See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/318208930

The Industry 4.0 Standards Landscape from a Semantic Integration Perspective

Conference Paper · September 2017

DOI: 10.1109/ETFA.2017.8247584

CITATIONS READS

2 1,399

7 authors, including:

Irlan Grangel-González Lavdim Halilaj

Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS
35 PUBLICATIONS   93 CITATIONS    25 PUBLICATIONS   67 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Steffen Lohmann Maria-Esther Vidal

Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Simon Bolívar University
131 PUBLICATIONS   967 CITATIONS    257 PUBLICATIONS   1,272 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Linked Open Data 2 View project

Knowledge management through Artificial Intelligence techniques in business and environmental management processes View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Irlan Grangel-González on 14 August 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The Industry 4.0 Standards Landscape
from a Semantic Integration Perspective
Irlán Grangel-González∗† , Paul Baptista∗‡ , Lavdim Halilaj∗† , Steffen Lohmann† ,
Maria-Esther Vidal†‡ , Christian Mader† , Sören Auer∗†
∗ Enterprise Information Systems, University of Bonn, Germany
{grangel, halilaj, auer}@cs.uni-bonn.de, [email protected]
† Fraunhofer IAIS, Sankt Augustin, Germany

{steffen.lohmann, maria-esther.vidal, christian.mader}@iais.fraunhofer.de

‡ Universidad Simón Bolívar, Venezuela

Abstract—Interoperability among actors, sensors, and hetero- information [3]. Standardization efforts enable the adoption of
geneous systems is a crucial factor for realizing the Industry 4.0 production and manufacturing technologies across different or-
vision, i.e., the creation of Smart Factories by enabling intelli- ganizations and stakeholders. Standards define terms, compo-
gent human-to-machine and machine-to-machine cooperation. In
order to empower interoperability in Smart Factories, standards nents, procedures, dimensions, and materials along with many
and reference architectures have been proposed. Standards allow other aspects of relevance for production and manufacturing.
for the description of components, systems, and processes, as Standards are of paramount importance in the manufacturing
well as interactions among them. Reference architectures classify, and automation domain and for the realization of the I4.0
align, and integrate industrial standards according to their pur- vision where different enterprises and stakeholders interact in
poses and features; industrial communities in Europe, the United
States, and Asia have proposed their own reference architectures. an interoperable manner [4]. Despite the fact that, they are
However, interoperability among analogous standards in these regionally extended or adapted, standards represent a common
reference architectures is hampered due to different granularity understanding of terms for a wide range of practitioners and
representation of similar processes or production parts. In this industry. There exist standards which focus on the enterprise
article, we survey the landscape of Industry 4.0 standards from as a whole, while others have been created to deal with
a semantic perspective. To tackle the problem of interoperability
between standards, we devise STO, an ontology for describing specific problems, such as PLC programming, automation
standards and their relations. Characteristics of I4.0 standards design, or unique identification. Concrete examples highly
are described using STO, and these descriptions are exploited relevant to I4.0, are AutomationML defined for mechatronic
for classifying standards from different perspectives according data modeling and OPC UA for machine-to-machine com-
to reference architectures. Moreover, semantics encoded in STO munication. Different organizations have developed reference
allows for the discovery of relations between I4.0 standards, and
for mappings across reference architectures proposed by different architectures to align standards in the context of I4.0. In Ger-
industrial communities. many, the Deutsches Institut für Normung (DIN) along with
other organizations, published the “Reference Architecture
I. I NTRODUCTION Model for Industry 4.0 (RAMI 4.0)”.1 In the United States,
The dynamics of today’s world impose new challenges the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
to enterprises. Globalization, ubiquitous presence of com- published a “Standards Landscape for Smart Manufacturing
munication networks and the Internet, new human-machine Systems”.2 In China, the Ministry of Industry and Information
collaboration scenarios as well as the development of com- Technology (MIIT) and the Standardization Administration of
plex information systems are some of the developments that China (SAC) published the “National Smart Manufacturing
provoke changes in various areas of industry and society. In the Standards Architecture Construction Guidance”. All these ref-
engineering and manufacturing domain, there is currently an erence architectures pursue the common objective of providing
atmosphere of departure to a new era of digitized production. a road-map for the use of standards for smart factories.
This fourth industrial revolution has been coined as Indus- Emphasis in is put on the interoperability of the standards
try 4.0 (I4.0) in Germany, while related terms (e.g., Industrial and the alignment with the processes in the factories.
Internet, Smart Manufacturing, Industrie du Future) are used Despite the classification of existing standards, there is still
to denote similar concepts. They all describe the application no structured, systematic approach to represent them and their
of modern IT concepts, such as Internet of Things (IoT), relationships between each other. In addition, the knowledge
Cyber-physical Systems (CPS), Internet of Services (IoS), and of the standards, the domain they cover, as well as the overlap
data-driven architectures, in industrial contexts to create more that might exist among them is still not formalized. In this
flexible and innovative products and services leading to new
1 https://www.zvei.org/en/subjects/industry-4-0/the-reference-architectural-model-
business models and added value.
rami-40-and-the-industrie-40-component/
For the realization of the I4.0 vision, many organizations 2 https://www.nist.gov/publications/current-standards-landscape-smart-
and stakeholders need to collaborate and interchange data and manufacturing-systems
 ISO 19439 ISO 19439 Enterprise
Level - ERP
B2MML
Manufacturing
ISO 22400 Operation
AutomationML CrossLevel Management CrossLevel
(MOM) Level - MOM
IEC 62443 IEC 62443
OPC UA
Supervisory control and data
OPC UA
acquisition (SCADA) Level –
ModBus HMI/DCS

IEC 61360 IEC 61784 Device Level - Field Device

(a) RAMI4.0 IT layer (b) ISA95 Reference Model

Fig. 1: Smart Factory Reference Architectures aligned with I4.0 Standards. (a) RAMI4.0 IT (adjusted from [1]). (b)
ISA95 Reference Model (adjusted from [2]). The OPC UA standard is positioned on different levels, i.e., at RAMI IT
communication level and at the SCADA level by ISA95. According to both classifications, OPC UA standardizes the
description of machine-to-machine communication. However, RAMI is a multi-dimensional reference architecture and
also characterizes OPC UA as a standard for the description of data management and analytics processes.

work, we devise a semantic-based landscape for I4.0. We II. S MART FACTORY S TANDARDIZATION AND R ELATED
present the STO ontology for describing I4.0 standards. We I NITIATIVES
exploit the semantics encoded in STO for the discovery of In this section, the most relevant architectures for stan-
relations between standards. Initial evaluation allowed the dardization landscapes for Smart Manufacturing are described.
tracking of known properties of existing I4.0 standards and Figure 1 depicts the two reference architectures RAMI4.0
uncovering relations between I4.0 standards that were not and ISA95 and the classification of existing I4.0 standards
initially modeled, e.g., a relation between AutomationML in the layers of these architectures. It is important to note that
(AML) and IEC 61499 [5]. Thus, this landscape provides a same standards are classified in different layers by the two
building block for the implementation of a knowledge graph architectures, e.g., OPC UA.
for Smart Factory standards, as well as for their mapping and
semantic integration. A. Reference Architecture Model for Industry 4.0 (RAMI4.0)
In particular, we make the following contributions: The Reference Architecture Model for Industry 4.0
(RAMI4.0), describes fundamental aspects of Industry 4.0 [1].
• The Standards Ontology (STO)3 to describe characteris- 1a illustrates the RAMI layers and the connections between
tics of standards for Smart Factories and their relations. IT, manufacturers/plants and the product life cycle in a three-
• A description of more than 60 standards of relevance to dimensional space. Each dimension shows a particular part of
I4.0 and 20 standard organizations using STO and the these domains divided into different layers.
classification of standards with regards to their RAMI The vertical axis to the left represents the IT perspective,
layers and dimensions and NISTIR criteria, such as comprising layers ranging from the physical device (asset)
Product Life-cycle Management (PLM). to complex functions as they are available in ERP systems
• A real-world use case showing the applicability and (functional). The horizontal axis on the left indicates the
benefits of the standardization landscape following a product life-cycle where Type and Instance are distinguished
semantic-based approach. as the two main concepts. The horizontal axis on the right hand
side organizes the locations of the features and responsibilities
The remainder of this article is structured as follows: in a hierarchy. The model extends the hierarchy levels defined
A review of the main standardization initiatives for smart in IEC 622644 by adding the concept Product on the lowest
factories is described in Section II, followed by a description of level and Connected World at the top level, which goes beyond
the methodology used to classify the standards in Section III. the boundaries of an individual factory. Figure 1a depicts
Section IV presents the semantic-based approach for the stan- standards for smart factories aligned with the IT layer; RAMI
dardization landscape as well as the description of Standards layers are annotated with I4.0 standards. For example, OPC
Ontology. A use case describing the benefits of our approach UA is located in the IT communication layer indicating that
is described inSection V. Section VI provides an overview of OPC UA standardizes machine to machine communication
related work, before the paper is concluded in Section VII. using a uniform data format, as well as describes data man-
agement, integration and analytics processes.
3 https://w3id.org/i40/sto 4 http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=57308
 Administration Shell

Objects

(a) Administration Shell (b) Relevant submodels and standards for the Administration Shell

Fig. 2: The RAMI Administration Shell concept (adjusted from [1]). (a) I4.0 Objects enclosed into the RAMI
Administration Shell, e.g., a motor. (b) Alignments between I4.0 Standards and the RAMI Administration Shell concept
and I4.0 submodels (taken from [6]). Relevant I4.0 standards and submodels considered in the I4.0 Standard Landscape.

B. The National Institute of Standards and Technology stan- enterprise collaboration. Their objective is to classify standards
dards landscape (ISA 95) into different architecture levels according to their functions.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) III. M ETHODOLOGY
has defined a standards landscape with focus on Smart This section presents the methodology followed for the
Manufacturing Systems [2]. The standard landscape classifies creation of the semantic-based landscape for I4.0 standards.
standards with respect to their functions. First, standards are We first looked into the different world-wide initiatives related
aligned regarding the four levels of the manufacturing pyramid to standards classifications, i.e., the RAMI model, the NIST
of the ISA 95 standard, i.e., from the device to the enterprise standard landscape as well as the Chinese approach. These
level (cf. 1b). Second, they organize standards taking into initiatives are focusing on I4.0 or the similar Smart Factory
account different phases of the Product Life Development concept.
(PLM) process such as Modeling Practice, Product Model and The RAMI model comprises the Administration Shell con-
Data Exchange, Manufacturing Model Data, Product Category cept. The Administration Shell concept describes how stan-
Data, and Product Life-cycle Data Management. Finally, they dards are linked to certain submodels, e.g., identification, com-
classify standards regarding the life-cycle of production sys- munication, or engineering [6]. For example, the identification
tems. In this case, they include categories such as Production submodel is aligned in the Administration Shell with the ISO
System Model Data, Production System Engineering and 29005 standard whereas the communication submodel with
Production System Operation and Maintenance. Similarly, ISA the IEC 61784 Fieldbus Profiles (cf. Figure 2). The aim of the
95 classifies I4.0 standards in layers. However, ISA 95 is not current specification of the RAMI model is not to provide a
a multi-dimensional model, and the classification of the I4.0 complete description of the standards. However, it provides
standards is more general than in RAMI. For instance, OPC a starting point to further investigate the relevance for the
UA is classified in the SCADA layer providing an uniform Administration Shell concept.
information model framework. However, in this classification Next, we considered the submodels, e.g., communication,
OPC UA focuses only on the SCADA systems and not on the engineering, and founded other standards particularly relevant
use of the data, e.g., data management and analytics processes. for them. For instance, the engineering domain is aligned
with standards such as IEC 61360, IEC 61987 as well as
C. National Smart Manufacturing Standards Architecture with eCl@ss. In this regard, we extended our classification
The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of to include the Automation Markup Language AutomationML
China in a joint effort with the Standardization Administration (AML) [9], known also as IEC 62714, since it is recognized
created a report for defining a National Smart Manufacturing as an important standard for engineering in the I4.0 realiza-
Standards Architecture [7], [8]. The architecture comprises tion [10], [11], [12]. The RAMI model also classifies standards
three dimensions: (1) Smart functions: from resource elements, according to its layers. We analyzed the IT layer of RAMI and
system integration, interconnect, information convergence, to classify standards which acts in specific layers. For this, we
new business models; (2) Life-cycle: from design, production, cover from the Asset to Business layer(cf. 1a).
logistics, marketing and sales, to service; and (3) Hierar- Additionally, we investigated specific synergies of standards
chy levels: from device, control, plant, enterprise, to inter- which are commonly described in scientific or white papers.
Fig. 3: The Semantic Standard Landscape Pipeline. I4.0 standards are received as input and the output is a graph
representing relations between standards. STO and existing vocabularies are utilized to describe known relations among
standards. A reasoning process exploits the semantics encoded in STO to infer new relations between standards.

For example, the relationship between OPC UA and AML DCTERMS8 for metadata such as license as well as RAMI 9 for
is of paramount importance for the realization of the I4.0 connecting Standards with RAMI concepts. For developing the
vision [10], [11]. As a result, these two standards have been ontology, VoCol [17] is used as an integrated environment for
combined into a new standard, i.e., DIN SPEC 165925 . Prove- ontology development based on the Git version control system.
nance and other characteristics of I4.0 standards, e.g., relations VoCol provides various views of the ontology such as human-
between standards, correspond to the properties modeled in the friendly documentation, graphical visualization and even sta-
I4.0 standard landscape. For instance, the following relations tistical charts. As a result, apart from ontology engineers, other
are described: OPC UA with IEC 61499 [13], and OPC groups of interest, in particular domain experts and users, are
UA and IEC 61850 [14]. Further, we extend our view of able to actively contribute to the further development of STO.
current standards and their use in the Smart Manufacturing Following best practices for ontology publishing10 , the STO
domain by analyzing related initiatives, e.g., NISTIR 8107 [2]. ontology is available via a W3ID permanent URL11 as well as
In this work, standards are classified according to different registered in the Linked Open Vocabulary service12 .
areas of crucial importance for Smart Factories, e.g., PLM. 1) Ontology description: In the following, the main STO
We considered PLM-related areas such as Product Life-cycle classes are described; Figure 4 depicts STO.
data management and Product Catalog Data, and classified sto:Standard: describes the Standard concept. Since Stan-
standards regarding their functions in these areas of PLM, e.g., dards are documents, this class specializes the foaf:Document
ISO 10303 and ISO 13584, respectively. Figure 3 depicts the class to represent the publication format of the standards.
pipeline that implements the methodology followed during the sto:SDO: models common standard developing organizations,
creation of the I4.0 Standard Landscape. e.g., ISO, IEC. This class specializes foaf:Organization
allowing to link its instances to FOAF defined resources.
IV. A SEMANTIC - BASED APPROACH FOR THE I4.0
sto:Domain: specifies the domains in which standards may
STANDARDS LANDSCAPE
work with, e.g., Manufacturing Operation Management, Func-
A. Standards Ontology tional Safety, Industry Automation.
The Standards Ontology (STO) is designed to semantically sto:ISA95Level: describes the ISA95 standard levels and
describe standards related to I4.0 as well as their relations. permits standards to be aligned with the NIST initiative linking
A knowledge-driven approach is used to model the most them to the ISA95 levels (cf. 1b).
relevant concepts along with their associations for representing sto:ProductionSystem represents standards for complex sys-
all metadata of the I4.0 standards. The STO development tem modeling, automation engineering, and operation and
follows best practices for ontology building, e.g., reusing maintenance perspectives of production systems.
existing concepts of well-known ontologies [15], [16]. In this The STO ontology reuses classes from the RAMI, MUTO
regard, classes and properties from existing ontologies are and FOAF ontologies, e.g., rami:RAMIHierarchyLevel and
used, e.g., MUTO6 for tagging, FOAF 7 for representing and rami:RAMIITLayer, muto:Tag, deo:Motivation, respectively.
linking documents and agents (e.g., persons, organizations),
8 http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/
5 http://www.din.de/de/ueber-normen-und-standards/din-spec/din-spec- 9 https://w3id.org/i40/rami

veroeffentlichungen/wdc-beuth:din21:265597431 10 https://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub/
6 http://purl.org/muto/core# 11 https://w3id.org/i40/sto#
7 http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/ 12 http://lov.okfn.org/
Fig. 4: The Standards Ontology (STO). STO classes and properties describe meaning and relations of I4.0 standards.
The rami vocabulary models a layer where a standard is classified in the RAMI architecture. Data type and Object
properties are represented by green and blue squares, respectively; red arrows represent inverse functional properties.

2) Properties description: In this section, we describe some descriptions for the Organizations that publish standards. The
of the most important defined properties for STO. dataset can be enriched by the community with further infor-
sto:license: links the standard with its correspondent license mation, directly in the Github repository15 . Further, a public
document. This information shows whether the standard is free VoCol instance16 is provided, to enable a better comprehension
to or has to be acquired for use. for non-ontology engineers, where users can easily view and
sto:isPartOf: links the standard document with the specific explore the already described standards and their metadata.
parts of the standard. In the following, we exemplify some of the most important
sto:published: links the standards with the organization who concepts as instances described in STO.
published it.
Listing 1: Semantic description of the OPC foundation
rami:ramiHierarchyLevel and rami:RAMIITLayer: align
organization responsible for publishing OPC UA
standards with their hierarchy level and ITLayer in the RAMI
@prefix sto: <https://w3id.org/i40/sto#> .
model respectively. @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
sto:relatedTo: represents links between I4.0 standards. This sto:OPC_Foundation rdf:type sto:SDO ;
sto:name "OPC Foundation"@en;
property is symmetric and transitive. The inference model dc:description "Industry consortium that creates and maintains..."@en;
based on sto:relatedTo allows for inferring and uncovering new sto:abbreviation "OPC";
sto:formationDate "1994-01-01"^^xsd:date;
relations between standards. For example, the standard ISO sto:hasDBpediaResource <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Association_...>;
13849, is directly related to IEC 61511. Likewise, IEC 61511 sto:hasOfficialResource <https://opcfoundation.org/>;
sto:hasWikidataEntity <https://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q7072814>;
is directly related to IEC 61508. By using the transitivity the sto:hasWikipediaArticle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPC_Foundation>.
relation of ISO 13849 and IEC 61508 can be inferred by
exploited relatedTo properties. Listing 1 describes the OPC Foundation organization as in-
sto:scope: describes the scope of the standard by defining stance of the sto:SDO class.
specific goals and limitations.
Listing 2: Semantic description of the OPC UA standard
sto:hasOntology: this property provides the information
@prefix sto: <https://w3id.org/i40/sto#> .
for the ontology of the standard if it is already de- @prefix rami: <https://w3id.org/i40/rami#> .
fined. For instance, the ISO 15926 standard, which is used @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
sto:IEC_62541 rdf:type sto:Standard;
in the integration of life-cycle data for process plants, dc:description "OPC Unified Architecture (OPC UA) is an ..."@en;
has its ontology13 . Additionally, we incorporated properties rami:hasRAMIHierarchyLevel rami:ControlDevice;
rami:hasRAMILifeCycleLayer rami:Communication;
which allow to link STO with external resources. For ex- sto:hasISA95Level sto:SCADALevel;
ample, sto:hasWikipediaArticle, sto:hasWikidataEntity, sto:developer sto:OPC_Foundation;
sto:hasDBpediaResource
sto:hasDBpediaResource and sto:hasOfficialResource. <http://dbpedia.org/resource/OPC_Unified_Architecture> ;
sto:hasOfficialResource
B. Population <https://opcfoundation.org/about/opc-technologies/opc-ua/> ;
sto:hasTag "OPC UA"@en;
Based on the STO ontology, we created the STO dataset14 , sto:hasWikidataEntity <https://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q623244>;
sto:hasWikipediaArticle
which contains a number of existing standards, along with their <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPC_Unified_Architecture>;
metadata like licenses or relations. It contains also semantic sto:norm "62541";

13 https://www.posccaesar.org/wiki/ISO15926inOWL 15 https://github.com/i40-Tools/StandardsVocabulary
14 https://w3id.org/i40/sto/standards.ttl 16 http://vocol.iais.fraunhofer.de/sto/
 (a) Explicit Relations between AML and existing I4.0 (b) Explicit and Inferred Relations between AML and I4.0 Standards

Fig. 5: I4.0 Standards related to AML. Relations between I4.0 standards are visualized using graphs; continuous
and dashed directed arrows represent explicit and inferred relations, respectively. The inference model relies on the
transitive and symmetric properties of sto:relatedTo. (a) Known relations between AML and I4.0 standards are
explicitly described using the STO object property sto:relatedTo. (b) Relations between I4.0 standards connected to
AML with dashed directed arrows and colored in a different color, are inferred. The relation between AML (ICE
62714) and the I4.0 standard named Measurement and Control Devices (IEC 61499) has been validated [5].

sto:publisher sto:IEC; }
sto:relatedTo sto:IEC_62714, sto:IEC_61499; }
sto:scope sto:Industrial_Automation.

Listing 3 retrieves relations of the IEC 62714, i.e., AML stan-

Listing 2, depicts the semantic description of the OPC UA dard. Figure 5a depicts explicit relations which are currently
sto:Standard. The dataset comprises more than 60 Standard annotated in the dataset whereas figure 5b shows inferred re-
instances and more than 20 Standard organization instances. lations which are obtained after executing the aforementioned
Moreover, we documented and included more than 20 direct query and firing the inference process based on the symmetric
relations between standards. On top of which is possible to and transitivity properties of sto:relatedTo. These queries
infer more than 50 new ones. can be evaluated on the STO VoCol repository 17 . To this end,
V. U SE C ASE : D ISCOVERING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN the ForceGraph option should be chosen as the graph type, and
STANDARDS
the Direct Standards Relations or Direct Standards Relations
options as queries to be executed.
One of the main motivations to create the Standards dataset
is to describe I4.0 standards using STO, as well as to study Listing 4: Searching for Standards Metadata
existing relations among them. PREFIX rami: <https://w3id.org/i40/rami#>
PREFIX sto: <https://w3id.org/i40/sto#>
SELECT DISTINCT
Listing 3: Searching for IEC 62714 properties and related ?name ?RAMIITLayer ?ISA95Level ?PLM ?AdminShellSubmodel ?license ?publisher
Standards WHERE {
?std a sto:Standard ;
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
sto:norm ?norm ;
PREFIX sto: <https://w3id.org/i40/sto#>
(sto:publisher/sto:name) ?publisher ;
SELECT DISTINCT ?std ?pred ?prop ?relNorm ?relsdoAbbr
(sto:publisher/sto:abbreviation) ?publisherAbbrv ;
WHERE {
rami:hasRAMIITLayer ?RAMIITLayer .
?std a sto:Standard .
FILTER(LANGMATCHES(LANG(?publisher), "en"))
?std sto:norm "62714" .
OPTIONAL { ?std sto:hasTag ?tag .}
?std sto:publisher ?sdo .
OPTIONAL { ?std sto:license ?license ;
?sdo sto:abbreviation "IEC" .
sto:hasOfficialResource ?officialResource . }
{ {?std ?pred ?prop } UNION
OPTIONAL { ?std rami:hasAdminShellSubmodel ?AdminShellSubmodel . }
{?prop ?pred ?std } UNION {
OPTIONAL { ?std sto:hasISA95Level ?ISA95Level . }
?std (sto:relatedTo+|^sto:relatedTo+)* ?mid .
OPTIONAL { ?std sto:isUtilizedIn ?PLM . }
?mid (sto:relatedTo|^sto:relatedTo) ?prop .
BIND(CONCAT(?publisherAbbrv," ",?norm," - ",?tag) as ?name)
{?mid ?pred ?prop } UNION
}
{?prop ?pred ?mid}
}
} FILTER (?std!=?prop) This feature allows for retrieving, not only relations that
OPTIONAL {
?prop sto:norm ?relNorm .
have been explicitly defined in the STO dataset, but also
?prop sto:publisher ?relsdo .
?relsdo sto:abbreviation ?relsdoAbbr .
17 http://vocol.iais.fraunhofer.de/sto/docs/d3sparql/index.html
 (a) Graph representing Explicit Relations between I4.0 Standards (b) Graph representing Explicit and Inferred Relations between I4.0 Standards

Fig. 6: Relations between I4.0 Standards. Relations between I4.0 standards are visualized using graphs; continuous
and dashed lines represent explicit and inferred relations, respectively. The inference model relies on the transitive and
symmetric properties of sto:relatedTo. For readability only symmetric relations are represented using undirected line.
(a) Known relations between I4.0 standards are explicitly described using the STO object property sto:relatedTo. (b)
Relations between I4.0 standards are inferred; the graph comprises 74 edges: 50 are inferred while 24 are explicit.

those that are inferred. For instance, relations of AML (IEC from Germany (RAMI), US (NIST), and China (MIIT&SAC).
62714) and OPC UA (IEC 62541) as well as OPC UA (IEC Based on this analysis, they present a Smart Manufacturing
62541) and IEC 61499 were explicitly defined in the dataset. Standard Framework whose focus is the information tech-
Based on this fact, the relation between AML and IEC 61499 nologies application layers and Life-cycle/value streams to
(cf. Figure 5) is inferred. We validate that this relation is of organize standards. A framework to analyze the Internet of
importance in the literature [5]. Things (IoT) Standardization has been presented in [19]. In
Furthermore, all the relations between I4.0 standards can this work, smart manufacturing is considered as a vertical
be collected (cf. Figure 6). The result of this query reports dimension of IoT. Authors define a standard database clas-
on 24 relations between I4.0 standards (cf. 6a), and 50 new sifying standards in an abstract way, e.g., generic and specific
relations inferred when the symmetric and transitive properties standards, cross and specific dimension standards. Finally, they
are considered by the inference process (cf. 6b). identify some general gaps of the standards and their function
Finally, to show the standard descriptions, especially to un- related to IoT. Trappey et al. [20] study also I4.0 related
derstand how standards are connected with important concepts standards. They focus on the role of Cyber-physical systems
for the domain such as the Administration Shell submodel, (CPS) for I4.0 and classify standards according to different
the IT RAMI layer as well as with PLM, a query is posed levels, e.g., Smart connection, Data-to-Information conversion,
againts the STO dataset (cf. Listing 4). Results also show some Cyber-computation, cognition, and configuration. Authors also
additional metadata used to describe I4.0 standards in the I4.0 build an CPS ontology based on the aforementioned concepts
Standard Landscape, e.g., name and tag, the license, as well as well as in keywords related to CPS that they found in the
as the publisher organization (cf. Table I). review of the literature. Aforementioned approaches classify
standards in several manners with respect to the Smart Factory
VI. R ELATED W ORK concept. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is not
Lu et al. [2], [18] describe a standardization landscape a formal description of standards as well as their relations.
for Smart Manufacturing Systems. The landscape is built
upon relations of standards with products, production systems, VII. C ONCLUSION AND F UTURE W ORK
and business life-cycle dimensions. Further, the most of the We developed both a landscape of Industry 4.0 related
important standards according to the ISA 95 manufacturing standards and the Standard Ontology (STO) for the semantic
pyramid are described. Li et al. [8] present commonalities and description of standards and their relations. Further, we inves-
differences from existing reference models for Smart Factories tigated existing reference models like RAMI and NIST and
TABLE I: Exemplar Descriptions of I4.0 Standards in the I4.0 Standard Landscape. An I4.0 standard is described in
terms of the classification level in the reference architectures, e.g., RAMI and ISA95; as well as basic properties like
license and publisher. The same I4.0 standard can be classified by two reference architectures, e.g., IEC 62264.

Standard RAMIITLayer ISA95Level PLM AdminShellSubmodel license Publisher

IEC 62714 - AML Information - ProductModelDataExchange Engineering Open IEC
ISO 19439 Business EnterpriseLevel - - Private ISO
IEC 62264 - Enterprise Control systems Functional EnterpriseLevel - - Private IEC
SE ModBus Integration SCADALevel ProductionEngineering - Private SE
IEC 61360 - IEC Common Data Dictionary Asset - ManufacturingModelData Engineering Private IEC
IEC 62541 - OPC UA Communication SCADALevel - - Open IEC

populated the Standard Ontology with descriptions of more [7] M. of Industry, Information technology of China (MIIT), and Stan-
that 60 standards, more than 20 standardization organizations, dardization Administration of China (SAC), “National Intelligent Man-
ufacturing Standard System Construction Guidelines,” Standardization
as well as 74 relations between I4.0 standards. Finally, we Administration of China (SAC), Tech. Rep., 2015.
illustrated the benefits of our semantic-based approach with a [8] Q. Li, H. Jiang, Q. Tang, Y. Chen, J. Li, and J. Zhou, “Smart manufac-
use case. We deep this work to be a crucial step in realizing turing standardization: Reference model and standards framework,” in
On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2016 Workshops -
the smart manufacturing vision, since it requires not only OTMA 2016, Rhodes, Greece, October 24-28, 2016, 2016, pp. 16–25.
standards governing individual aspects but consideration of full [9] R. Drath, A. Lüder, J. Peschke, and L. Hundt, “Automationml - the
standardization landscapes. With the ontology-based standard glue for seamless automation engineering,” in Proceedings of 13th
IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory
and relationship representation, we facilitate an integration Automation, ETFA 2008, September 15-18, 2008, Hamburg, Germany,
of standards on a conceptual as well as operational and 2008, pp. 616–623.
implementation level. [10] M. Schleipen, M. Damm, R. Henßen, A. Lüder, N. Schmidt, O. Sauer,
and S. Hoppe, “OPC UA and AutomationML–collaboration partners for
In future work, we envision to extend the annotations of one common goal: Industry 4.0,” 2014.
standards including all classifications of the different reference [11] R. Henßen and M. Schleipen, “Interoperability between OPC UA and
architectures. In this regard, we aim to include especially those AutomationML,” Procedia CIRP, vol. 25, pp. 297–304, 2014, 8th
International Conference on Digital Enterprise Technology DET 2014
from the National Smart Manufacturing Standards Architec- Disruptive Innovation in Manufacturing Engineering towards the 4th
ture, that were not considered for this article. Further, we Industrial Revolution.
plan to define algorithms to discover patterns and discover [12] F. Himmler, “Function based engineering with automationml - towards
better standardization and seamless process integration in plant engi-
associations between the concepts of the I4.0 standards. neering.” in Wirtschaftsinformatik, O. Thomas and F. Teuteberg, Eds.,
2015, pp. 16–30.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS [13] S. Kozar and P. Kadera, “Integration of IEC 61499 with OPC UA,”
in 21st IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and
This work has been supported by the German Federal Factory Automation, ETFA 2016, Berlin, Germany, September 6-9, 2016,
2016, pp. 1–7.
Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) in the context of [14] S. Cavalieri and A. Regalbuto, “Integration of IEC 61850 SCL and OPC
the projects Industrial Data Space (no. 01IS15054) and SDI-X UA to improve interoperability in smart grid environment,” Computer
(no. 01IS15035C). Standards & Interfaces, vol. 47, pp. 77–99, 2016.
[15] C. Pedrinaci, J. Cardoso, and T. Leidig, “Linked USDL: a vocabulary
for web-scale service trading,” in The Semantic Web: Trends and
R EFERENCES Challenges. Springer, 2014, pp. 68–82.
[16] L. Halilaj, I. Grangel-González, G. Coskun, and S. Auer, “Git4voc: Git-
[1] P. Adolphs, H. Bedenbender, D. Dirzus, M. Ehlich, U. Epple, M. Hankel, based versioning for collaborative vocabulary development,” in Tenth
R. Heidel, M. Hoffmeister, H. Huhle, B. Kärcher, H. Koziolek, R. Pich- IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing, ICSC 2016,
ler, S. Pollmeier, F. Schewe, A. Walter, B. Waser, and M. Wollschlaeger, Laguna Hills, CA, USA, February 4-6, 2016, 2016, pp. 285–292.
“Reference Architecture Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI4.0),” ZVEI and [17] L. Halilaj, N. Petersen, I. Grangel-González, C. Lange, S. Auer,
VDI, Status Report, Jul. 2015. G. Coskun, and S. Lohmann, “Vocol: An integrated environment to
[2] Y. Lu, K. Morris, and S. Frechette, “Current standards landscape for support version-controlled vocabulary development,” in Knowledge En-
smart manufacturing systems,” National Institute of Standards and gineering and Knowledge Management - 20th International Conference,
Technology, NISTIR, vol. 8107, 2016. EKAW 2016, Bologna, Italy, November 19-23, 2016, Proceedings, 2016,
[3] S. Weyer, M. Schmitt, M. Ohmer, and D. Gorecky, “Towards Industry pp. 303–319.
4.0-Standardization as the crucial challenge for highly modular, multi- [18] Y. Lu, K. C. Morris, and S. Frechette, “Standards landscape and direc-
vendor production systems,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. tions for smart manufacturing systems,” in IEEE International Confer-
579–584, 2015. ence on Automation Science and Engineering, CASE 2015, Gothenburg,
[4] V. Vyatkin, “Software engineering in industrial automation: State-of-the- Sweden, August 24-28, 2015, 2015, pp. 998–1005.
art review,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 9, no. 3, [19] E. Darmois, O. Elloumi, P. Guillemin, and P. Moretto, “Iot standards–
pp. 1234–1249, 2013. state-of-the-art analysis,” Digitising the Industry Internet of Things
[5] C. Pang and V. Vyatkin, “IEC 61499 function block implementation of Connecting the Physical, Digital and Virtual Worlds, ISBN, pp. 978–
Intelligent Mechatronic Component,” in Industrial Informatics (INDIN), 87, 2012.
2010 8th IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2010, pp. 1124– [20] A. J. C. Trappey, C. V. Trappey, U. H. Govindarajan, J. J. Sun, and
1129. A. C. Chuang, “A review of technology standards and patent portfolios
[6] P. Adolphs, S. Auer, M. Billmann, M. Hankel, R. Heidel, M. Hoffmeis- for enabling cyber-physical systems in advanced manufacturing,” IEEE
ter, H. Huhle, M. Jochem, M. Kiele, G. Koschnick, H. Koziolek, Access, vol. 4, pp. 7356–7382, 2016.
L. Linke, R. Pichler, F. Schewe, K. Schneider, and B. Waser, “Reference
architecture model industrie 4.0 (rami4.0),” ZVEI and VDI, Status
Report, 2016.

View publication stats