2019 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Cyber Physical Systems (ICPS) 2019
DOI: 10.1109/icphys.2019.8780114
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automated Reasoning and Knowledge Inference on OPC UA Information Models

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The average F1-score of M3, M4, and M5 presented values of 0.67, 0.44, and 0.42, respectively. For this configuration, M3 presented the best results, however, it is important to remark that the anomalies (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19) are not detected. In contrast, M4 and M5 detected the faults (14,17,18), though the average scores are lower than M3 scores.…”
Section: E Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The average F1-score of M3, M4, and M5 presented values of 0.67, 0.44, and 0.42, respectively. For this configuration, M3 presented the best results, however, it is important to remark that the anomalies (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19) are not detected. In contrast, M4 and M5 detected the faults (14,17,18), though the average scores are lower than M3 scores.…”
Section: E Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The MC EC M3 detected the anomalies (7,11) with F1-scores higher or equal to 0.55 and the anomalies (9,13,17) with F1-scores higher or equal to 0.34 and less than 0.42. The MC EC M4 detected the anomalies (8,14,17) with F1-scores higher or equal to 0.67 and the anomalies (7,10,11,15) with F1-scores higher or equal to 0.38 and less than 0.54. Alternatively, the EC M5 detected the anomalies (14,18) with F1-scores higher or equal to 0.68 and the anomalies (7,11,15,17,20) higher or equal to 0.31 and less than 0.54.…”
Section: B: Effects Of the Window Sizementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Awangga et al 157 used OWL and RDF as tools to build ontology to correlate and describe the resources contained in family planning data. Bakakeu et al 161 implemented a solution to transform the information model into an OWL ontology expressed by RDF. Alshahrani et al 162 proposed a method for generating OWL ontology from SPARQL queries using n-ary relational patterns.…”
Section: Framesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It must be clarified in which form and where the information of the individual elements is stored and how they can be efficiently combined. Here, it is possible to combine the advantages of the OPC UA information model with the advantages of semantic web technologies [14], There have already been several approaches to implement plug & produce approaches [6], [15], [16]. Several of these systems also rely on OPC UA as communication middleware, however, OPC UA client-server communication is used.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%