Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-zzvtc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-04T01:43:58.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Three-dimensional information exchange over the semantic web for the domain of architecture, engineering, and construction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2011

Pieter Pauwels ,
Davy Van Deursen ,
Jos De Roo ,
Tim Van Ackere ,
Ronald De Meyer ,
Rik Van de Walle  and
Jan Van Campenhout
Pieter Pauwels*
Affiliation:
Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium Department of Electronics and Information Systems, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Davy Van Deursen
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Information Systems, Multimedia Lab, Ghent University, IBBT, Ledeberg-Ghent, Belgium
Jos De Roo
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Information Systems, Multimedia Lab, Ghent University, IBBT, Ledeberg-Ghent, Belgium
Tim Van Ackere
Affiliation:
Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Ronald De Meyer
Affiliation:
Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Rik Van de Walle
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Information Systems, Multimedia Lab, Ghent University, IBBT, Ledeberg-Ghent, Belgium
Jan Van Campenhout
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Information Systems, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
*
Requests for reprints to: Pieter Pauwels, Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Ghent University, J. Plateaustraat 22, Ghent B-9000, Belgium. E-mail: pipauwel.pauwels@ugent.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3-D) geometry can be described in many ways, with both a varying syntax and a varying semantics. As a result, several very diverse schemas and file formats can be deployed to describe geometry, depending on the application domain in question. In a multidisciplinary domain such as the domain of architecture, engineering, and construction, this range of specialized schemas makes file format conversions inevitable. The approach adopted by current conversion tools, however, often results in a loss of information, most often due to a “mistranslation” between different syntaxes and/or semantics, leading to errors and limitations in the design conception stage and to inefficiency due to the required remodeling efforts. An approach based on semantic web technology may reduce the loss of information significantly, leading to an improved processing of 3-D information and hence to an improved design practice in the architecture, engineering, and construction domain. This paper documents our investigation of the nature of this 3-D information conversion problem and how it may be encompassed using semantic web technology. In an exploratory double test case, we show how the specific deployment of semantic rule languages and an appropriate inference engine are to be adopted to improve this 3-D information exchange. It shows how semantic web technology allows the coexistence of diverse descriptions of the same 3-D information, interlinked through explicit conversion rules. Although only a simple example is used to document the process, and a more in-depth investigation is needed, the initial results indicate the suggested approach to be a useful alternative approach to obtain an improved 3-D information exchange.

Keywords

Architectural DesignInformation ExchangeReasoningSemantic WebThree-Dimensional

Information

Type
Special Issue Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 25 , Issue 4: Representing and Reasoning About Three-Dimensional Space , November 2011 , pp. 317 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

3D CAD Browser. (2010). 3D CAD Browser—3D Models—Home Accessed at http://3dcadbrowser.com/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Abdul-Ghafour, S., Ghodous, P., Shariat, B., & Perna, E. (2008). Towards an intelligent CAD models sharing based on semantic web technologies. Proc. 15th ISPE Int. Conf. Concurrent Engineering, pp. 195–203.Google Scholar
AIM@SHAPE. (2010). AIM@SHAPE Project—Shape Repository. Accessed at http://shapes.aimatshape.net/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Attene, M., Robbiano, F., Spagnuolo, M., & Falcidieno, B. (2007). Semantic annotation of 3D surface meshes based on feature characterization. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Semantic and Digital Media Technologies, pp. 126–139.Google Scholar
Baader, F., & Nutt, W. (2003). Basic description logics. In Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications (Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., & Patel-Schneider, P.F., Eds.), pp. 47–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Beckett, D., & Berners-Lee, T. (2011). Turtle—terse RDF triple language. W3C Team Submission, March 28, 2011. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., & Lassila, O. (2001). The semantic web. Scientific American 284, 35–43.Google ScholarPubMed
Beetz, J., van Leeuwen, J.P., & de Vries, B. (2009). IfcOWL: a case of transforming EXPRESS schemas into ontologies. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 23(1), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berners-Lee, T. (2010). CWM—a general purpose data processor for the semantic web. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/doc/cwm on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Berners-Lee, T., & Connolly, D. (2011). Notation 3 (N3): a readable RDF syntax—W3C Team Submission March 28, 2011. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/n3/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Berners-Lee, T., Connolly, D., Kagal, L., Scharf, Y., & Hendler, J. (2008). N3Logic: a logical framework for the World Wide Web. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 8(3), 249–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biasotti, S., Giorgi, D., Marini, S., Spagnuolo, M., & Falcidieno, B. (2006). A comparison framework for 3D object classification methods. Proc. Int. Workshop on Multimedia Content Representation, Classification and Security (MCRS), pp. 314–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bizer, C., Heath, T., & Berners-Lee, T. (2009). Linked data—the story so far. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems 5(3), 1–22.Google Scholar
Brickley, D., & Guha, R.V. (2004). RDF vocabulary description language 1.0: RDF schema—W3C recommendation February 10, 2004. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
De Roo, J. (2009). Eye. Accessed at http://eulersharp.sourceforge.net/2003/03swap/eye-2009.txt on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
De Roo, J. (2010). Euler proof mechanism. Accessed at http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Eastman, C.M., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2008). BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modelling for Owners, Managers, Architects, Engineers, Contractors, and Fabricators. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerbino, S. (2003). Tools for the interoperability among CAD systems. Proc. XIII ADM-XV INGEGRAF Int. Conf. Tools and Methods Evolution in Engineering Design.Google Scholar
Grant, J., & Beckett, D. (2004). RDF test cases—W3C recommendation, February 10, 2004. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-testcases/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Boley, H., Tabet, S., Grosof, B., & Dean, M. (2004). SWRL: a semantic web rule language combining OWL and RuleML—W3C member submission May 21, 2004. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Liebich, T., Adachi, Y., Forester, J., Hyvarinen, J., Karstila, K., Reed, K., Richter, S., & Wix, J. (2010). Industry foundation classes IFC2x edition 3 technical corrigendum 1. Accessed at http://www.iai-tech.org/ifc/IFC2x3/TC1/html/index.htm on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Manola, F., & Miller, E. (2004). RDF primer—W3C recommendation, February 10, 2004. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
McGuinness, D.L., & van Harmelen, F. (2004). OWL web ontology language overview—W3C recommendation, February 10, 2004. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Pauwels, P., De Meyer, R., & Van Campenhout, J. (2010). Interoperability for the design and construction industry through semantic web technology. Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Semantic and Digital Media Technologies.Google Scholar
Pauwels, P., Van Deursen, D., Verstraeten, R., De Roo, J., De Meyer, R., Van de Walle, R., & Van Campenhout, J. (2011). A semantic rule checking environment for building performance checking. Automation in Construction 20(5), 506–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prud'hommeaux, E., & Seaborne, A. (2008). SPARQL query language for RDF—W3C recommendation January 15, 2008. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Rule Interchange Format (RIF) Working Group. (2010). RIF. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Shilane, P., Min, P., Kazhdan, M., & Funkhouser, T. (2004). The Princeton Shape Benchmark. Proc. Int. Conf. Shape Modeling International, pp. 167–178.Google Scholar
The Stanford 3D Scanning Repository. (2010). The Stanford 3D Scanning Repository. Accessed at http://graphics.stanford.edu/data/3Dscanrep/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
UGent Multimedialab. (2010 a). IFC-to-RDF service. Accessed at http://ninsuna.elis.ugent.be/IfcRDFService/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
UGent Multimedialab. (2010 b). IFC/RDF SPARQL endpoint. Accessed at http://ninsuna.elis.ugent.be/SPARQLEndpoint/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Van Ackere, T., & De Roo, J. (2010). Rules for the conversion of 3D geometry information. Accessed at http://eulersharp.sourceforge.net/2010/05smml/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
W3C. (2010). W3C semantic web activity. Accessed at http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar
Web3D Consortium. (2010). Web3D consortium | open standards for real-time 3D communication. Accessed at http://www.web3D.org/ on April 25, 2011.Google Scholar