Recent intelligent systems as required for Industry 4.0 merge data from diverse domains and more gradually demand data to be combined with field knowledge. The convergence and scenarization of data permits for the high-level inferring required to create knowledge based on the data under consideration. In this study, a framework for an ontology-assisted multi-scenario inference platform is proposed to help some of the desirable platform qualities in automotive troubleshooting service involve message clarity, platform interoperability, and elegant maturing. This framework is constructed through the model with triple modes (Conception-Expression-Manipulation, CEM), which is a communication-based framework. This proposed framework applies a two-tier class with three performers and can combine and use multiple scenarios. There are several characteristics, including flexibility, interaction, and handily maintenance. The transformation of data is separated from one element of the platform and thus does not implicate several other elements. A field of employment can be easily decided by the utilization of prototypes and field-norm elements. This proposed framework is instantiated applying an instance study including data from the troubleshooting tasks of automotive system.
GiustozziFSaunierJZanni-MerkC.Context modeling for industry 4.0: an ontology-based proposal. Proc Comp Sci2018; 126: 675–684.
2.
KumarVRSKhamisAFioriniS, et al. Ontologies for industry 4.0. Know Eng Rev2019; 34(17): 1–14.
3.
YahyaMBreslinJGAliMI. Semantic web and knowledge graphs for industry 4.0. Appl Sci2021; 11(11): 1–23.
4.
Lista RossettiAPLuz TortorellaGBouzonM, et al. Identifying industry 4.0 technologies enablers for knowledge management – a scoping review. TQM J2023; 36(1): 340–360.
5.
UllahAS. What is knowledge in industry 4.0?Eng Rep2020; 2(8): e12217.
6.
LiangSJ. A process-based automotive troubleshooting service and knowledge management system in collaborative environment. Robot Comput Integr Manuf2020; 61: 101836.
StaabSStuderR. Handbook on ontologies. 2nd ed. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, 2009.
9.
WaloszekW. Towards use of ontoclean for ontology contextualization. Proc Comput Sci2021; 192: 786–795.
10.
WenSFKattB. Preliminary evaluation of an ontology-based contextualized learning system for software security. In: Proceedings of the evaluation and assessment on software engineering, Copenhagen, Denmark, 15–17 April 2019, pp. 90–99.
11.
LiangSJ. An ontology-oriented knowledge methodology for process planning in additive layer manufacturing. Robot Comput Integr Manuf2018; 53: 28–44.
12.
RosingMVScheelHV. Using the business ontology to develop enterprise standards. Int J Concept Struct Smart Appl2016; 4(1): 48–70.
13.
AntonyUPeterJ (2016) An ontology for strongly sustainable business models: defining an enterprise framework compatible with natural and social science. Organ Environ29(1): 97–123.
14.
RzevskiGSkobelevPZhilyaevA. Emergent intelligence in smart ecosystems: conflicts resolution by reaching consensus in resource management. Mathematics2022; 10(11): 1923.
15.
ReinischCKoflerMJKastnerW. ThinkHome: a smart home as digital ecosystem. In: 4th IEEE international conference on digital ecosystems and technologies. Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 13–16 April 2010, pp. 256–261.
16.
KamišalićARiañoDKertS, et al. Multi-level medical knowledge formalization to support medical practice for chronic diseases. Data Know Eng2019; 119: 36–57.
17.
AlirezaieMRenouxJKöckemannU, et al. An ontology-based context-aware system for smart homes: e-care@home. Sensors2017; 17(7): 1586.
18.
KeriakosMHosnyHMAlySG. Context-aware goal-oriented business process aspect modelling. Int J Bus Process Integr Manag2013; 6(2): 112–145.
19.
SøilenKS. A research agenda for intelligence studies in business. J Intell Stud Bus2016; 6(1): 21–36.
EI-SabaghHA. Adaptive e-learning environment based on learning styles and its impact on development students’ engagement. Int J Educ Technol High Educ2021; 18(53): 1–24.
22.
NormadhiNBShuibLNasirHNM, et al. Identification of personal traits in adaptive learning environment: systematic literature review. Comput Educ2019; 130: 168–190.
23.
JaskolkaJMacCaullWKhedriR. Towards an ontology design architecture. In: Proceedings of the 2015 international conference on computational science and computational intelligence. Washington, DC, USA, 5–7 December 2015, pp. 132–135.
24.
SanyaIOShehabEM. A framework for developing engineering design ontologies within the aerospace industry. Int J Product Res2015; 53(8): 2383–2409.
25.
CagalabanGKimS. Context-aware service framework for decision-support applications using ontology-based modeling. In: PKAW 2010: Knowledge management and acquisition for smart systems and service. Daegue, Korea, 30–31 August 2010, pp. 103–110.
26.
Padilla-CuevasJReyes-OrtizJABravoM. Ontology-based context event representation, reasoning, and enhancing in academic environments. Future Int2021; 13(6): 151.
27.
XueXJiangC. Matching sensor ontologies with multi-context similarity measure and parallel compact differential evolution algorithm. IEEE Sensor J2021; 21(21): 24570–24578.
28.
OthmaneABTettamanziAGVillataS, et al. A multi-context BDI recommender system: from theory to simulation. In: 2016 IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference web intelligence. Omaha, NE, USA, 13–16 October 2016, pp. 602–605.
29.
Ul HaqueHMKhanSU. A context-aware reasoning framework for heterogeneous systems. In: International conference on advancements in computational sciences. Lahore, Pakistan, 19–21 February 2018, pp. 1–9.
30.
RodriguezJBravoMGuzmánR. Multi-dimensional ontology model to support context-aware systems. In: ICIW 2012: The seventh international conference on internet and web applications and services. Stuttgart, Germany, 27 May–1 June 2021, pp. 80–89.
31.
RyuJKKimJHChungKY, et al. Ontology based context information model for u-healthcare service. In: 2011 international conference on information science and applications. Jeju Island, Korea, 26–29 April 2011, pp. 1–6.
32.
Ramírez-DuránVJBergesIIllarramendiA. ExtruOnt: an ontology for describing a type of manufacturing machine for industry 4.0 systems. Semantic Web2020; 11(6): 887–909.
33.
MantravadiSMøllerC. An overview of next-generation manufacturing execution systems: how important is MES for industry 4.0?Proc Manufac2019; 30: 588–595.
34.
OsmanMANoahSAMSaadS. Ontology-based knowledge management tools for knowledge sharing in organization – a review. IEEE Access2022; 10: 43267–43285.
35.
SarnikarSDeokarAV. A design approach for process-based knowledge management system. J Know Manag2017; 21(4): 693–717.
36.
DehghaniRRamsinR. Methodologies for developing knowledge management systems: an evaluation framework. J Know Manag2015; 19(4): 682–710.
37.
MoraMWangFGomezJM, et al. Phillips-Wren G. Developing methodologies for ontology-based knowledge management systems: a review. Expert Syst2022; 39(1): 12851.
38.
JosephSRHlomaniHLetsholoK, et al. Natural language processing: a review. Int J Res Eng Appl Sci2016; 6(3): 207–216.
39.
OpasjumruskitKSchindlerSPetersD. Automatic data sheet information extraction for supporting model-based systems engineering. In: CDVE 2021. LNCS 12983, 24–27 October 2021, pp. 97–102.
40.
ShahRJainS. Ontology-based information extraction: an overview and a study of different approaches. Int J Comput Appl2014; 87(4): 6–8.
41.
PradeepPKrishnamoorthySPathinarupothiRK, et al. Leveraging context-awareness for interne of things ecosystem: representation, organization, and management of context. Comput Commun2021; 117: 33–50.
42.
AbedinB. Managing the tension between opposing effects of explainability of artificial intelligence: a contingency theory perspective. Int Res2022; 32(2): 425–453.
43.
SalamaMKaderHAAbdelwahabA. An analytic framework for enhancing the performance of big heterogeneous data analysis. Int J Eng Bus Manag2021; 13: 1–11.
44.
DuvalTFleuryC. PAC-C3D: a new software architectural model for designing 3D collaborative virtual environments. In: The 21st international conference on artificial reality and telexistence. Osaka, Japan, 28–30 November 2011, pp. 60.
45.
QianKFuXTaoL, et al. and XuCW. Software architecture and design illuminated. London, UK: Jones and Bartlett Learning, 2009, pp. 199–218.
BowenJP. Z notation: whence the cause and whither the course? In: Engineering trustworthy software systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Switzerland: Springer, 2016, Vol. 9506, pp. 103–151.
BotheCWeberCMaggS, et al. A context-based approach for dialogue act recognition using simple recurrent neural networks. In: Eleventh international conference on language resources and evaluation. Miyazaki, Japan, 7–12 May 2018, pp. 1952–1957.
60.
FabbrizioGDBharathiSSShiY, et al. Context interpretation in natural language processing using previous dialog acts. US Patent Application WO/179510A1, 2015.
61.
NikolaouCKoubarakisM. Querying incomplete information in RDF with SPARQL. Artif Intell2016; 237: 138–171.
AlhajMPetriuD. Using aspects for platform-independent to platform-dependent model transformations. Int J Elect Comput Syst2021; 1(1): 35–48.
65.
RingertJORumpeBWortmannA. Transforming platform-independent to platform-specific component and connector software architecture models. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on model-driven engineering for component-based software systems. Ottawa, Canada, 28 September 2015, Vol. 1463, pp. 30–35.
66.
KainznerMKlöschCFilipiakD, et al. Towards reusable ontology alignment for manufacturing maintenance. In: SEMANTiCS 2021. Amsterdam, Netherlands, 6–9 September 2021, pp. 1–5.
67.
GherbiSKhadirMT. Inferred ontology concepts alignment using instances and an external dictionary. Proc Comput Sci2016; 83: 648–652.
68.
ApatHKNayakRSahooB. A comprehensive review on internet of things application placement in fog computing environment. Int Things2023; 23: 100866.
69.
StoreyVCBaskervilleRL. Computational science: a field of inquiry for design science research. In: Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. Maui, Hawaii, USA, 4–7 January 2022, pp. 5768–5777.
70.
GregorS. Reflections on the practice of design science in information systems. In: Engineering the transformation of the enterprise – A design science research perspective. Switzerland: Springer Cham, 2022, pp. 101–113.
71.
MonsonM. Socially responsible design science in information systems for sustainable development: a critical research methodology. Eur J Inform Syst2023; 32(2): 207–237.
