A procedure ontology for advanced diagnosis of process systems

Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems

Volumn 21, Issue 1-2, 2010, Pages 19-31

  Nemeth E ^a,b   Hangos, K M ^a,c   Lakner, R ^c  

^a INSTITUTE FOR COMPUTER SCIENCE AND CONTROL   (Hungary)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PANNONIA   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Intelligent systems; Knowledge management; Multi agent systems; Ontology

Indexed keywords

CONTROL PROCEDURES; DIAGNOSTIC ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC METHODS; FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS; INTEGRATED ONTOLOGY; NORMAL FLOW; NOVEL DIAGNOSTICS; OPERATING PROCEDURES; PROCESS PLANTS; PROCESS SYSTEM; TIME-OUTS;

FAILURE ANALYSIS; INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS; KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT;

ONTOLOGY;

EID: 76149089535     PISSN: 10641246     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/IFS-2010-0432     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. I.T. Cameron, B. Seligmann, K.M. Hangos, R. Lakner and E. Ńemeth, The P3 formalism: a basis for improved diagnosis in complex systems, In CHEMECA Conference 2007, Melbourne, Australia, on CD. Engineers Australia, 2007.
2. C.G. Cassandras and S. Lafortune, Introduction to Discrete Event Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
3. K.M. Hangos, E.Ńemeth and R. Lakner,Aprocedure ontology for advanced diagnosis of process systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 51(77) (2008), 501-508.
4. S. Hashtrudi Zad, R.H. Kwong and W.M. Wonham, Fault diagnosis in discrete-event systems: Framework and model reduction, IEEE Trans on Automatic Control 48(7) (2003), 1199-1212.
5. K. Jensen, Coloured Petri Nets. Basic Concepts, Analysis Methods and Practical Use. Volume 1 Basic Concepts, Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, 1997.
6. W. Jordan, Failure modes, effects and criticality analyses, In Proceedings of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, IEEE Press, 30-37, 1972.
7. R.E. Knowlton, Hazard and Operability Studies: The Guide Word Approach, Vancouver: Chematics International Company, 1989.
8. R. Lakner, E. Ńemeth, K.M. Hangos and I.T. Cameron, Multiagent realization of prediction-based diagnosis and loss prevention, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 40(31) (2006), 70-80.
9. E. Ńemeth, R. Lakner, K.M. Hangos and I.T. Cameron, Prediction-based diagnosis and loss prevention using modelbased reasoning, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 35(33) (2005), 367-369.
10. C.M. Ozveren and A.S. Willsky, Observability of discrete event dynamic systems, IEEE Trans on Automatic Control 35 (1990), 797-806.
11. A. Paoli and S. Lafortune, Safe diagnosability for fault-tolerant supervision of discrete-event systems, Automatica 41 (2005), 1335-1347.
12. Prot́eǵe, The Prot́eǵe Ontology Editor and Knowledge Acquisition System, http://protege.stanford.edu, 2008.
13. M. Sampath, R. Sengupta, S. Lafortune, K. Sinnamohideen and D.C. Teneketzis, Failure diagnosis using discrete-event models, IEEE Trans on Control Systems Technology 4 (1996), 105-124.
14. V. Venkatasubramanian, R. Rengaswamy and S.N. Kavuri, Areviewof process fault detection and diagnosis Part II: Qualitative models and search strategies, Computers and Chemical Engineering 27 (2003), 313-326.
15. A. Yang, W. Marquardt, I. Stalker, E. Fraga, M. Serra and D. Pinol, Principles and informal specification of OntoCAPE. COGents WP2 deliverable (D22-1), 2004.