Knowledge formalization in experience feedback processes: An ontology-based approach

Computers in Industry

Volumn 59, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 694-710

  Kamsu Foguem, B ^a   Coudert, T ^a   Beler C ^a   Geneste, L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

Author keywords

Conceptual graphs; Continuous improvement; Experience feedback; Interoperability; Knowledge management

Indexed keywords

ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROCESSING; CLARIFICATION; COMPETITION; INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS; INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; INFORMATION THEORY; INTEROPERABILITY; KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT; MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MANAGEMENT SCIENCE; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

(ALGORITHMIC) COMPLEXITY; (E ,3E) PROCESS; COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES; CONCEPTUAL GRAPH (CG); CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT (CI); DOMAIN ONTOLOGIES; EXPERIENCE FEEDBACK; EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE; IN ORDER; INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES; INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS; KNOW-HOW; KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT (KM); LESSONS LEARNED (LL); PROCESS MODELLING; SEMANTIC INTEROPERABILITY;

ONTOLOGY;

EID: 47049112320     PISSN: 01663615     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compind.2007.12.014     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Zaraté P., Munoz M., Soubie J.L., and Houé R. Knowledge Management Systems: A process oriented view. Cybernetics and Systems Analysis vol. 41, no. 2 (2005), Springer Verlag pp. 274-277
2. Vernadat F.B. Interoperable enterprise systems: principles, concepts and methods. Annual Review in Control 31 1 (2007) 137-145
3. IEEE standard computer dictionary: a compilation of IEEE standard computer glossaries, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, NY, 1990.
4. S. Viel, T. Coudert, L. Geneste, F. Cherencq, Proposition of a multi co-operating experience feedback processes architecture, IFAC MCPL'07, Sibiu, Romania, September 27-30, 2007, pp. 79-84.
5. H. Rakoto. Intégration du Retour d'Expérience dans les processus industriels - Application à Alstom Transport (in French), PhD thesis, National Polytechnic Institute of Toulouse (France), October 2004.
6. Whitman L.E., and Panetto H. The missing link: culture and language barriers to interoperability. Annual Review in Control 30 (2006) 233-241
7. T.E. Zorn, J.R. Taylor, Knowledge management and/as organizational communication, in: D. Tourish, O. Hargie (Eds.), Key Issues in Organizational Communication, Routledge, London and New York, ISBN 0415260930, Zorn and Taylor (pp. 98-99) distinguish four uses of the term "knowledge management", 2004.
8. In: Easterby-Smith M., and Lyles M.A. (Eds). The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management (2003), Blackwell Publishing, Oxford
9. Lebowitz J. Knowledge Management Handbook (1999), CRC Press
10. Dalkir K. Knowledge Management In Theory and Practice (2005), Elsevier/Butterworth Heinemann, Amsterdam, Boston, June
11. Bergmann R. Experience Management: Foundations, Development Methodology, and Internet-Based Applications, volume 2432 of LNAI (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence) (2002), Springer
12. Kolb D. Experiential learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development (1984), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
13. Weber R., Aha D.W., and Becerra-Fernandez I. Intelligent lessons learned systems. Expert Systems with Applications 20 1 (2001) 17-34
14. Faure A., and Bisson G. Modeling the experience feedback loop to improve knowledge base reuse in industrial environment. Proceedings of KAW 99, Twelfth Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management. Banff, Canada (1999)
15. Schreiber G., Akkermans H., Anjewierden A., Hoog R.d., Shadbolt N., Velde W.v.d., and Wielinga B. Knowledge Engineering and Management (2000), The MIT Press, Cambridge
16. Duribreux M., Caulier P., Houriea B., and Faroux D.A. Elicitation and Analysis of Expert Knowledge on the Operation of Gas Distribution Networks (1993), University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany
17. Hermosillo Worley J., Rakoto H., Grabot B., and Geneste L. A competence approach in the experience feedback process. In: Zulch Z., Jagdev H.S., and Stock P. (Eds). Integrating Human Aspects in Production Management, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing series vol. 160 (2005), Springer-Verlag, New York, USA 220-235
18. Weber R.O., and Aha D.W. Intelligent delivery of military lessons learned. Decision Support Systems 34 February 3 (2003) 287-304
19. van Eck P., Engelfriet J., Fensel D., van Harmelen F., Venema Y., and Willems M. A survey of languages for specifying dynamics: a knowledge engineering perspective. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 13 3 (2001) 462-496
20. Pierret-Golbreich C., and Talon X. TFL: an algebraic language to specify the dynamic behaviour of knowledge-based systems. The Knowledge Engineering Review 11 3 (1996) 253-280
21. Abrial J.R. The B-Book: Assigning Programs to Meanings (2005), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
22. Brazier F.M.T., Treur J., Wijngaards N.J.E., and Willems M. Temporal semantics of compositional task models and problem solving methods. Data and Knowledge Engineering 29 1 (1999) 17-42
23. David H. Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming 8 (1987) 231-274
24. Jungclaus R., Saake G., Hartmann T., and Sernadas C. Troll: a language for object-oriented specification of information systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 14 (1996) 175-211
25. Sowa J.F. Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine (1984), Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA
26. Baader F. Logic-based knowledge representation. In: Wooldridge M.J., and Veloso M. (Eds). Artificial Intelligence Today, Recent Trends and Developments, number 1600, in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (1999), Springer Verlag 13-41
27. The REVISE project, A purpose driven method for language comparison, in: N. Shadbolt, K.O' Hara (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th European Knowledge Acquisition Workshop (EKAW'96), LNAI 1076, Springer Verlag, 1996, pp. 66-81.
28. Sowa J.F. Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and computational Foundations (2000), Brooks Cole Publishing Co.
29. K.T. Quinn, Review of Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice by Kimiz Dalkir, Interactions 13 (2) (2006) 48-ff, Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, ISBN: 0-7506-7864-X.
30. Nonaka I., and Takeuchi H. The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation (1995), Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York
31. R. Dieng-Kuntz, N. Matta (Eds.), Knowledge Management and Organizational Memories, Kluwer Academic Publishers, ISBN 0-7923-2659, July, 2002.
32. Fensel D., Motta E., van Harmelen F., Benjamins V.R., Crubezy M., Decker S., Gaspari M., Groenboom R., Grosso W., Musen M., Plaza E., Schreiber G., Studer R., and Wielinga B. The unified problem-solving method development language UPML. Knowledge and Information Systems 5 1 (2003) 83-131
33. Baget J.F., and Mugnier M.-L. Extensions of simple conceptual graphs: the complexity of rules and constraints. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 16 (2002) 425-465
34. Aamodt A., and Plaza E. Case-based reasoning: foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Communications 7 1 (1994) 39-59
35. Kolodner J. Case-Based Reasoning (1993), Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
36. In: Staab S., and Studer R. (Eds). Handbook on Ontologies. International Handbooks on Information Systems (2004), Springer Verlag
37. Gruber T.R. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition 2 5 (1993) 199-220
38. D. Fensel, Ontologies: Silver Bullet for Knowledge Management and Electronic Commerce. Springer-Verlag, ISBN: 3540416021, Berlin, 2001.
39. Guarino N. Understanding, building, and using ontologies: a commentary to using explicit ontologies in KBS development. International Journal of Human and Computer Studies 46 (1997) 293-310
40. Campbell K.E., Oliver D.E., and Shortliffe E.H. The unified medical language system: toward a collaborative approach for solving terminologic problems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1998 5 1 (1998) 12-16
41. Gruninger M., Atefi K., and Fox M.S. Ontologies to support process integration in enterprise engineering. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory 6 4 (2000) 381-394
42. Abecker A., and van Elst L. Ontologies for Knowledge Management, in Handbook of Ontologies (2004), Springer, Berlin pp. 435-455
43. Berners-Lee T., Hendler J., and Lassila O. The Semantic Web. Scientific American 284 5 (2001) 34-43
44. Malucelli A., Palzer D., and Oliveira E. Ontology-based Services to help solving the heterogeneity problem in e-commerce negotiations. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 5 Spring (1) (2006) 29-43
45. G. Berio, Deliverable D3.1: requirements analysis: initial core constructs and architecture. Unified Enterprise Modeling Language (UEML) Thematic Network, IST-2001-34229 (document available from the UEML portal at: http://www.ueml.org), 2003.
46. Chen D., and Vernadat F. Standards on enterprise integration and engineering - a state of the art. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing (IJCIM) 17 April-May 3 (2004) 235-253
47. Shahar Y., Young O., Shalom E., Galperin M., Mayaffit A., Moskovitch R., and Hessing A. A framework for a distributed, hybrid, multiple-ontology clinical-guideline library, and automated guideline-support tools. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 37 October 5 (2004) 325-344
48. Domingue J., Stutt A., Martins M., Tan J., Petursson H., and Motta E. Supporting online shopping through a combination of ontologies and interface metaphors. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59 November 5 (2003) 699-723
49. D. Genest, M. Chein, A Content-search Information Retrieval Process Based on Conceptual Graphs. Knowledge And Information Systems, vol. 8, no. 3, Springer, 2005, pp. 292-309.
50. Braga R.M.M., Werner C.M.L., and Mattoso M. Odyssey-search: a multi-agent system for component information search and retrieval. Journal of Systems and Software 79 2 (2006) 204-215
51. Uschold M., and Gruninger M. Ontologies: principles, methods and applications. Knowledge Engineering Review 11 2 (1996) 93-136
52. Ducq Y., Chen D., and Vallespir B. Interoperability in enterprise modelling: requirements and roadmap. Advanced Engineering Informatics 18 4 (2004) 193-203
53. Orgun B., and Vu J. HL7 ontology and mobile agents for interoperability in heterogeneous medical information systems. Computers in Biology and Medicine 36 7-8 (2006) 817-836
54. Tu S.W., Eriksson H., Gennari J.H., Shahar Y., and Musen M.A. Ontology-based configuration of problem-solving methods and generation of knowledge-acquisition tools: application of PROTÉGÉ-II to protocol-based decision support. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 7 3 (1995) 257-289
55. Reynaud C., and Tort F. Using explicit ontologies to create problem solving methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 46 2-3 (1997) 339-364
56. Abel M., Silva L.A., Campbell J.A., and De Ros L.F. Knowledge acquisition and interpretation problem-solving methods for visual expertise: S study of petroleum-reservoir evaluation. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 1-2 (2005) 51-69
57. Barthès J.P.A., and Tacla C.A. Agent-supported portals and knowledge management in complex R&D projects. Computers in Industry 48 1 (2002) 3-16
58. Wand Y. Ontology as a foundation for meta-modelling and method engineering. Information and Software Technology 38 4 (1996) 281-287
59. Baader F., Calvanese D., McGuinness D., Nardi D., and Patel-Schneider P. The Description Logic Handbook. Theory, Implementation and Applications (2003), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
60. Angele J., and Lausen G. Ontologies in f-logic. In: Staab S., and Studer R. (Eds). Handbook on Ontologies (2004), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 29-50
61. P. Hayes, Resource Description Framework (RDF) Semantics, W3C Recommendation, 2004.
62. Antoniou G., and Harmelen F.V. Web ontology language: OWL. In: Staab S., and Studer R. (Eds). Handbook on Ontologies (2004), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 67-92
63. Fensel D., Rousset M.C., and Decker S. Workshop on comparing description and frame logic. Data & Knowledge Engineering (1998) 347-352
64. R. Dieng, O. Corby, Conceptual graphs for semantic web applications, in: F. Dau, M.-L. Mugnier, G Stumme (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Conceptual Structures (ICCS'2005), Kassel (Germany), July 17-23, 2005, Springer-Verlag, LNAI 3596, 2005, pp. 19-50.
65. Yao H., and Etzkorn L. Automated conversion between different knowledge representation formats. Knowledge-Based Systems 19 October 6 (2006) 404-412
66. D. Diallo, Assistance to validation through paraphrasing of formal specification written in B (in French), PhD thesis, University of Nantes, 2000.
67. A. Gutierrez, COGUI (Conceptual Graphs Graphical User Interface), Workshop "Tools" of the 13th International Conference on Conceptual Structures (ICCS'2005), July 18-22, 2005, Kassel, Germany, CoGui Project Web site: http://www.lirmm.fr/∼gutierre/cogui/, 2005.
68. O. Gerbé, G.W. Mineau, The CG Formalism as an Ontolingua for Web-Oriented Representation Languages, ICCS'2002, Borovetz, July 2002, Springer, pp. 205-219, 2002.
69. Dieng-Kuntz R., Minier D., Ruzicka M., Corby F., Corby O., and Alamarguy L. Building and using a medical ontology for knowledge management and cooperative work in a health care network. Computers in Biology and Medicine 36 7-8 (2006) 871-892
70. Chein M., and Mugnier M.L. Conceptual graphs: fundamental notions. Revue d'Intelligence Artificielle 6 4 (1992) 365-406
71. Mugnier M.L. On generalization/specialization for conceptual graphs. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 7 (1995) 325-344
72. Coulondre S. CG-SQL: a front-end language for conceptual graph knowledge bases. Knowledge-Based Systems 12 October 5-6 (1999) 293-302
73. Kamigaki T., and Nakamura N. An object-oriented visual model - building and simulation system for FMS control. Simulation 67 6 (1996) 375-385
74. Volot F., Joubert M., and Fieschi M. Review of biomedical knowledge and data representation with conceptual graphs. Methods of Information in Medicine 37 1 (1998) 86-96
75. Lee J., and Lai L.F. Verifying task-based specifications in conceptual graphs. Information and Software Technology 39 14-15 (1998) 913-923
76. Kamsu-Foguem B., and Chapurlat V. Requirements modelling and formal analysis using graph operations. International Journal of Production Research 44 September 17 (2006) 3451-3470
77. In: Mugnier M.L., and Chein M. (Eds). Conceptual Structures: Theory, Tools, and Applications, Lecture Notes in AI 1453 (1998), Springer-Verlag, Berlin
78. Corby O., Dieng-Kuntz R., Faron-Zucker C., and Gandon F. Searching the Semantic Web: approximate query processing based on ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems Journal 21 1 (2006) 20-27
79. Thomopoulos R., Buche P., and Hammerlé O. Representation of weakly structured imprecise data for fuzzy querying. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 140 (2003) 111-128
80. A. Kabbaj, U. Petersen, PROLOG+CG version 2.0 User's Manual (Web site of PROLOG+CG: http://prologpluscg.sourceforge.net/).
81. M. Jackson, Problems, Methods and Specialisation. Software Engineering Journal, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 249-255 (edited and abridged in IEEE Software, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 57-62, November 1994).
82. Maiden N.A.M., and Hare M. Problem domain categories in requirements engineering. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 49 September 3 (1998) 281-304
83. Aha D.W., Breslow L., and Muñoz-Avila H. Conversational case-based reasoning. Applied Intelligence 14 1 (2001) 9-32
84. M. Manago, R. Bergmann, S. Wess, R. Traphöner, CASUEL: a common case representation language - Version 2.0 ESPRIT-Project INRECA, Deliverable D1, Technical Report, University of Kaiserslautern, 1994. Document available from http://www.wi2.uni-trier.de/publications/CASUEL%20V2.03%20 Language%20Def_w95.pdf, 1994.
85. Hayes C., and Cunningham P. Shaping a CBR view with XML. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1650 (1999) 468-482