Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T16:11:37.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An ontological approach to engineering requirement representation and analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 October 2016

Alolika Mukhopadhyay  and
Farhad Ameri
Alolika Mukhopadhyay
Affiliation:
Engineering Informatics Research Group, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas, USA
Farhad Ameri*
Affiliation:
Engineering Informatics Research Group, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas, USA
*
Reprint requests to: Farhad Ameri, Engineering Informatics Research Group, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Requirement planning is one of the most critical tasks in the product development process. Despite its significant impact on the outcomes of the design process, engineering requirement planning is often conducted in an ad hoc manner without much structure. In particular, the requirement planning phase suffers from a lack of quantifiable measures for evaluating the quality of the generated requirements and also a lack of structure and formality in representing engineering requirements. The main objective of this research is to develop a formal Web Ontology Language ontology for standard representation of engineering requirements. The proposed ontology uses explicit semantics that makes the ontology amenable to automated reasoning. To demonstrate how the proposed ontology can support requirement analysis and evaluation in engineering design, three possible services enabled by the ontology are introduced in this paper. These services are information content measurement, specificity and completeness analysis, and requirement classification. The proposed ontology and its associated algorithms and tools are validated experimentally in this work.

Keywords

Engineering RequirementsInformation ContentOntological ReasoningOntologyRequirement Management
Type
Special Issue Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 30 , Special Issue 4: Engineering Design Informatics , November 2016 , pp. 337 - 352
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Chandrasegaran, S.K., Ramani, K., Sriram, R.D., Horváth, I., Bernard, A., Harik, R.F., & Gao, W. (2013). The evolution, challenges, and future of knowledge representation in product design systems. Computer-Aided Design 45(2), 204–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collopy, P.D., & Eames, D.J.H. (2001). Aerospace manufacturing cost prediction from a measure of part definition information. Proc. SAE World Aviation Congr.—2001 Aerospace Congr., Seattle, WA, September 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darlington, M.J., & Culley, S.J. (2008). Investigating ontology development for engineering design support. Advanced Engineering Informatics 22(1), 112–134.Google Scholar
Hauge, P.L., & Stauffer, L.A. (1993). ELK: a method for eliciting knowledge from customers. ASME Design Engineering 53, 73–81.Google Scholar
Hirtz, J., Stone, R.B., McAdams, D.A., Szykman, S., & Wood, K.L. (2002). A functional basis for engineering design: reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Research in Engineering Design-Theory Applications and Concurrent Engineering 13(2), 65–82. doi:10.1007/S00163-001-0008k-3 Google Scholar
Jianxin, J., & Chun-Hsien, C. (2006). Customer requirement management in product development: a review of research issues. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 14(3), 173–185. doi:10.1177/1063293X06068357 Google Scholar
Joshi, S., & Summers, J.D. (2014). Tracking project health using completeness and specificity of requirements: a case study. Proc. ASME 2014 Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf./Computers and Information Engineering Conf., Buffalo, NY, August 17–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jureta, I.J., Mylopoulos, J., & Faulkner, S. (2009). A core ontology for requirements. Applied Ontology 4(3–4), 169–244. doi:10.3233/ao-2009-0069 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kossmann, M., Odeh, M., Wong, R., Gillies, A., & IEEE. (2008). Ontology-driven requirements engineering: building the OntoREM meta model. Proc. 2008 3rd Int. Conf. Information and Communication Technologies: From Theory to Applications, pp. 1378–1383, Damascus, Syria, April 7–11.Google Scholar
Lamar, C., & Mocko, G.M. (2010). Linguistic analysis of natural language engineering requirement statements. Proc. 8th Int. Symp. Tools and Methods of Competitive Engineering, TMCE 2010, Ancona, Italy, April 12–16.Google Scholar
Lin, J., Fox, M.S., & Bilgic, T. (1996). A requirement ontology for engineering design. Concurrent Engineering 4(3), 279–291.Google Scholar
Micouin, P. (2008). Toward a property based requirements theory: system requirements structured as a semilattice. Systems Engineering 11(3), 235–245. doi:10.1002/sys.20097 Google Scholar
Mir, M.S., Agarwal, N., & Iqbal, K. (2011). Applied ontology for requirments engineering: an approach to semantic integration of requirements model with system model. Proc. 15th IASTED Int. Conf. Software Engineering and Applications, SEA 2011, Dallas, TX, December 14–16.Google Scholar
Morkos, B., Shankar, P., & Summers, J.D. (2012). Predicting requirement change propagation, using higher order design structure matrices: an industry case study. Journal of Engineering Design 23(12), 905–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., & Wallace, K. (1984). Engineering Design: London: Design Council.Google Scholar
Qureshi, N.A., Jureta, I.J., & Perini, A. (2011). Requirements engineering for self-adaptive systems: core ontology and problem statement. Proc. 23rd Int. Advanced Information Systems Engineering Conf., CAiSE 2011, Berlin, June 20–24.Google Scholar
Schatz, B., Fleischmann, A., Geisberger, E., & Pister, M. (2005). Model-based requirements engineering with AutoRAID. Proc. 35th Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft fur Informatik e.V. (GI): Informatik LIVE!, INFORMATIK 2005 [35th Annual Conf. German Informatics Society (GI): Informatics LIVE!, INFORMATIK 2005], Bonn, September 19–22.Google Scholar
Sen, C., Caldwell, B.W., Summers, J.D., & Mocko, G.M. (2010). Evaluation of the functional basis using an information theoretic approach. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 24(1), 87–105.Google Scholar
Shannon, C.E. (1948). A Mathematical Theory of Communication (Vol. 5). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
Tseng, M.M., & Jianxin, J. (1998). Computer-aided requirement management for product definition: a methodology and implementation. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 6(2), 145–160. doi:10.1177/1063293X9800600205 Google Scholar
Yan, W., Chen, C.H., & Khoo, L.P. (2001). A radial basis function neural network multicultural factors evaluation engine for product concept development. Expert Systems 18(5), 219–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yannou, B. (2012). Requirements management within a full model-based engineering approach. Systems Engineering 15(2), 119–139. doi:10.1002/sys.20198 Google Scholar
Zhang, Y., & Zhang, W. (2007). Description logic representation for requirement specification. Proc. 7th Int. Conf. Computational Science, ICCS 2007, Beijing, May 27–30.Google Scholar