<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Automatically Linking Concepts in Distributed, Cloud-Based Manufacturing Environments</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Research Center Digital Factory Vorarlberg, Vorarlberg University of Applied Sciences</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Hochschulstr. 1, 6850 Dornbirn</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="AT">Austria</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>With the digitalisation, and the increased connectivity between manufacturing systems emerging in this context, manufacturing is shifting towards decentralised, distributed concepts. Still, for manufacturing scenarios manual input or augmentation of data is required at system boundaries. Especially in distributed manufacturing environments, like Cloud Manufacturing (CMfg) systems, constant changes to the available manufacturing resources and products pose challenges for establishing connections between them. We propose a feature-oriented representation of concepts, especially from the manufacturing domain, which serves as the basis for (semi-) automatically linking, e.g., manufacturing resources and products. This linking methodologies, as well as knowledge inferred using it, is then used to support distributed manufacturing, especially in CMfg environments, and enhance product development. The concepts and methodologies are to be evaluated in a real world learning factory.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Manufacturing • Cloud Manufacturing • Distributed Man- ufacturing • Reasoning • Ontologies • Feature-Based</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        Emerging technologies and concepts enabled various changes for the
manufacturing domain during the recent years. Initiatives, such as Industrie 4.0, advance the
digitalisation of manufacturing and simplify the distribution of manufacturing
tasks [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3, 15</xref>
        ]. With increasing connectivity, systems are shifting from centralised,
monolithic to decentralised, modular applications [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>Systems such as CMfg platforms realise this distribution of manufacturing
tasks. These platforms can be employed by a single manufacturing company
or can integrate manufacturing resources of various, independent companies. In
both cases the information and knowledge managed within these CMfg
platforms is highly dynamic. New manufacturing resources, as well as products, are
constantly being added to or removed from the plattform.</p>
      <p>Copyright ' 2021 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative
Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).</p>
      <p>
        A representation of knowledge in CMfg is required to describe how a product
can be manufactured using the available resources. Knowledge representations
in manufacturing, like the MAnufacturing's Semantics ONtology (MASON) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ],
model such connections in di erent ways, e.g. by describing the manufacturing
process for a product using a combination of resources. In case of hardly
dynamic manufacturing systems or when products and manufacturing resources
are de ned by the same authority these links can be established manually. In a
highly distributed and dynamic system, such as a CMfg platform, the manual
creation of these links may not be viable when a new manufacturing resource
connects to the platform or a new product is added.
      </p>
      <p>The aim of the PhD thesis described in this paper is to establish links between
a product and the manufacturing resources required to produce it, based on a
tting knowledge representation and by employing reasoning as well as matching
mechanisms. Therefore, major challenges are (1) the creation of a feature-based
representation of products and manufacturing resources, (2) implementing
(semi) automatic linking mechanisms, and using these representation and mechanisms
to support (3) distributed manufacturing as well as (4) product design.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Related Work</title>
      <p>
        The description of the manufacturing domain comprises a research topic present
since multiple decades [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. Widely used technologies for describing
manufacturing resources and for enabling the communication between them, are, for
example, Open Platform Communication Uni ed Architecture (OPC UA) and
MTConnect [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4 ref9">4, 9</xref>
        ]. In the manufacturing domain, ontologies are commonly used for
knowledge representation. An ontology is \an explicit speci cation of a
conceptualization" [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ] and enables the integration and interoperability of systems [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13,
23</xref>
        ]. Topics in modeling knowledge in manufacturing include (1) modeling of
manufacturing resources, (2) modeling of manufacturing systems, (3) modeling
of manufacturing processes, and (4) the adoption of foundational ontologies,
besides others [16].
      </p>
      <p>
        One way to describe products in a manufacturing setting is by specifying their
parts and the relation between each part [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10, 19, 21, 23</xref>
        ]. This form of
representation builds upon the hierarchic structure, which is often inherent to complex
systems [20]. Other representations of products in manufacturing use features
to describe them. For example, when designing products tools, like Computer
Aided Design (CAD) software, de ne objects by their features [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. Generally
speaking, features can be components of a thing as well as concrete or abstract
properties of it [22]. Analogously, in product design features carry information
about the geometric or physical nature of the product as well as manufacturing
and life-cycle related information [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">16, 6</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Jarvenpaa et al. use ontologies to match products and manufacturing
resources [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ]. The authors de ne product requirements and manufacturing
resource capabilities to nd matching (combinations of) resources. Manufacturing
tools are an alternative to capabilities for describing what a manufacturing
resource is able to do. The process of manufacturing a product can be described
by de ning on the one hand what tools are required for an operation and on the
other hand what operations are required to machine a raw material to achieve
a geometric entity [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ]. Independently of whether capabilities, tools, or other
concepts are used to model a manufacturing resource's skills, connecting
manufacturing resources to products by describing the process is common, e.g., as in
the reference ontology for manufacturing proposed by Usman et al. [23].
      </p>
      <p>
        In contrast to hardly changing manufacturing environments, which are often
considered when developing models like the ontologies described before, in CMfg
products may be de ned independently of manufacturing resources. A eld with
similar challenges are web services where de nitions of web services and
requirements by service requesters are de ned independently [24]. Describing services
has been explored extensively for web services [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. Here, technologies like the
Web Ontology Language for Web Services (OWL-S) and the Web Service
Modeling Ontology (WSMO) are commonly used [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ]. Those technologies, especially
OWL-S, are also considered for matching manufacturing resources [17].
      </p>
      <p>
        A di erent approach for matching web services, but also for other
ontology related applications, is ontology matching [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ]. Di erences in meaning when
representing knowledge, i.e. the semantic heterogeneity problem, is a problem
that can be tackled using this approach [18]. Zhdanova and Shvaiko describe
an approach enhancing the process of ontology matching by elevating it to a
community-driven activity [25].
3
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Research Questions</title>
      <p>The motivation for the work to be done in this thesis stems from the
manufacturing domain, especially distributed manufacturing. The research question,
that forms the basis of the thesis, can be formulated in a general way as follows.
RQ How can feature based speci cations of concepts representing di erent views
of the same domain, be automatically linked together by means of reasoning and
classi cation?
4</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Hypothesis</title>
      <p>The hypothesis related to the research question formulated before are
{ Products as well as manufacturing resources described in a hierarchic,
featurebased way are a suitable representation in distributed manufacturing.
{ Reasoning and classi cation methods can be used on such a representation,
to link products to the manufacturing resources required to produce them.
{ The methods to be developed in this thesis are of use for various
manufacturing related tasks, e.g., product design and production planning.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Approach</title>
      <p>The goal of the thesis is the exploration and advancement of methods to
automatically link concepts based on their features, i.e., to describe which combination
of manufacturing resources are able to create a given product. The developed
methods are meant to be applied to the manufacturing domain to support its
processes, especially in distributed, cloud-based manufacturing environments.</p>
      <p>A representation of knowledge about manufacturing resources and products,
based on existing ontologies and standards, is to be created as a foundation for
the other work to be done in this thesis, i.e., automatic linking of concepts. In
order to (semi-) automatically create the connections between manufacturing
resources and products, reasoning and matching mechanisms are to be used.
Utilizing the knowledge inferred this way, combinations of resources are de ned,
which are able to produce speci c products.</p>
      <p>The concepts and technologies used for (semi-) automatically linking a
product to the manufacturing resources required to produce it are then to be applied
to di erent elds in the manufacturing domain. The main focus is to support
distributed manufacturing systems, like CMfg platforms. The developed
representation of manufacturing resources and products are used to bring together
customers and manufactures by nding tting manufacturing resources in an ever
changing environment. During the design phase of a product, possible
manufacturing processes can be dynamically created, based on the information derived
from these links, while the designer is still working on the product.</p>
      <p>Since a fully automated linking of concepts may not result in a useable
ontology, the use of manual input has to be considered, as well. In order to include
domain experts into the process of creating these links, a community-driven
approach, similar to the one described in [25], could be applied and used to improve
the overall result.</p>
      <p>The main aspects of the thesis are:
{ Representation of products and manufacturing resources
{ (Semi-) Automatic linking
{ Support of distributed manufacturing
{ Support of product design
{ Real world validation</p>
      <p>According to these main aspects, tasks can be identi ed.
{ Development of a feature based representation. The foundation of the
work to be done in this thesis is a representation of knowledge about
products and manufacturing resources. For this representation existing models
and standards have to be considered. A rst feature-based model may be
developed with a still manual process of linking concepts in mind.
{ Automation of the linking process. Using the representation developed
during the rst phase of the thesis, the process of linking products and
manufacturing resources is automated. Here the degree of automation is an
important factor. Since a full automation may not be feasible, the possibility
of manual steps has to be explored.
{ Manufacturing process creation. Linking the concepts in a (semi-)
automatic way already allows to infer assumptions about whether a product
can be produced or not. This knowledge is then to be used to create a
manufacturing process. Additional considerations, e.g. geographic locations of
manufacturing resources, have to be taken into account. Implementing the
creation of manufacturing processes enables (semi-) automatic distributed
manufacturing.
{ Support of product design. The model and concepts to be developed
can be used to support product design, as well. To accomplish this the
information covered in CAD models has to be brought into the knowledge
representation introduced in this work. Then it can be deduced whether or
not the product currently designed can be produced with the existing
manufacturing resources. The inferred knowledge is then to be returned to the
CAD application in order to give useful feedback to the product designer.
{ Real world validation. The methods and knowledge representations to
be developed in this thesis are to be validated in a real world setting. The
model factory of the Digital Factory Vorarlberg provides an environment for
validating the work [14]. The manufacturing process modelled by the model
factory includes a heterogenus set of manufacturing resources, like mills,
transportation systems, and assembly resources. It is one of multiple
laboratories connected for distributed manufacturing. This is enabled by a CMfg
platform which connects di erent laboratories. This setup includes various
aspects of distributed manufacturing and o ers a real world environment for
the validation of the work in this thesis.
6</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Conclusion &amp; Future Work</title>
      <p>In recent years concepts and methods, especially related to digitalisation,
enabled the rise of distributed manufacturing and consequently the distribution of
manufacturing tasks to di erent manufacturing providers. Applications in this
eld, such as CMfg platforms, have to establish connections between products
and manufacturing resources required to produce them. This paper outlines how
such a (semi-) automatic linking can be established and gives a roadmap for the
proposed thesis. While similar work often connects products and manufacturing
resources by the manufacturing process itself, we propose automatically
generating feasible manufacturing processes based on systematically derived
connections of products and manufacturing resources. This not only enables distributed
manufacturing by supporting the constantly changing, heterogenus
manufacturing environment that follows from this paradigm, but is also able to support
other manufacturing related processes, such as product design. The work
described here is still in a very early stage and hence no major preliminary results
are being reported in this paper. Nevertheless, with the tasks outlined in this
paper we aim to create an appropriate representation as a basis for (semi-)
automatically linking concepts from the manufacturing domain. For evaluating the
results of the work to be done in this thesis, the representations and
methodologies developed are to be integrated into a learning factory, o ering real world
applications, as well as various manufacturing resources.</p>
      <p>Acknowledgment. The research presented in this paper is partially nanced
by FFG-Project No. 866833 \CIDOP".
14. Merz, R., Hoch, R., Drexel, D.: A cloud-based research and learning
factory for industrial production. Procedia Manufacturing 45, 215{221 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.04.097
15. Muller, J.M., Voigt, K.I.: Sustainable Industrial Value Creation in SMEs: A
Comparison between Industry 4.0 and Made in China 2025. International Journal of
Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 5(5), 659{670 (oct
2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-018-0056-z
16. San lippo, E.M., Borgo, S.: What are features? an ontology-based
review of the literature. Computer-Aided Design 80, 9{18 (nov 2016).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2016.07.001
17. Sheng, B., Zhang, C., Yin, X., Lu, Q., Cheng, Y., Xiao, T., Liu, H.: Common
intelligent semantic matching engines of cloud manufacturing service based on
OWL-S. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology
84(14), 103{118 (nov 2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7996-z
18. Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: Ontology Matching: State of the Art and Future
Challenges. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 25(1), 158{176
(jan 2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/tkde.2011.253
19. Silverston, L.: The Data Model Resource Book, Volume 1. John Wiley &amp; Sons Inc
(Apr 2001)
20. Simon, H.A.: The Architecture of Complexity. Proceedings of the American
Philosophical Society 106(6), 467{482 (Dec 1962)
21. Soininen, T., Tiihonen, J., Mannisto, T., Sulonen, R.: Towards a general ontology
of con guration. Ai Edam 12(4), 357{372 (1998)
22. Tversky, A.: Features of similarity. Psychological review 84(4), 327 (1977)
23. Usman, Z., Young, R.I.M., Chungoora, N., Palmer, C., Case, K.,
Harding, J.A.: Towards a formal manufacturing reference ontology.
International Journal of Production Research 51(22), 6553{6572 (nov 2013).
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.801570
24. Wu, Z., Ranabahu, A.H., Gomadam, K., Sheth, A.P., Miller, J.A.: Automatic
composition of semantic web services using process and data mediation. Tech. rep.,
Kno.e.sis Center, Wright State University (Feb 2007)
25. Zhdanova, A.V., Shvaiko, P.: Community-driven ontology matching. In: European
Semantic Web Conference. pp. 34{49. Springer (2006)</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Adamson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Moore</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Feature-based control and information framework for adaptive and distributed manufacturing in cyber physical systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Manufacturing Systems</source>
          <volume>43</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>305</fpage>
          {315 (apr
          <year>2017</year>
          ). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.
          <year>2016</year>
          .
          <volume>12</volume>
          .003
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ameri</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dutta</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>An upper ontology for manufacturing service description</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference</source>
          . vol.
          <volume>42578</volume>
          , pp.
          <volume>651</volume>
          {
          <issue>661</issue>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Anderson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Diab</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>French</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Harper</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nair</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sobel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The Industrial Internet of ThingsVolume T3: Analytics Framework</article-title>
          .
          <source>Tech. rep., Industrial Internet Consortium</source>
          (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bauernhansl</surname>
            , T., ten Hompel,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vogel-Heuser</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B</given-names>
          </string-name>
          . (eds.): Industrie 4.0 in Produktion,
          <source>Automatisierung und Logistik</source>
          . Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden (
          <year>2014</year>
          ). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
          <fpage>658</fpage>
          -04682-8
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Muller, Y.:
          <article-title>Mogliche Veranderungen von SystemArchitekturen im Bereich der Produktion</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Industrie 4.0</source>
          , pp.
          <volume>57</volume>
          {
          <fpage>68</fpage>
          . Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden (
          <year>2017</year>
          ). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
          <fpage>658</fpage>
          -15557-5 4
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Case</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gao</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gindy</surname>
          </string-name>
          , N.:
          <article-title>Feature validation in a feature-based design system</article-title>
          .
          <source>`Advances in Manufacturing Technology VII ` the Proceedings of the Ninth National Conference on Manufacturing Research</source>
          pp.
          <volume>272</volume>
          {
          <issue>276</issue>
          (
          <year>1993</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Euzenat</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Shvaiko</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          : Ontology Matching. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (
          <year>2013</year>
          ). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
          <fpage>642</fpage>
          -38721-0
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gruber</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.R.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A translation approach to portable ontology speci cations</article-title>
          .
          <source>Knowledge Acquisition</source>
          <volume>5</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <volume>199</volume>
          {220 (jun
          <year>1993</year>
          ). https://doi.org/10.1006/knac.
          <year>1993</year>
          .1008
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jasperneite</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Neumann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pethig</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>OPC UA versus MTConnect</article-title>
          . Computer&amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Automation (Sonderheft S2 2015 Control&amp;Drives</surname>
          </string-name>
          ) S pp.
          <volume>16</volume>
          {
          <issue>21</issue>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10. J rgensen, K.A.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Petersen</surname>
          </string-name>
          , T.D.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nielsen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Habib</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Product family modelling for manufacturing planning</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 21th International Conference on Production Research, ICPR</source>
          <year>2011</year>
          ,
          <article-title>1</article-title>
          .-
          <fpage>4</fpage>
          . August, Stuttgart, Germany. Fraunhofer Verlag (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11. Jarvenpaa,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Siltala</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Hylli</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Lanz</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.:</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The development of an ontology for describing the capabilities of manufacturing resources</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing</source>
          <volume>30</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <volume>959</volume>
          {978 (jun
          <year>2018</year>
          ). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-018-1427-6
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lara</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Roman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Polleres</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fensel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>A Conceptual Comparison of WSMO and OWL-S</article-title>
          . In: Web Services, pp.
          <volume>254</volume>
          {
          <fpage>269</fpage>
          . Springer Berlin Heidelberg (
          <year>2004</year>
          ). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
          <fpage>540</fpage>
          -30209-4 19
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lemaignan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Siadat</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dantan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Semenenko</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>MASON: A Proposal For An Ontology Of Manufacturing Domain</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: IEEE Workshop on Distributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DIS'06)</source>
          . IEEE (
          <year>2006</year>
          ). https://doi.org/10.1109/dis.
          <year>2006</year>
          .48
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>