Advertisement

Product abstraction evolution by active process facilitators

  • Mark J. Silvestri
Frameworks
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 492)

Abstract

This paper provides a framework for concurrent abstract refinement activity for a product throughout its life cycle. Two distinct abstraction activities are discussed: interdomain and intradomain life cycle representation. Product process facilitation by active computer agents provides the vehicle for schema evolution via specialization.

Keywords

Product Life Cycle Explicit Constraint Implicit Constraint Inherent Constraint Life Cycle Representation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference List

  1. [1]
    Brodie, M.L. On the Development of Data Model, pp.19–47; On Conceptual Modelling. Brodie, M., Mylopoulos, J. and J.W. Schmidt,eds., Springer-Verlag, New York Inc. 1984.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Brown, D. Product Information Management(PIM): The Next Phase in CAD/CAM/CAE. D.H.Brown Associates, Inc. 1989.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Brown,D.C. and B. Chandrasekaran. Knowledge and Control for a Mechanical Design Expert System. IEEE Computer Magazine, Special Issue, July 1986.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Brodie,M., R. Balzer, G. Wiederhold, R. Brachman, J. Mylopoulos. Knowledge Base Management Systems: Discussions from the Working Group, pp.19–26; Expert Database Systems; Kerschberg,L.,ed., The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co.,Inc. 1986.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Brachman,R and H. Levesque. What Makes a Knowledgebase Knowledgeable? A View of Databases from the Knowledge Level, pp. 69–78; Expert Database Systems; Kerschberg,L., ed., The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co.,Inc. 1986.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Canzi, U., G. Guida,W. Poloni and S. Pozzi. CRONOS-II. A Knowledge-based Scheduler for Complex Manufacturing Environments. Proceedings from Second International Conference on Data and Knowledge Systems for Manufacturing and Engineering. IEEE 89CH2806-8. pp.76–83. 1989.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Cheeseman, P. Uncertainty and Planning: A Summary. Workshop Report: DARPA Santa Cruz Workshop on Planning, W. Swartout, Editor, AI Magazine. Vol. 9:2. 1988.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Dodhiawala, R., V. Jagannathan, L. Baum and T. Skillman. Workshop Report: The First Workshop on Blackboard Systems. AI Magazine. Vol. 10:1. 1989.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Geol, V and P. Pirolli. Motivating the Notion of Generic Design within Information Processing Theory: The Design Problem Space. AI Magazine. Vol. 10:1. 1989.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Kostovetsky, A and M. Silvestri. A Taxonomy-Based Knowledge Representation Technique for Extending the Relational Model. Proceedings of the International Symposium of New Directions in Computing, IEEE 85CH2134-5, pp. 72–79. 1985.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    McGoveran, D. The Power of Stored Procedures. Database Programming and Design. Vol. 2:9. 1989.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Nii, H.P. Blackboard Systems: The Blackboard Model of Problem Solving and the Evolution of Blackboard Architectures, Part One. AI Magazine, 7:2, pp. 38–53. 1986(a).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Nii, H.P. Blackboard Systems: The Blackboard Model of Problem Solving and the Evolution of Blackboard Architectures, Part Two. AI Magazine, 7:3, pp. 82–106. 1986(b).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    PDES Product Structure and Configuration Management, ISO TC184/SC4/WG1, Part 44, 1990.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Ray, S. Process Reasoning. Proceedings of the IFIP WG5.7 Working Conference on Information Flow in Automated Manufacturing Systems. 1987.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Reimer, U. A System-Controlled Multi-type Specialization Hierarchy. pp. 173–187. Expert Database Systems; Kerschberg,L.,ed., The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co.,Inc. 1986.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Shepherd,A. and L. Kerschberg. Constraint Management in Expert Database Systems, pp. 309–331. Expert Database Systems; Kerschberg,L.,ed., The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co.,Inc. 1986.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Silvestri,M.J. Dual Design Partners in an Incremental Redesign Environment; (in preparation for print). Tong,C. and D. Sriram, eds.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Sriram, D. and R. Logcher. Cooperative Engineering Design. Knowledge-based System Applications in Engineering Design: Research at MIT. D. Sriram, G. Stephanopoulos, R. Logcher, D. Gossard, N. Groleau, D. Serrano and D. Navinchandra. AI Magazine. Vol 10:3. 1989.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Stonebraker, M. Adding Semantic Knowledge to a Relational Database System, pp.333–353; On Conceptual Modelling. Brodie, M., Mylopoulos, J. and J.W. Schmidt,eds., Springer-Verlag, New York Inc. 1984.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Tyler,J. DRAFT. A Repository of Meta Constructs for Product Data Exchange Specification (PDES). National Institute of Standards and Technology, Md. 1989.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Waters, R.C. KB Emacs: Where's the AI?. AI Magazine, 7:1, pp. 47–56. 1985.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Workshop Proceedings for Databases in Large AI Systems, eds. F. Golshani and O. Friesen. 1988.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Yu,L. and D. Rosenkrantz. Ancestor-Controlled Submodule Inclusion in Design Databases. Proceedings from Second International Conference on Data and Knowledge Systems for Manufacturing and Engineering. IEEE 89CH2806-8. pp.28–37. 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark J. Silvestri

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations