial to be able to verify consistency during ontology development. Thedegree of integration of reasoners does make a difference.


http://www.topquadrant.com/knowledge-assets/faq/tbc/

Ontology quality control

QA is key.

� Top-down across imports� Reproducibility!� Syntax checking – SPARQL test methods� DL Reasoning a hard requirement for maintaining consistency� Integrity constraint checking� Logic of ontology modules� Metaphysically motivated sanity checks� Heuristics of “balance” – topical modules� Domain specific rules� Continous Integration (Jenkins – Chris Mungall)

Q. What are the rules for building large, robust ontologies?


Outlook


The long road to adoption

� Timing is crucial to success� Show business value along the way

Enterprise process

observe implementappraiselearn evaluate

join testchooseusecase

buildteam

milestones

activities


Standards as ontologies

We need the standards organizations to start issuing their standards as ontologies:as machine-readable, and compatible across different standards, even those issuedby other organizations. We need conformance criteria to be openly available, withreproducible tests and support for verification by independent bodies. Proprietarysoftware has not been up to the task.


Competing upper ontologies – semantic silos

� ISO 15926: No success for standardization of industry classes through ISO� BFO: Lack of organisation, coordination across projects� Both have OWL troubles

� BFO: Time troubles� ISO 15926: Higher-order troubles


Panoptique: Application, 2016

“Ontologies and declarative mappings will be used to capture domainconceptualisations, facilitate the specification of application level data needs, andtransform them into highly optimised queries over a wide variety of Big Datasources. PANOPTIQUE will contribute to the development of ontology standards forthe process industry that can function as the organizing principle of an ecosystemof tools and work processes that is open to a range of specialized service providersand tool developers, and that covers the whole value chain. To promoteinteroperability, ontologies used in the PANOPTIQUE pilots will share a commoncore; the generic parts of Aibel’s ISO 15926 based MMD ontology can provide sucha core, and one that has already proven its usefulness in a production setting.PANOPTIQUE will use state of the art ontology engineering tools, many of whichhave been developed by members of the consortium, to ensure that ontologiesmeet rigorous QA standards.” (p. 19).


Transformative improvement

What we need:1. Automated requirements management2. Automated verification of solutions against requirementsPart 1. requires cross-disciplinary collaboration on machine-interpretablestandards, to be publisehd by the respective entities responsible – government,standardisation organisations, and industry groups. This needs to happen in bothnational and international contexts.Part 2. requires technology to make information conformant, and verificationmethods available during development and use in projects/work processes.


Thanks!

Johan W. Klüwer

[email protected]


Date post:	16-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times