Nine month progress report submitted for continuation towards a PhD
Toward a Canonical Method to Solve Patterns of Ontology Modelling Issues 13 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________Fault-Type-i = TUPLE[ viewpoint1: {value1 | value2}, viewpoint2: {value1 | value2}, ..., viewpoint8: {value1 | value2} ]These eight pairs of mutually exclusive attribute values could be seen as a closed vocabulary of allowed “tags” to define a specific type of fault, where each value pair belongs to one of the eight fault viewpoints. These eight viewpoints could be seen as the eight facets of the concept “Fault”. For example, the fault type corresponding to column labelled “1” could be defined as:Fault-Type-1 = TUPLE[ phase-of-creation: system-boundary: phenomenological-cause: dimension: objective: intent: capability: persistence: {development}, {internal}, {human-made}, {software}, {non-malicious}, {non-deliberate}, {accidental}, {permanent} ]The rest of faults represented in Figure 3 from column “2” to “31” could be represented similarly setting each property to the corresponding value in the 8-tuple. Furthermore, this definition of a fault class as a function of its 8-tuple of atomic values, allows with the help of basic algebraic constructs, to define any combination or clustering of faults (multiple views of faults could be generated). For example, Figure 3 defines “Logic Bombs” as the faults that belong to either fault type column “5” or fault type column “6”. In other words, “Logic Bombs” fault instances could be identified as:Logic-Bombs = Fault-Type-5(8-tuple) U Fault-Type-6(8-tuple)And by the same principle, the rest of named fault classes in Figure 3 could also be characterized: “Software Flaws”, “Hardware Errata”, “Production Defects”, etc.Figure 4 - OWL properties of the Fault class. Figure 4 illustrates how this design for the concept of “Fault” can be brought into the ReSIST KB by giving a graphical view of a partial OWL implementation using the Protégé OWL ontology editor (Horridge et al. 2004). The eight different fault viewpoints