Ontology:Process Specification Language (PSL)

From Odp

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Current revision (22:49, 5 March 2010) (view source)
 
(7 intermediate revisions not shown.)
Line 3: Line 3:
|OntologyOrganization=NIST
|OntologyOrganization=NIST
|OntologyAuthor=Michael Gruninger, Conrad Bock, Bob Young
|OntologyAuthor=Michael Gruninger, Conrad Bock, Bob Young
-
|Description=PSL-Core axiomatizes a set of intuitive semantic primitives that is adequate for describing the fundamental concepts of manufacturing processes.  
+
|Description=PSL-Core axiomatizes a set of intuitive semantic primitives that is adequate for describing the fundamental concepts of manufacturing processes.
|SubmittedBy=MichaelUschold
|SubmittedBy=MichaelUschold
|OntologyPurpose=software interoperability, decision support
|OntologyPurpose=software interoperability, decision support
-
|OWLImplementation=http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/psl-ontology/psl_core.html
+
|OntologyURI=http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/psl-ontology/psl_core.html
 +
|LongDescription=For many years, the [http://www.nist.gov/msid/ Manufacturing Systems Integration Division] (MSID) has been involved in the definition of a neutral representation of product data, most recently realized through the STEP standard. With that effort well underway, another candidate area for a division focus is the representation of manufacturing process. Like product data, process data is also used throughout the life cycle of a product, from early indications of manufacturing process flagged during design, through process planning, validation, production scheduling and control. In addition, the notion of process also underlies the entire manufacturing cycle, coordinating the workflow within engineering and shop floor manufacturing.
 +
 
 +
The Process Specification Language (PSL) defines a neutral representation for manufacturing processes that supports automated reasoning. Process data is used throughout the life cycle of a product, from early indications of manufacturing process flagged during design, through process planning, validation, production scheduling and control. In addition, the notion of process also underlies the entire manufacturing cycle, coordinating the workflow within engineering and shop floor manufacturing.
 +
 
 +
If you would like to learn more about PSL, including rationale and the need for its implementation, please [http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/rationale.html click here].
 +
 
 +
=== PSL Ontology -- Current Theories and Extensions (version 2.8) ===
 +
The axioms of PSL are organized into PSL-Core and a set of extensions. PSL-Core is the set of axioms written in CLIF (the [http://www.nist.gov/cgi-bin/exit_nist.cgi?url=http://philebus.tamu.edu/cl/ Common Logic] Interchange Format) and using only the nonlogical lexicon of PSL-Core. The extensions form a lattice of extensions to PSL-Core.
 +
 
 +
The purpose of PSL-Core is to axiomatise a set of intuitive semantic primitives that is adequate for describing the fundamental concepts of manufacturing processes. Consequently, this characterization of basic processes makes few assumptions about their nature beyond what is needed for describing those processes, and the Core is therefore rather weak in terms of logical expressiveness. In particular, PSL-Core is not strong enough to provide definitions of the many auxiliary notions that become necessary to describe all intuitions about manufacturing processes.
 +
 
 +
To supplement the concepts of PSL-Core, the ontology includes a set of extensions that introduce new terminology. An PSL extension provides the logical expressiveness to express information involving concepts that are not explicitly specified in PSL-Core. For each symbol in the nonlogical lexicon of an extension of PSL, there exist one or more axioms, written in CLIF, that constrain its interpretation. A distinction is drawn between definitional and nondefinitional extensions of PSL-Core. A definitional extension is an extension whose nonlogical lexicon can be completely defined in terms of PSL-Core. Definitional extensions add no new expressive power to PSL-Core. Nondefinitional extensions (also called core theories) are extensions of PSL-Core that involve at least one new primitive not contained in PSL-Core. All extensions within PSL must be consistent extensions of PSL-Core, and may be consistent extensions of other PSL extensions. However, not all extensions within PSL need be mutually consistent.
 +
 
 +
The organization of the extensions below reflects the Parts within standard [http://www.nist.gov/cgi-bin/exit_nist.cgi?url=http://www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=35185&ICS1=25&ICS2=40&ICS3=40 ISO 18629]. All files are updates to the standard, except for those marked by “x”, which are in progress. Other status indicators are: “c” (consistency proof completed) and “ca” (consistency verified by the automated theorem prover [http://www.nist.gov/cgi-bin/exit_nist.cgi?url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire_theorem_prover Vampire]). The syntax of all files has been checked by automated theorem provers, see [http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/download.html download page].
 +
 
 +
 
 +
The purpose of PSL-Core is to axiomatize a set of intuitive semantic primitives that is adequate for describing the fundamental concepts of manufacturing processes. Consequently, this characterization of basic processes makes few assumptions about their nature beyond what is needed for describing those processes, and the Core is therefore rather weak in terms of logical expressiveness.
 +
 
 +
The basic ontological commitments of PSL-Core are based on the following intuitions:
 +
 
 +
'''Intuition 1:'''
 +
 
 +
''There are four kinds of entities required for reasoning about processes -- activities, activity occurrences, timepoints, and objects. ''
 +
 
 +
'''Intuition 2:'''
 +
 
 +
''Activities may have multiple occurrences, or there may exist activities that do not occur at all. ''
 +
 
 +
'''Intuition 3:'''
 +
 
 +
''Timepoints are linearly ordered, forwards into the future, and backwards into the past. ''
 +
 
 +
'''Intuition 4:'''
 +
 
 +
''Activity occurrences and objects are associated with unique timepoints that mark the begin and end of the occurrence or object. ''
 +
 
 +
=== Key Publications ===
 +
Bock, C. and Gruninger, M. (2004) [http://stl.mie.utoronto.ca/publications/semantic_domain.pdf PSL: A semantic domain for flow models], '''Software and Systems Modeling'''.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
Gruninger, M. and Menzel, C. (2003)[http://stl.mie.utoronto.ca/publications/psl-aimag.pdf  Process Specification Language: Principles and Applications], '''AI Magazine''', 24:63-74.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
Cheng, J., Gruninger, M., Sriram, R., and Law, K. (2003)[http://stl.mie.utoronto.ca/publications/pslschedules.pdf  Process Specification Language for project scheduling information exchange], '''International Journal of IT in Architecture, Engineering and Construction''', 1:307-328.
|Justification=Formally rigorous.  Heavy use of competency questions, both informal and formal. Deployed in industrial scenarios.  Basis for highly modular set of ontologies.  ISO 18629
|Justification=Formally rigorous.  Heavy use of competency questions, both informal and formal. Deployed in industrial scenarios.  Basis for highly modular set of ontologies.  ISO 18629
|CompetencyQuestion=Identify the set of activities that occurred before a particular timepoint., Are there any activities that have no occurrences?,Which timepoints did no activities occur at?, Which objects participated in a given activity occurrence at a specific timepoint.
|CompetencyQuestion=Identify the set of activities that occurred before a particular timepoint., Are there any activities that have no occurrences?,Which timepoints did no activities occur at?, Which objects participated in a given activity occurrence at a specific timepoint.
-
|Domain=Business, Management, Manufacturing
 
|Scenario=Software exchanging process information between a planner and a scheduler
|Scenario=Software exchanging process information between a planner and a scheduler
|KnownIssues=none
|KnownIssues=none
|OntologyLicensing=ISO Standard
|OntologyLicensing=ISO Standard
-
|WebReference=http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/
 
}}
}}
 +
 +
{{My references}}

Current revision

Return to Catalogue of Exemplary Ontologies

Ontology Overview

Name: Process Specification Language Core (PSL)
Description: PSL-Core axiomatizes a set of intuitive semantic primitives that is adequate for describing the fundamental concepts of manufacturing processes.
Purpose: software interoperability, decision support
Organization(s): NIST
Author(s): Michael Gruninger, Conrad Bock, Bob Young
Justification Formally rigorous. Heavy use of competency questions, both informal and formal. Deployed in industrial scenarios. Basis for highly modular set of ontologies. ISO 18629
Recommended by:
Submitted by: MichaelUschold
Competency Questions: Identify the set of activities that occurred before a particular timepoint., Are there any activities that have no occurrences?, Which timepoints did no activities occur at?, Which objects participated in a given activity occurrence at a specific timepoint.
Domains:
Scenario: Software exchanging process information between a planner and a scheduler
Known issues: none
OntologyURI:

http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/psl-ontology/psl_core.html (5639)

Licensing: ISO Standard
Web references:
Other references:

Long Description

For many years, the Manufacturing Systems Integration Division (MSID) has been involved in the definition of a neutral representation of product data, most recently realized through the STEP standard. With that effort well underway, another candidate area for a division focus is the representation of manufacturing process. Like product data, process data is also used throughout the life cycle of a product, from early indications of manufacturing process flagged during design, through process planning, validation, production scheduling and control. In addition, the notion of process also underlies the entire manufacturing cycle, coordinating the workflow within engineering and shop floor manufacturing.

The Process Specification Language (PSL) defines a neutral representation for manufacturing processes that supports automated reasoning. Process data is used throughout the life cycle of a product, from early indications of manufacturing process flagged during design, through process planning, validation, production scheduling and control. In addition, the notion of process also underlies the entire manufacturing cycle, coordinating the workflow within engineering and shop floor manufacturing.

If you would like to learn more about PSL, including rationale and the need for its implementation, please click here.

PSL Ontology -- Current Theories and Extensions (version 2.8)

The axioms of PSL are organized into PSL-Core and a set of extensions. PSL-Core is the set of axioms written in CLIF (the Common Logic Interchange Format) and using only the nonlogical lexicon of PSL-Core. The extensions form a lattice of extensions to PSL-Core.

The purpose of PSL-Core is to axiomatise a set of intuitive semantic primitives that is adequate for describing the fundamental concepts of manufacturing processes. Consequently, this characterization of basic processes makes few assumptions about their nature beyond what is needed for describing those processes, and the Core is therefore rather weak in terms of logical expressiveness. In particular, PSL-Core is not strong enough to provide definitions of the many auxiliary notions that become necessary to describe all intuitions about manufacturing processes.

To supplement the concepts of PSL-Core, the ontology includes a set of extensions that introduce new terminology. An PSL extension provides the logical expressiveness to express information involving concepts that are not explicitly specified in PSL-Core. For each symbol in the nonlogical lexicon of an extension of PSL, there exist one or more axioms, written in CLIF, that constrain its interpretation. A distinction is drawn between definitional and nondefinitional extensions of PSL-Core. A definitional extension is an extension whose nonlogical lexicon can be completely defined in terms of PSL-Core. Definitional extensions add no new expressive power to PSL-Core. Nondefinitional extensions (also called core theories) are extensions of PSL-Core that involve at least one new primitive not contained in PSL-Core. All extensions within PSL must be consistent extensions of PSL-Core, and may be consistent extensions of other PSL extensions. However, not all extensions within PSL need be mutually consistent.

The organization of the extensions below reflects the Parts within standard ISO 18629. All files are updates to the standard, except for those marked by “x”, which are in progress. Other status indicators are: “c” (consistency proof completed) and “ca” (consistency verified by the automated theorem prover Vampire). The syntax of all files has been checked by automated theorem provers, see download page.


The purpose of PSL-Core is to axiomatize a set of intuitive semantic primitives that is adequate for describing the fundamental concepts of manufacturing processes. Consequently, this characterization of basic processes makes few assumptions about their nature beyond what is needed for describing those processes, and the Core is therefore rather weak in terms of logical expressiveness.

The basic ontological commitments of PSL-Core are based on the following intuitions:

Intuition 1:

There are four kinds of entities required for reasoning about processes -- activities, activity occurrences, timepoints, and objects.

Intuition 2:

Activities may have multiple occurrences, or there may exist activities that do not occur at all.

Intuition 3:

Timepoints are linearly ordered, forwards into the future, and backwards into the past.

Intuition 4:

Activity occurrences and objects are associated with unique timepoints that mark the begin and end of the occurrence or object.

Key Publications

Bock, C. and Gruninger, M. (2004) PSL: A semantic domain for flow models, Software and Systems Modeling.


Gruninger, M. and Menzel, C. (2003)Process Specification Language: Principles and Applications, AI Magazine, 24:63-74.


Cheng, J., Gruninger, M., Sriram, R., and Law, K. (2003)Process Specification Language for project scheduling information exchange, International Journal of IT in Architecture, Engineering and Construction, 1:307-328.

Additional Information



References

Add a reference

  • PSL Downloads Downloads | reference page
  • Bock, C. and Gruninger, M. (2004) PSL: A semantic domain for flow models, Software and Systems Modeling. Paper | reference page
  • Gruninger, M. and Menzel, C. (2003)The Process Specification Language: Theory and Applications, AI Magazine, 24:63-74. Paper | reference page
  • Cheng, J., Gruninger, M., Sriram, R., and Law, K. (2003)Process Specification Language for project scheduling information exchange, International Journal of IT in Architecture, Engineering and Construction, 1:307-328. Paper | reference page
  • PSL Home Page Project Home Page | reference page
Retrieved from "http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Ontology:Process_Specification_Language_%28PSL%29"
Personal tools
Quality Committee
Content OP publishers