2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.datak.2017.03.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A conceptual framework for large-scale ecosystem interoperability and industrial product lifecycles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, several enterprise interoperability frameworks have been proposed in the literature (Chen et al, 2008 ), such as LISI (Levels of Information Systems Interoperability) (C4ISR, 1998 ), IDEAS interoperability framework (IDEAS, 2002 ), ATHENA interoperability framework (AIF) (ATHENA, 2003 ), Framework for Enterprise Interoperability (FEI), Big Data Value (BDV) Reference Model (BDVA, 2017 ), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and Big Data Interoperability Framework (NIST, 2019 ). In addition, during the last years, new domain-specific interoperability frameworks have been proposed, such as the European Interoperability Framework (EIF) (EIF, 2017 ), the Internet of Things-based interoperability framework for fleet management (Backman et al, 2016 ), the Smart City Interoperability Framework (Ahn et al, 2016 ), the interoperability framework for software as service systems in cloud (Rezaei et al, 2014 ), the International Image Interoperability Framework (Snydman et al, 2015 ), and the conceptual interoperability framework for large-scale systems (Selway et al, 2017 ). Overall, the enterprise interoperability frameworks can be seen in the frame of three main layers (Romero and Vernadat, 2016 ; Leal et al, 2020 ; Technical, Semantic, and Organizational).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, several enterprise interoperability frameworks have been proposed in the literature (Chen et al, 2008 ), such as LISI (Levels of Information Systems Interoperability) (C4ISR, 1998 ), IDEAS interoperability framework (IDEAS, 2002 ), ATHENA interoperability framework (AIF) (ATHENA, 2003 ), Framework for Enterprise Interoperability (FEI), Big Data Value (BDV) Reference Model (BDVA, 2017 ), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and Big Data Interoperability Framework (NIST, 2019 ). In addition, during the last years, new domain-specific interoperability frameworks have been proposed, such as the European Interoperability Framework (EIF) (EIF, 2017 ), the Internet of Things-based interoperability framework for fleet management (Backman et al, 2016 ), the Smart City Interoperability Framework (Ahn et al, 2016 ), the interoperability framework for software as service systems in cloud (Rezaei et al, 2014 ), the International Image Interoperability Framework (Snydman et al, 2015 ), and the conceptual interoperability framework for large-scale systems (Selway et al, 2017 ). Overall, the enterprise interoperability frameworks can be seen in the frame of three main layers (Romero and Vernadat, 2016 ; Leal et al, 2020 ; Technical, Semantic, and Organizational).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Modelverse also uses the concept of undefined potency, which is similar to star potency in the sense that it represents uncertainty. SLICER is another multi-level modeling framework that is aimed at modeling large ecosystems, mainly focusing on scalability [56]. SLICER is different from other approaches as it has no explicit levels, -therefore, it can be considered to be level-blind -and is not potency-based.…”
Section: Multi-level Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Name Description Nature characterization potency [32] an iteration on classic potency, focusing on abstractness-related problems approach classic potency [7] the original potency notion approach classic potency with edges [5] extended support for handling edges approach cross-level relations [14] level-adjuvant, not based on potency approach Cuadrado and de Lara [14] provides adaptation and extensibility for multi-level tools approach DeepJava [34] Java with multi-level programming tool DeepRuby [49] implementation of dual deep instantiation by extending the Ruby language tool DeepTelos [30] knowledge representation system employing multi-level modeling tool DPF Workbench [35] based on the DPF tool dual deep instantiation [48] / modeling [50] uses dual potency on feature endpoints approach endurance properties [36] assigns potency to field values approach FMML x [21] modeling language using intrinsic features that also support operations approach formalisation by Rossini et al [55] multi-level modeling based on the DPF approach leap potency [39] aims to remedy identity instantiation approach Melanee [2] supports star potency and endurance properties tool MetaDepth [38] supports leap potency and star potency tool ML2 [20] provides a text-based language for conceptual multi-level modeling based on MLT tool Modelverse (AToMPM) [46] model repository that supports classic potency-based multi-level modeling tool MultEcore [41] potency-based tool based on EMF tool Nivel [1] uses a modified version of the classic potency notion tool non-potency elements [28] an iteration on classic potency, removing certain elements from the potency notion approach OMLM [28] potency-based framework that uses non-potency elements tool order [32,33] represents "the maximum number of classification relationships between an element and its most remote instances" approach SLICER [56] level-blind; scalability is the main focus tool star (*) potency [24] introduces uncertainty in the model approach TOTEM [29] focuses on closing the gap betw...…”
Section: A Summary Of Discussed Multi-level Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, they are domain specific such as the Internet of Things based interoperability framework (Backman et al, 2016) for fleet management, the Smart City Interoperability Framework (Ahn et al, 2016), the interoperability framework for software as service systems in cloud (Rezaei et al, 2014a), the International Image Interoperability Framework (Snydman et al, 2015) and the conceptual interoperability framework for large-scale systems (Selway et al, 2017).…”
Section: Framework For Enterprise Interoperabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%