identification and bridging of semantic gaps: the case of multidomain engineering

Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010, Golden, Colorado

Identification and Bridging of Semantic Gaps: The Case of Multi-

Domain Engineering

Andreas M. HeinInstitute of Astronautics,

Technical University of Munich

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 2

Content

1. Context: Frequent problems in Multi-Domain Engineering2. Introduction to the Semantic Gap (SG)3. Semantic Gaps in Multi-Domain Engineering4. Limits to inter-domain understanding5. Conclusion

1. Context: Frequent problems in Multi-Domain Engineering

• What is an engineering domain?

- Mainly dependent on engineering curriculum (already interdisciplinary)- Constantly shifting and fuzzy borders (mechatronics, bionics)

• Frequent problems in Multi-Domain Engineering:

- Engineer does not understand customer needs- Design engineer and production engineer miss opportunities- Engineers from different domains have difficulties to understand each

other

What is common to these problems? (commonly refered to „communication“ problem)

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 3

2. Introduction to the Semantic Gap

“A “semantic gap” is the difference in meaning between constructs formed within different representation systems.”

Example:

[1]

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 4

Hum

an

understanding

Machine

understanding

2. Introduction to the Semantic Gap

10.05.2010 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 5

How to close the gap?

Goal: Increase the synonymy of the constructs!

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 6

3. Semantic Gaps in Multi-Domain Engineering

10.05.2010 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 7

Between stakeholder and engineer

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 8

Close the gap between stakeholder and engineer

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 9

What is SysML ?

[3]

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 10

1 Structure

2 Behaviour

3 Requirements

4 Parameter

Within an engineering domain

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 11

Close the gap within an domain

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 12

Feature Based CAD/CAM

• feature = geometry + semantics [2]

• Example: blind borehole

• Geometric form: Cylinder with cone at the end (diameter, length, angle)

• Semantics: hole that is made of a drill, does not go entirely through the

material

10.05.2010 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 13

Between Engineering Domains

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 14

Bridging of the Inter-Domain Gap

• What does usually happen?

- Searching for analogies (similar structures) in natural language- Display ideas in drawings, using common objects (boxes, relations)- Increase the synonymy of each others mental representations(„cognitive synchronization“)- Domain specific documentation

New development: Integrated documentation in SysML framework

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 15

Close the gaps between engineering domains

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 16

Example using SysML

[4]

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 17

Example using SysML

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 18

5. Limits to inter-domain understanding

• Expert – Novice difference:Is this diagram gramatically correct? (SysML knowledge required)Is the (propositional) content making sense? (domain-knowledge

required)

• EconomyHow much effort does it take to convey the knowledge?How important is the knowledge?Are people willing to learn new „vocabulary“?

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 19

6. Conclusion

• Many problems in engineering can be associated with the notion „Semantic Gap “

• Three characteristic Semantic Gaps in Multi-Domain Engineering • How to bridge these gaps• How the understanding between domains works and can be

improved• The limits of inter-domain understanding

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 20

Thank you for your attention!

Andreas Hein Institute of Astronautics

Technical University of Munich a.hein@tum.de

10.04.23 Workshop Philosophy & Engineering 2010 21

References

[1] Spinczyk, O. (2008) Betriebssysteme, Rechnernetze und verteilte Systeme 1

(BSRvS1) Zusammenfassung und Ausblick. Retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://ess.cs.uni-dortmund.de/Teaching/SS2008/BSRvS1/Downloads/14-Zusammenfassung-Ausblick-1x2.pdf

[2] Shah, J.J., Mäntylä, M. (1995). Parametric and Feature Based CAD/CAM.New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

[3] Object Management Group, Systems Modeling Language Specification v.1.1,

http://www.omgsysml.org

[4] All SysML diagrams are drawn with the MagicDraw SysML plugin software