Introduction to the Fourth Industrial Revolution

  • Jung-Sup Um


Due to the relative newness of CPS concept, there are many weaknesses perceived in previous CPS books. For the moment, in terms of cost, the drone CPS is the only available system offering the advantage of 3D autonomous dynamic flying in the nearby classroom condition. Drone could become the primary ways for our young people to experience cyber-physical world. It helps illustrate for students to find a combined cyber and physical components in the single drone. Much CPS theory can be explained by typical drone flying procedures in which communication between sensors, actuators and controllers occurs through a shared communication network. Once basics for CPS with drone are delivered to the class, class can be extended to share a variety of examples with students so that they can explore the range of possibilities. The aim of this book is to help for teachers’ communities find a combined cyber and physical components in the single drone.


  1. 1.
    Kim S, Park S (2017) CPS (cyber physical system) based manufacturing system optimization. Procedia Comput Sci 122:518–524. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Um J-S (2017) Valuing current drone CPS in terms of bi-directional bridging intensity: embracing the future of spatial information. Spat Inf Res 25(4):585–591. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sogeti VINT (2014) The fourth industrial revolution: things to tighten the link between IT and OT. Sogeti VINT, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dombrowski U, Wagner T (2014) Mental strain as field of action in the 4th industrial revolution. Procedia CIRP 17:100–105. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schwab K (2017) The fourth industrial revolution. Crown Business, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ahmad IA (2016) Is it the dawn of industrial revolution 4.0 in Malaysia? myForesight. Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kuruczleki E, Pelle A, Laczi R, Fekete B (2016) The readiness of the European Union to embrace the fourth industrial revolution. Management (18544223) 11(4):327–347Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gordon RJ (2014) The demise of US economic growth: restatement, rebuttal, and reflections. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brynjolfsson E, McAfee A (2014) The second machine age: work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. WW Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ishak H (2016) Industrial revolution 4.0 –tackling it by its horn. myForesight. Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schwaab K (2015) The fourth industrial revolution: what it means, how to respond. Foreign Aff 12:2015–2017Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ahmadi A, Cherifi C, Cheutet V, Ouzrout Y (2017) A review of CPS 5 components architecture for manufacturing based on standards. In: SKIMA, international conference on software, knowledge, intelligent management and applications, Colombo, Sri Lanka, Dec 6, 2017–Dec 8, 2017Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Um J-S (2017) Embracing cyber-physical system as cross-platform to enhance fusion-application value of spatial information. Spat Inf Res 25(3):439–447. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee I, Sokolsky O (2010) Medical cyber physical systems. In: Design automation conference, 13–18 June 2010, pp 743–748Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    PCAST (2007) Leadership under challenge: information technology R&D in a competitive world. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Negri E, Fumagalli L, Macchi M (2017) A review of the roles of digital twin in CPS-based production systems. Procedia Manuf 11:939–948. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grieves M, Vickers J (2017) Digital twin: mitigating unpredictable, undesirable emergent behavior in complex systems. In: Kahlen F-J, Flumerfelt S, Alves A (eds) Transdisciplinary perspectives on complex systems: new findings and approaches. Springer, Cham, pp 85–113. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schleich B, Anwer N, Mathieu L, Wartzack S (2017) Shaping the digital twin for design and production engineering. CIRP Ann 66(1):141–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goossens P (2017) Industry 4.0 and the power of the digital twin. Maplesoft. Cybernet Systems CoGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tao F, Cheng J, Qi Q, Zhang M, Zhang H, Sui F (2018) Digital twin-driven product design, manufacturing and service with big data. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 94(9):3563–3576. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cearley DW, Burke B, Searle S, Walker MJ, Claunch C (2017) The top 10 strategic technology trends for 2018. Gartner. Accessed 28 Sept 2018
  22. 22.
    Hauschild M (2017) Top 10 digital trends for power and utilities. The ManufacturerGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chen A, Ramanandan A, Farrell JA (2010) High-precision lane-level road map building for vehicle navigation. In: IEEE/ION position, location and navigation symposium, 4–6 May 2010, pp 1035–1042.
  24. 24.
    Ahmed M, Karagiorgou S, Pfoser D, Wenk C (2015) A comparison and evaluation of map construction algorithms using vehicle tracking data. GeoInformatica 19(3):601–632. CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim D, Chung T, Yi K (2015) Lane map building and localization for automated driving using 2D laser rangefinder. In: 2015 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV), June 28 2015–July 1 2015, pp 680–685.
  26. 26.
    Noh S, An K, Han W (2015) High-level data fusion based probabilistic situation assessment for highly automated driving. In: 2015 IEEE 18th international conference on intelligent transportation systems, 15–18 Sept. 2015, pp 1587–1594.
  27. 27.
    Guo C, Meguro J, Kojima Y, Naito T (2015) A multimodal ADAS system for unmarked urban scenarios based on road context understanding. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 16(4):1690–1704. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Akanmu A, Anumba C, Messner J (2014) Critical review of approaches to integrating virtual models and the physical construction. Int J Constr Manag 14(4):267–282. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pereira F, Gomes L (2016) Combining data-flows and petri nets for cyber-physical systems specification. Int Fed Inf Process Publ IFIP 2016(470):65–76Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wang L, Haghighi A (2016) Combined strength of holons, agents and function blocks in cyber-physical systems. J Manuf Syst 40:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Carhart N, Rosenberg G (2016) A framework for characterising infrastructure interdependencies. Int J Complexity Appl Sci Technol 1(1):35–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sun X, Ansari N, Wang R (2016) Optimizing resource utilization of a data center. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 18(4):2822–2846. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Huang J, Kirsch CM, Sengupta R (2015) Cloud computing in space. INFORMS J Comput 27(4):704–717. MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Akanmu A, Anumba C, Messner J (2013) Scenarios for cyber-physical systems integration in construction. J Inf Technol Constr 18:240–260Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lombardo T (2005) Science and the technological vision of the future. Center for Future Consciousness, GlendaleGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Xia F, Kong X, Xu Z (2011) Cyber-physical control over wireless sensor and actuator networks with packet loss. In: Wireless networking based control. Springer, New York, pp 85–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jung-Sup Um
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of GeographyKyungpook National UniversityDaeguKorea (Republic of)

Personalised recommendations