Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Ontology engineering”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Ontology Engineering in Provenance Enablement for the National Climate Assessment

The National Climate Assessment of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) analyzes and presents the impacts of climate change on the United States. The provenance information in the assessment is important because the assessment findings are of great public and academic concern and are used in policy and decision-making. By applying a use case-driven iterative methodology, we developed information models and ontology to represent the content structure of the recent National Climate Assessment draft report and its associated provenance information. We tested the ontology by using it in pilot systems serving information about instances of chapters, scientific findings, figures, tables, images, datasets, references, people, and organizations, etc. in the draft report, as well as interrelationships among those instances. The results successfully help users trace provenance in the draft report, such as finding all the journal articles from which a figure in the report was derived. The provenance information in our work was maintained in the context of the "Web of Data". In addition to the pilot systems we developed, other tools and services are also able to retrieve and utilize the provenance information. Our work is part of a Global Change Information System coordinated by the USGCRP that will eventually cover provenance information for the entire scope of global change research. Such a system will greatly increase understanding, credibility and trust in the global change research and foster reproducibility of scientific results and conclusions.

Ontology engineering↗
NASA NTRS2019

Orbital Debris Ontology, Terminology, and Knowledge Modeling

The looming threat orbital debris poses to assets in orbit demands solutions. As the orbital population grows, so does this hazard, but so does the sea of data. The problem is also an opportunity for interdisciplinary innovation and cooperation. This paper focuses on the data and information management aspect of developing solutions for a sustainable and safe orbital space environment. The corresponding author’s in-progress work to develop an orbital debris domain ontology is summarized in order to discuss knowledge modeling for this domain. Methodological approaches of this effort can also contribute to standards efforts and address terminological and policy questions. Leveraging the growing volumes of orbital debris and space situational awareness (SSA) data will create a more complete picture of the orbital space environment. Part of the solution will be: consistent and correct data interpretation, sharing orbital debris and SSA data in one form or another, terminology development & harmonization, and knowledge or domain modeling. To facilitate this, [Rovetto, 2015/16] discussed ontology development for the orbital debris domain. This paper lists concepts from that paper, and subsequently developed concepts [2-9]. Ontology engineering is an interdisciplinary field related to knowledge representation and reasoning in artificial intelligence, semantic technologies and the so-called semantic web. An ontology is effectively a computable and semantically rich terminology that presents a knowledge or domain model for a topic area. Expressions of knowledge or assertions are stored using formally defined term. This knowledge base is reasoned over to yield answers to queries, among other things. Ontologies have been developed in knowledge-based projects across various disciplines, and used for such things as search engines, chatbots, enterprise knowledge graphs, etc. Ontologies support: interoperability, automated reasoning, data sharing and integration, data search and retrieval, and communicating the meaning of data. The Orbital Debris Ontology (ODO), and related ontologies [Rovetto & Kelso 2016] [Rovetto 2016, 2017], were proposed to help achieve this. ODO, for instance, is intended as a domain ontology that can be used across federated databases, offering an explicitly specified set of concepts describing the orbital debris domain. Its meaning-rich taxonomy will provide a sharable semantics for orbital debris data to, in part, consistently communicate the meaning of data to both humans and machines, and tag data elements in space object catalogs to help afford inference tasks, decision support, knowledge discovery, and information integration. ODO and the SSA ontology (SSAO) is part of the overall Orbital Space Domain Ontology concept, which is conceived as a broader domain reference ontology. It aims to provide a knowledge representation structure of the orbital space environment, a common semantic model, and develop a sharable terminology. Collectively this will provide common meaning for datasets, a high-level taxonomy or classification for orbital space objects, and thus means to characterize space objects. Ongoing efforts have included using visualizations, R, JSON-LD, and contemporary semantic technologies. Potential applications and interdisciplinary partnerships include web-based platforms, web apps, visualizations, and academia projects. Community input and participation may yield a more widely understood domain model as well as facilitate terminological standards. For example, the proposed conceptual, terminological and ontological analysis may contribute to such efforts as the Space Debris Mitigation Requirements in the International Standards Organization by developing more precise, consistent and coherent terms and definitions. Projects that seek to develop in-house ontologies can use ODO and related ontologies as domain reference ontologies. This paper was developed independent of author affiliations. Readers are encouraged to contact corresponding author(1) with general interest and potential opportunities to support or realize the described project.

Robert J. Rovetto↗
DOE OSTI2022

Ontology Development Kit: a toolkit for building, maintaining and standardizing biomedical ontologies

Similar to managing software packages, managing the ontology life cycle involves multiple complex workflows such as preparing releases, continuous quality control checking and dependency management. To manage these processes, a diverse set of tools is required, from command-line utilities to powerful ontology-engineering environmentsr. Particularly in the biomedical domain, which has developed a set of highly diverse yet inter-dependent ontologies, standardizing release practices and metadata and establishing shared quality standards are crucial to enable interoperability. The Ontology Development Kit (ODK) provides a set of standardized, customizable and automatically executable workflows, and packages all required tooling in a single Docker image. In this paper, we provide an overview of how the ODK works, show how it is used in practice and describe how we envision it driving standardization efforts in our community.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Detecting and Characterizing Patterns of Failure in Complex Engineered Systems: an Ontology Development and Clustering Approach

While the causes of failures in complex engineered systems are often clear in hindsight, it can be challenging to predict failures proactively during the design of novel engineered products or systems. Identifying patterns can be useful for capturing common characteristics that may lead to failure. In this paper, we present a methodology for identifying patterns of failure from NASA’s publicly available Lessons Learned Information System (LLIS). We apply an ontology development and clustering approach to identify representative patterns leading to failures in historical lessons learned. A joint inductive-deductive approach reveals the key themes in lessons that lead to failure, which are formalized and recorded as an ontology of complex systems failure causes. Documents from the LLIS are manually tagged with relevant characteristics from the ontology. From the tagged set, clustering is used to capture co-occurring sets of characteristics that lead to failure. The primary contribution of this work is a method for extracting a set of generic failure patterns in complex engineered systems and characteristics for these patterns that can be identified at design time, knowledge of which can be used to plan mitigation strategies.

Systems Engineering↗
DOE OSTI2024

Dynamic Retrieval Augmented Generation of Ontologies using Artificial Intelligence (DRAGON-AI)

Ontologies are fundamental components of informatics infrastructure in domains such as biomedical, environmental, and food sciences, representing consensus knowledge in an accurate and computable form. However, their construction and maintenance demand substantial resources and necessitate substantial collaboration between domain experts, curators, and ontology experts. We present Dynamic Retrieval Augmented Generation of Ontologies using AI (DRAGON-AI), an ontology generation method employing Large Language Models (LLMs) and Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG). DRAGON-AI can generate textual and logical ontology components, drawing from existing knowledge in multiple ontologies and unstructured text sources.We assessed performance of DRAGON-AI on de novo term construction across ten diverse ontologies, making use of extensive manual evaluation of results. Our method has high precision for relationship generation, but has slightly lower precision than from logic-based reasoning. Our method is also able to generate definitions deemed acceptable by expert evaluators, but these scored worse than human-authored definitions. Notably, evaluators with the highest level of confidence in a domain were better able to discern flaws in AI-generated definitions. We also demonstrated the ability of DRAGON-AI to incorporate natural language instructions in the form of GitHub issues.These findings suggest DRAGON-AI's potential to substantially aid the manual ontology construction process. However, our results also underscore the importance of having expert curators and ontology editors drive the ontology generation process.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Data Science and the Knowledge Discovery Adventure

This talk will cover the important steps involved in the data science and knowledge discovery process: • Initial fact gathering (interview domain experts, review reports, articles, state-of-the-art) • Identify the problem (prediction, classification, statistical analysis, etc.) • Survey supporting data sources • Understand the data (numerical, categorical, text, sampling rate, data quality issues, etc.) • Selecting relevant features and sources • Acquire the data (set up agreements with the data stewards, APIs to download, etc.) • Merge data sources (temporal, spatial, common key, other ontologies...) • Feature Engineering (non linear domain knowledge or physics-based relationships) • Build data processing pipeline (may need to tap into data stream, develop parallel processing algorithm, federated learning etc.) • Build model and test (tune hyper-parameters, cross validation.) • Analyze/Validate results (do the results make sense. Does it answer the original question). • Deploy/Publish (Monitor and assess benefits)

Data science↗
NASA NTRS2012

Semantically-Rigorous Systems Engineering Modeling Using Sysml and OWL

The Systems Modeling Language (SysML) has found wide acceptance as a standard graphical notation for the domain of systems engineering. SysML subsets and extends the Unified Modeling Language (UML) to define conventions for expressing structural, behavioral, and analytical elements, and relationships among them. SysML-enabled modeling tools are available from multiple providers, and have been used for diverse projects in military aerospace, scientific exploration, and civil engineering. The Web Ontology Language (OWL) has found wide acceptance as a standard notation for knowledge representation. OWL-enabled modeling tools are available from multiple providers, as well as auxiliary assets such as reasoners and application programming interface libraries, etc. OWL has been applied to diverse projects in a wide array of fields. While the emphasis in SysML is on notation, SysML inherits (from UML) a semantic foundation that provides for limited reasoning and analysis. UML's partial formalization (FUML), however, does not cover the full semantics of SysML, which is a substantial impediment to developing high confidence in the soundness of any conclusions drawn therefrom. OWL, by contrast, was developed from the beginning on formal logical principles, and consequently provides strong support for verification of consistency and satisfiability, extraction of entailments, conjunctive query answering, etc. This emphasis on formal logic is counterbalanced by the absence of any graphical notation conventions in the OWL standards. Consequently, OWL has had only limited adoption in systems engineering. The complementary strengths and weaknesses of SysML and OWL motivate an interest in combining them in such a way that we can benefit from the attractive graphical notation of SysML and the formal reasoning of OWL. This paper describes an approach to achieving that combination.

Web Ontology Language (OWL)↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Detecting and Characterizing Patterns of Failure in Complex Systems: An Ontology Development and Clustering Approach

While the causes of failures in complex engineered systems are often clear in hindsight, it can be challenging to predict failures proactively during the design of novel engineered products or systems. Identifying patterns can be useful for capturing common characteristics that may lead to failure. In this paper, we present a methodology for identifying patterns of failure from NASA’s publicly available Lessons Learned Information System (LLIS). We apply an ontology development and clustering approach to identify representative patterns leading to failures in historical lessons learned. A joint inductive-deductive approach reveals the key themes in lessons that lead to failure, which are formalized and recorded as an ontology of complex systems failure causes. Documents from the LLIS are manually tagged with relevant characteristics from the ontology. From the tagged set, clustering is used to capture co-occurring sets of characteristics that lead to failure. The primary contribution of this work is a method for extracting a set of generic failure patterns in complex engineered systems and characteristics for these patterns that can be identified at design time, knowledge of which can be used to plan mitigation strategies.

Systems Engineering↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-16833-DND

Semantic Infrastructure is central to realizing the first goal of the ASDC's Strategic Plan: expanding the ASDC's customer base by improving access to ASDC data. ASDC data comprises a widely heterogeneous set of complex products which presents two significant challenges in data access: Helping customers discover, among many available options, the most suitable data products for their purpose; and Guiding customers to easily and appropriately use products. Data products differ significantly in terms of how the data was collected and processed, even with similar subject matter. Understanding differences is critical to using data effectively. To reach a broader customer range, the ASDC must provide prospective users with enough information to quickly and meaningfully compare and evaluate data products. Data formats and structures also differ among products. Applications displaying and analyzing data need access to federated and semantically disambiguated data. Semantic technologies offer functionality for addressing this issue. Ontologies can provide robust, stable domain models serving as common schema for discovering, evaluating, comparing, and integrating data from disparate products. Reasoning engines and triple stores can leverage ontologies to support intelligent search applications allowing users to discover, query, retrieve, and easily reformat data from a broad spectrum of sources.

Beth Huffer↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

From Research to Reality -- Challenges and Opportunities in Complex System Design

The scope and scale of our interconnected society requires that we view the world through a complex system lens, where numerous parts interact, and emergent behaviors are the norm. Understanding complex systems is critical for decision-making and policy development in domains such as ecological systems, financial markets, supply chains, and global transportation systems, where decision-makers need reliable information to predict the impact of decisions that may play out over decades. Traditional approaches to the research that produces this information are often insufficient, where hypotheses are tested in an isolated environment, and where the results may not carry over to the integrated system. There are a multitude of advancements in system engineering, artificial intelligence, and test and evaluation that are emerging to meet the challenge. Approaches such as agile development, model-based system engineering, design of experiments, large language models, and formal ontologies are providing ways to manage complexity and increase our collective ability to make the changes that we want to see in the world. In this talk I will provide a few examples related to the architecture of the National Airspace System (NAS), where we have investigated the use of large language models, basic formal ontology, and applied category theory to help researchers and system engineers be more effective in this complex design space. Bio: Dr. Ian Levitt’s current research focus is on the complex evolution of the National Airspace System. Prior to joining NASA in 2020, he was with the FAA leading international standards and national laboratory development for the agency. Dr. Levitt earned his PhD in mathematics from Rutgers University in 2009. His mission is to promote a healthy and continuous transformation of society through open information and cooperation.

Ian Levitt↗
DOE OSTI2023

The Model Assessment Wizard (MAW): A Visualization System for Ontology Constraint Violations

Validation and verification of engineering models is important to understand potential weaknesses and issues in the model. This is accomplished through the application of constraint logic to the model. These models and the constraints put upon them can be represented through a graph structure. Here we give a visualization system to aid users understanding, locating, and fixing constraint violations in their systems. We give users several ways to narrow down on the specific errors and parts of the graph they’re interested in. Users have the opportunity to choose the types of errors that will be shown in the graph. Clustering is applied to the graph to help users narrow down their searches. Several other graph interactions are given to support discovery of constraint violations.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2014

Bringing Back the Social Affordances of the Paper Memo to Aerospace Systems Engineering Work

Model-based systems engineering (MBSE) is a relatively new field that brings together the interdisciplinary study of technological components of a project (systems engineering) with a model-based ontology to express the hierarchical and behavioral relationships between the components (computational modeling). Despite the compelling promises of the benefits of MBSE, such as improved communication and productivity due to an underlying language and data model, we observed hesitation to its adoption at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. To investigate, we conducted a six-month ethnographic field investigation and needs validation with 19 systems engineers. This paper contributes our observations of a generational shift in one of JPL's core technologies. We report on a cultural misunderstanding between communities of practice that bolsters the existing technology drag. Given the high cost of failure, we springboard our observations into a design hypothesis - an intervention that blends the social affordances of the narrative-based work flow with the rich technological advantages of explicit data references and relationships of the model-based approach. We provide a design rationale, and the results of our evaluation.

design↗
NASA NTRS2024

Decision Space Modeling: Trade Space Ontology

As the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) works to develop a crewed Moon to Mars Architecture, it is dealing with a large decision space consisting of the overlay of human exploration architectures for both the Moon and for Mars. Efforts are underway to enable reasoning, analysis, and deliberation on this decision space. A critical first step is to develop a model of the decision space, which will then allow for various methods and techniques to be applied in support of the larger architecture decision-making process. The Trade Space Ontology consists of a set of terminologies and relations (an ontology) and a MagicDraw resource that enables documentation of decisions and alternatives. It also provides a means by which decisions and alternatives can be traced to other Systems Engineering artifacts. For documenting alternatives, the Trade Space Ontology adapts the Morphological Matrix methodology to The Systems Modeling Language (SysML) through a profile; custom diagrams are also implemented to simplify the profile's use. With the profile and custom diagrams, system architects can specify options for architecture attributes, as well as compatibility between them, in a compact visual format. While the approach shares similarities to a trade tree, the emphasis at this stage is less on enumerating specific combinations of options and instead on specifying the options and their compatibility. Enumeration of alternatives is performed by an external analysis that operates on an output file from a model constructed using the Trade Space Ontology. For decisions, the Trade Space Ontology provides a way to model generic precedence relationships as well as documenting inputs and outputs. These may include what alternatives, criteria, and rationale are understood to be relevant for each decision. Importantly, the decision-making side of the Trade Space Ontology is defined at a more general level, such that it can be adapted to the specific terms in use by projects and programs at NASA. However, this adaptability also means that less capability is provided ``out-of-the-box'' from installation. Currently the resource includes plugin functionality to enumerate paths through generic precedence relationships between decisions and to export these paths to a spreadsheet. Custom dependency stereotypes are included in the profile to indicate the cross-cutting relationships between the trade space and the architecture decisions, providing a means to map which parts of the trade space enumerate alternatives for a decision, and to identify how the output of a decision may modify the trade space through pruning or down-selection. While the motivating use case for this resource is in human exploration architectures, the broad applicability of the Morphological Matrix methodology indicates that the Trade Space Ontology should also be useful for other activities and tasks at the agency.

Trade Tree↗
NASA NTRS1993

ATOS-1: Designing the infrastructure for an advanced spacecraft operations system

The space industry has identified the need to use artificial intelligence and knowledge based system techniques as integrated, central, symbolic processing components of future mission design, support and operations systems. Various practical and commercial constraints require that off-the-shelf applications, and their knowledge bases, are reused where appropriate and that different mission contractors, potentially using different KBS technologies, can provide application and knowledge sub-modules of an overall integrated system. In order to achieve this integration, which we call knowledge sharing and distributed reasoning, there needs to be agreement on knowledge representations, knowledge interchange-formats, knowledge level communications protocols, and ontology. Research indicates that the latter is most important, providing the applications with a common conceptualization of the domain, in our case spacecraft operations, mission design, and planning. Agreement on ontology permits applications that employ different knowledge representations to interwork through mediators which we refer to as knowledge agents. This creates the illusion of a shared model without the constraints, both technical and commercial, that occur in centralized or uniform architectures. This paper explains how these matters are being addressed within the ATOS program at ESOC, using techniques which draw upon ideas and standards emerging from the DARPA Knowledge Sharing Effort. In particular, we explain how the project is developing an electronic Ontology of Spacecraft Operations and how this can be used as an enabling component within space support systems that employ advanced software engineering. We indicate our hope and expectation that the core ontology developed in ATOS, will permit the full development of standards for such systems throughout the space industry.

Poulter, K. J.↗
NASA NTRS1990

IDEF5 Ontology Description Capture Method: Concept Paper

The results of research towards an ontology capture method referred to as IDEF5 are presented. Viewed simply as the study of what exists in a domain, ontology is an activity that can be understood to be at work across the full range of human inquiry prompted by the persistent effort to understand the world in which it has found itself - and which it has helped to shape. In the contest of information management, ontology is the task of extracting the structure of a given engineering, manufacturing, business, or logistical domain and storing it in an usable representational medium. A key to effective integration is a system ontology that can be accessed and modified across domains and which captures common features of the overall system relevant to the goals of the disparate domains. If the focus is on information integration, then the strongest motivation for ontology comes from the need to support data sharing and function interoperability. In the correct architecture, an enterprise ontology base would allow th e construction of an integrated environment in which legacy systems appear to be open architecture integrated resources. If the focus is on system/software development, then support for the rapid acquisition of reliable systems is perhaps the strongest motivation for ontology. Finally, ontological analysis was demonstrated to be an effective first step in the construction of robust knowledge based systems.

Menzel, Christopher P.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Qualitative models for space system engineering

The objectives of this project were: (1) to investigate the implications of qualitative modeling techniques for problems arising in the monitoring, diagnosis, and design of Space Station subsystems and procedures; (2) to identify the issues involved in using qualitative models to enhance and automate engineering functions. These issues include representing operational criteria, fault models, alternate ontologies, and modeling continuous signals at a functional level of description; and (3) to develop a prototype collection of qualitative models for fluid and thermal systems commonly found in Space Station subsystems. Potential applications of qualitative modeling to space-systems engineering, including the notion of intelligent computer-aided engineering are summarized. Emphasis is given to determining which systems of the proposed Space Station provide the most leverage for study, given the current state of the art. Progress on using qualitative models, including development of the molecular collection ontology for reasoning about fluids, the interaction of qualitative and quantitative knowledge in analyzing thermodynamic cycles, and an experiment on building a natural language interface to qualitative reasoning is reported. Finally, some recommendations are made for future research.

Forbus, Kenneth D.↗