pith. sign in

arxiv: 2506.11502 · v3 · pith:G7FX2D6Gnew · submitted 2025-06-13 · 💻 cs.IR

A Reference Model and Patterns for Production Event Data Enrichment

Mark van der Pas , Remco Dijkman , Alp Ak\c{c}ay , Ivo Adan , John Walker This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 00:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.IR
keywords production event datareference modeldata enrichmentmanufacturing processesevent knowledge graphsISA-95information extraction patternsprocess performance analysis
0
0 comments X

The pith

A reference model and patterns standardize storage and automated extraction of insights from production event data in manufacturing.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Organizations generate large volumes of event data across disparate systems during digital transformation, but extracting useful insights for process monitoring and analysis is typically done through ad-hoc, time-consuming pre-processing. The paper introduces a reference model that gives a standard way to store and extract production event data, built by combining the ISA-95 industry standard with the Event Knowledge Graph formalism. It also presents a set of patterns, derived from real manufacturing event datasets, that capture common information extraction tasks and show how to automate them. The patterns are formalized using the reference model, and their relevance is shown by applying them to concrete use cases.

Core claim

The reference model, formed by integrating ISA-95 with Event Knowledge Graphs, supplies a uniform structure for production event data that supports both storage and extraction; the accompanying patterns, observed empirically in manufacturing logs, encode recurring extraction tasks and the steps needed to automate them so that data from heterogeneous sources can be enriched systematically rather than case by case.

What carries the argument

The reference model that merges the ISA-95 standard for production operations with Event Knowledge Graph formalism to structure event storage and enable pattern-based extraction.

If this is right

  • Data pre-processing for process performance monitoring can shift from ad-hoc labor to repeatable, model-guided steps.
  • Common extraction tasks such as linking events to resources or calculating cycle times become candidates for automated scripts based on the patterns.
  • Integrated views of heterogeneous production data become easier to maintain once the reference model is adopted.
  • Use-case demonstrations suggest the patterns can be reused across multiple manufacturing sites that share similar event structures.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the patterns prove portable, they could serve as a starting library for event-data pipelines in adjacent domains such as logistics or service operations.
  • Embedding the reference model into existing process-mining tools would let analysts import raw logs and immediately apply the documented extraction steps.
  • The formalism could be extended to streaming data sources so that enrichment occurs in real time rather than in batch pre-processing phases.

Load-bearing premise

The patterns observed in the examined manufacturing event datasets are general enough to work across other production environments and systems without major changes.

What would settle it

Applying the reference model and patterns to a fresh production dataset from a different manufacturing system or software platform yields extraction results that still require substantial manual adaptation or fail to automate the intended tasks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.11502 by Alp Ak\c{c}ay, Ivo Adan, John Walker, Mark van der Pas, Remco Dijkman.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Notation that is used to define the reference model and the pattern examples. 3.2 Patterns The data sets from several (discrete) manufacturing companies in different do￾mains inspired the patterns described in this work. The data sets contain produc￾tion traces, defined as events and associated entities illustrating the production process of items (e.g., batches or lots). Although the use cases for the pat… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Reference model describing the different event and entity types, and their re￾lations, that are used to describe the production trace patterns. The concepts in bold define the high-level model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: gives an example of use case 1-1, in this example two alarms occur in the interval between track in and out of a job on a machine. The (SPARQL) pattern template can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Interval start event type: IntervalStartType = TrackIn; – Interval end event type: IntervalEndType = TrackOut; – Type of event that should be counted: EventType = Alarm [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/fu… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: gives an example of use case 2-1, in this example two observations are made, with an average value of 11. The (SPARQL) pattern template can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Interval start event type: IntervalStartType = TrackIn; – Interval end event type: IntervalEndType = TrackOut; – Event type of interest: EventType = Observation; – Attribute of event that should be aggregated: attribute = … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: gives an example of use case 3-2, in this example the time since the last maintenance can be derived from the track-in event with timestamp 12 and the maintenance event with timestamp 10. The (SPARQL) pattern template can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Event type of interest: EventType = TrackIn; – Preceding event type of interest: PrecedingEventType = Maintenance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: gives an example of use case 4-1. In this example the downtime can be derived from the switch to failed state at time 10 and the switch back to working state at time 14. The (SPARQL) pattern template can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Event type of interest: EventType = SwitchState [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: gives an example of use case 5-1. In this example the throughput time can be derived from the first track in at time 3 and the last track out at time 15. The (SPARQL) pattern template can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Interval start event type: IntervalStartType = SwitchState; – Interval end event type: IntervalEndType = SwitchState [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: gives an example of use case 6-1, where the machine switched tools directly before a job was tracked at that machine. The (SPARQL) pattern tem￾plate can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Event type of interest: EventType = TrackIn; – Preceding event type of interest: PrecedingEventType = SwitchTool [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Application of Pattern 7 on product and production lot level events. It is common in batch/lot manufacturing environments that lots are split into smaller lots and/or merged into bigger lots, for example to distribute the load over the different machines optimally [11]. The meaning of a split or merge event can be used to relate an event to other entities it is (possibly) related to. For example, if some e… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: gives an example of use case 8-1, where there is one event related to the lot before two lots are split from that lot. The (SPARQL) pattern template can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Type of entity for which new relations should be derived: RelatedEntityType = ProductionLot [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: gives an example of use case 9-1, where there are two events related to lots that were split from another lot. The (SPARQL) pattern template can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Type of entity for which new relations should be derived: RelatedEntityType = ProductionLot [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: gives an example of use case 10-1, where a specific product is observed at a resource in the interval where this resource was processing a certain production lot. In this case it can be derived that the product is part of the production lot. The (SPARQL) pattern template can be instantiated for this example as follows: – Interval start event type: IntervalStartType = TrackIn; – Interval end event type: In… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

With the advent of digital transformation, organisations are increasingly generating large volumes of data through the execution of various processes across disparate systems. By integrating data from these heterogeneous sources, it becomes possible to derive new insights essential for tasks such as monitoring and analysing process performance. Typically, this information is extracted during a data pre-processing or engineering phase. However, this step is often performed in an ad-hoc manner and is time-consuming and labour-intensive. To streamline this process, we introduce a reference model and a collection of patterns designed to enrich production event data. The reference model provides a standard way for storing and extracting production event data. The patterns describe common information extraction tasks and how such tasks can be automated effectively. The reference model is developed by combining the ISA-95 industry standard with the Event Knowledge Graph formalism. The patterns are developed based on empirical observations from event data sets originating in manufacturing processes and are formalised using the reference model. We evaluate the relevance and applicability of these patterns by demonstrating their application to use cases.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a reference model for production event data enrichment formed by combining the ISA-95 industry standard with the Event Knowledge Graph formalism. It derives a collection of patterns for common information extraction tasks from empirical observations of manufacturing event datasets, formalizes them via the reference model, and evaluates relevance by demonstrating application to use cases drawn from manufacturing processes.

Significance. If the patterns hold under broader testing, the work could supply a standardized framework that reduces ad-hoc, labor-intensive preprocessing of heterogeneous production data, supporting more reliable monitoring and analysis of process performance. The construction explicitly builds on documented external standards and observed datasets rather than introducing free parameters or circular definitions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5] Section 5: The evaluation assesses relevance solely by demonstrating pattern application to use cases. No quantitative metrics (e.g., automation time reduction, error rates, precision/recall against ground truth, or comparisons to ad-hoc baselines) are reported. This directly bears on the central claim that the patterns 'automate effectively' and mitigate the 'time-consuming and labour-intensive' character of information extraction.
  2. [Sections 3–4] Sections 3–4: The claim that patterns observed in the examined manufacturing datasets are sufficiently general for other production environments rests only on the same use-case demonstrations; no cross-domain validation, sensitivity analysis, or counter-example search is supplied. This assumption is load-bearing for the asserted automation benefit across systems.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and Section 1: The phrasing 'how such tasks can be automated effectively' is not accompanied by an operational definition of effectiveness that is later measured.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment below, indicating the revisions we plan to make to strengthen the presentation of the evaluation and scope of the patterns.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 5] Section 5: The evaluation assesses relevance solely by demonstrating pattern application to use cases. No quantitative metrics (e.g., automation time reduction, error rates, precision/recall against ground truth, or comparisons to ad-hoc baselines) are reported. This directly bears on the central claim that the patterns 'automate effectively' and mitigate the 'time-consuming and labour-intensive' character of information extraction.

    Authors: We agree that the evaluation in Section 5 relies on qualitative demonstration of pattern application to use cases rather than quantitative metrics. This approach aligns with the manuscript's primary contribution of introducing the reference model and formalized patterns derived from empirical observations. To address the concern, we will revise Section 5 to add a dedicated discussion of how quantitative metrics (such as preprocessing time reduction or extraction accuracy) could be applied in future implementations of the patterns, using the existing use cases as illustrative examples. We will also clarify that the current work focuses on the conceptual framework rather than a full empirical benchmark study. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Sections 3–4] Sections 3–4: The claim that patterns observed in the examined manufacturing datasets are sufficiently general for other production environments rests only on the same use-case demonstrations; no cross-domain validation, sensitivity analysis, or counter-example search is supplied. This assumption is load-bearing for the asserted automation benefit across systems.

    Authors: The patterns in Sections 3–4 were derived from observations of manufacturing event datasets and are formalized via the reference model for production event data enrichment. The use-case demonstrations illustrate applicability but do not constitute broad validation. We will revise these sections to explicitly delineate the intended scope (production environments drawing on ISA-95 and Event Knowledge Graphs) and to include a limitations subsection noting the absence of cross-domain testing. We will also outline directions for future sensitivity analysis and adaptation to other domains. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper constructs its reference model by integrating the external ISA-95 industry standard with the Event Knowledge Graph formalism, and develops patterns from empirical observations on manufacturing event datasets. These are independent external inputs rather than quantities fitted to or defined by the model's own outputs. No equations, parameter fits, or predictions are described that could reduce by construction to the inputs. Evaluation proceeds via qualitative demonstration on use cases, which does not create a self-referential loop. No self-citation load-bearing steps or uniqueness theorems imported from prior author work appear in the derivation. The central claims remain self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The work rests on two established external standards and the assumption that observed patterns generalize; no free parameters are fitted and no new physical entities are postulated.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption ISA-95 provides a suitable industry standard for manufacturing operations management data structures
    Invoked to develop the reference model for storing and extracting production event data.
  • domain assumption Event Knowledge Graph formalism is appropriate for representing and querying production events
    Combined with ISA-95 to create the reference model.
invented entities (1)
  • Reference model for production event data enrichment no independent evidence
    purpose: To provide a standard way for storing and extracting production event data
    New construct introduced by combining ISA-95 and Event Knowledge Graphs.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5713 in / 1357 out tokens · 43542 ms · 2026-05-22T00:11:47.017652+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , Barros, A.P.: Workflow patterns

    Van der Aalst, W.M., Ter Hofstede, A.H., Kiepuszewski, B. , Barros, A.P.: Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14(1), 5–51 (7 2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022883727209/METRICS

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1022883727209/metrics 2003

  2. [2]

    Oxford University Press (1977)

    Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M.: A Pattern L anguage : Towns, Build- ings, Construction. Oxford University Press (1977)

    work page 1977

  3. [3]

    In: SWeTI: Semantic Web of T hings for Industry 4.0

    Alvanou, G., Lytra, I., Petersen, N.: An MTConnect Ontolo gy for Semantic Indus- trial Machine Sensor Analytics. In: SWeTI: Semantic Web of T hings for Industry 4.0. pp. 57–80. Heraklion (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    In: Procee dings of the 20th international conference on World wide web

    Anicic, D., Fodor, P., Rudolph, S., Stojanovic, N.: EP-SP ARQL: A Unified Lan- guage for Event Processing and Stream Reasoning. In: Procee dings of the 20th international conference on World wide web. pp. 635–644 (20 11) A Reference Model and Patterns for Production Event Data Enr ichment 23

    work page

  5. [5]

    Advanced Engi neering Informatics 26(4), 727–736 (10 2012)

    Benevolenskiy, A., Roos, K., Katranuschkov, P., Scherer , R.J.: Construction pro- cesses configuration using process patterns. Advanced Engi neering Informatics 26(4), 727–736 (10 2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AEI.2 012.04.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aei.2 2012

  6. [6]

    Advance d Engineering Informatics 30(3), 500–521 (8 2016)

    Bilal, M., Oyedele, L.O., Qadir, J., Munir, K., Ajayi, S.O ., Akinade, O.O., Owolabi, H.A., Alaka, H.A., Pasha, M.: Big Data in the construction in dustry: A review of present status, opportunities, and future trends. Advance d Engineering Informatics 30(3), 500–521 (8 2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AEI.20 16.07.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aei.20 2016

  7. [7]

    Sensors 18(11), 3832 (11 2018)

    Bonte, P., Tommasini, R., Valle, E.D., De Turck, F., Ongen ae, F.: Streaming MAS- SIF: Cascading Reasoning for Efficient Processing of IoT Data Streams. Sensors 18(11), 3832 (11 2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/S18113832

    work page doi:10.3390/s18113832 2018

  8. [8]

    In: Shar- man, R., Kishore, R., Ramesh, R

    Borgo, S., Leitão, P.: Foundations for a Core Ontology of M anufacturing. In: Shar- man, R., Kishore, R., Ramesh, R. (eds.) Ontologies: a Handbo ok of Principles, Concepts and Applications in Information Systems, vol. 14, pp. 751–775. Springer, Boston, MA (2007)

    work page 2007

  9. [9]

    Computers in Indust ry 89, 35–49 (8 2017)

    Byun, J., Woo, S., Kim, D.: Efficient and privacy-enhanced o bject traceability based on unified and linked EPCIS events. Computers in Indust ry 89, 35–49 (8 2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPIND.2017.04.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.compind.2017.04.001 2017

  10. [10]

    Rongen, N

    Cao, Q., Beden, S., Beckmann, A.: A core reference ontolo gy for steelmaking pro- cess knowledge modelling and information management. Comp uters in Industry 135, 103574 (2 2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPIND.20 21.103574

    work page doi:10.1016/j.compind.20 2022

  11. [11]

    Kucukkoc, A

    Cheng, M., Mukherjee, N.J., Sarin, S.C.: A review of lot s treaming. In- ternational Journal of Production Research 51(23-24), 7023–7046 (11 2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.774506

    work page doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.774506 2013

  12. [12]

    Expert Systems with Applications 166, 114060 (3 2021)

    Dogan, A., Birant, D.: Machine learning and data mining i n man- ufacturing. Expert Systems with Applications 166, 114060 (3 2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESW A.2020.114060

    work page doi:10.1016/j.esw 2021

  13. [13]

    Dublin Core: DCMI: Is Part Of (10 2023), https://www.dublincore.org/ specifications/dublin-core/dcmi-terms/terms/isPartOf/

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    Journal on Data Semantics 10(1-2), 109–141 (2021)

    Esser, S., Fahland, D.: Multi-Dimensional Event Data in Graph Databases. Journal on Data Semantics 10(1-2), 109–141 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13740- 021- 00122-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s13740- 2021

  15. [15]

    In: Process Mining Handbook, vol

    Fahland, D.: Process Mining over Multiple Behavioral Di mensions with Event Knowledge Graphs. In: Process Mining Handbook, vol. 448, pp . 274–

    work page

  16. [16]

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08848-3{\_}9

    Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH ( 2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08848-3{\_}9

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-08848-3 2022

  17. [17]

    Inferring Unobserved Events in Systems with Shared Re- sources and Queues

    Fahland, D., Denisov, V., Van Der Aalst, W.M.P.: Inferri ng Unobserved Events in Systems with Shared Resources and Queues. Fundamenta Inf ormaticae 183(4), 203–242 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3233/FI-2021-2087

    work page doi:10.3233/fi-2021-2087 2021

  18. [18]

    Addison-Wesley, Mas- sachusetts (1997)

    Fowler, M.: Analysis patterns: reusable object models. Addison-Wesley, Mas- sachusetts (1997)

    work page 1997

  19. [19]

    Addison Wesley (2002)

    Fowler, M.: Patterns of Enterprise Application Archite cture. Addison Wesley (2002)

    work page 2002

  20. [20]

    Addison-Wesley Profe ssional (11 1994)

    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.M.: Desig n Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley Profe ssional (11 1994)

    work page 1994

  21. [21]

    Data & Knowledge Engineering 20(3), 305–322 (11 1996)

    Gerstl, P., Pribbenow, S.: A conceptual theory of part-w hole relations and its applications. Data & Knowledge Engineering 20(3), 305–322 (11 1996). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-023X(96)00014-6

    work page doi:10.1016/s0169-023x(96)00014-6 1996

  22. [22]

    Procedia Computer Science 126, 675–684 (2018)

    Giustozzi, F., Saunier, J., Zanni-Merk, C.: Context mod eling for industry 4.0: An ontology-based proposal. Procedia Computer Science 126, 675–684 (2018)

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    GS1: EPCIS Standard. Tech. rep., GS1 (6 2022), https://ref.gs1.org/ standards/epcis/ 24 M. van der Pas et al

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    Knublauch, H., Kontokostas, D.: Shapes Constraint Lang uage (SHACL) (2017), https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/REC-shacl-20170720/

    work page 2017

  25. [25]

    N., Abdrasheva, G

    Kulvatunyou, B.S., Wallace, E., Kiritsis, D., Smith, B. , Will, C.: The industrial ontologies foundry proof-of-concept project. In: APMS 201 8: Advances in Pro- duction Management Systems. Smart Manufacturing for Indus try 4.0. vol. 536, pp. 402–409. Springer New York LLC (2018). https://doi.org /10.1007/978-3-319- 99707-0{\_}50/TABLES/2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319- 2018

  26. [26]

    Advanced Engineering Informatics 50, 101428 (10 2021)

    Lee, C.H., Liu, C.L., Trappey, A.J., Mo, J.P., Desouza, K .C.: Understanding digital transformation in advanced manufacturing and engineering : A bibliometric analy- sis, topic modeling and research trend discovery. Advanced Engineering Informatics 50, 101428 (10 2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AEI.2021. 101428

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aei.2021 2021

  27. [27]

    In- dustrial Management and Data Systems 108(6), 713–725 (2008)

    Lee, D., Park, J.: RFID-based traceability in the supply chain. In- dustrial Management and Data Systems 108(6), 713–725 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570810883978/FULL/PDF

    work page doi:10.1108/02635570810883978/full/pdf 2008

  28. [28]

    In: IEEE Workshop on Dist ributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DI S’06)

    Lemaignan, S., Siadat, A., Dantan, J., Semenenko, A.: MA SON: A proposal for an ontology of manufacturing domain. In: IEEE Workshop on Dist ributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DI S’06). p. 195–200. Prague (2006)

    work page 2006

  29. [29]

    Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 51, 100–114 (2 2015)

    Lin, J.T., Chen, C.M.: Simulation optimization approac h for hybrid flow shop scheduling problem in semiconductor back-end manu factur- ing. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 51, 100–114 (2 2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SIMPAT.2014.10.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.simpat.2014.10.008 2015

  30. [30]

    In: Case-Based Reasoning Research a nd Development: 24th International Conference, ICCBR 2016

    Müller, G., Bergmann, R.: Case Completion of Workflows fo r Process-Oriented Case-Based Reasoning. In: Case-Based Reasoning Research a nd Development: 24th International Conference, ICCBR 2016. pp. 295–310. Spring er International Pub- lishing (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Ontology Design Patterns (ODP): Submissions:PartOf - O dp (3 2010), http:// ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Submissions:PartOf

    work page 2010

  32. [32]

    opcfoundation.org/v104/ISA-95/docs/4.2.3/

    OPC Foundation: OPC UA Online Reference (2019), https://reference. opcfoundation.org/v104/ISA-95/docs/4.2.3/

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    Journal of information science 33(2), 163–180 (2007)

    Rowley, J.: The wisdom hierarchy: representations of th e DIKW hierarchy. Journal of information science 33(2), 163–180 (2007)

    work page 2007

  34. [34]

    Procedia CIRP 93, 700–705 (2020)

    Schuitemaker, R., Xu, X.: Product traceability in manuf actur- ing: A technical review. Procedia CIRP 93, 700–705 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROCIR.2020.04.078

    work page doi:10.1016/j.procir.2020.04.078 2020

  35. [35]

    Com puters in Industry 137, 103612 (5 2022)

    Schuster, D., van Zelst, S.J., van der Aalst, W.M.: Utili zing domain knowledge in data-driven process discovery: A literature review. Com puters in Industry 137, 103612 (5 2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPIND.202 2.103612

    work page doi:10.1016/j.compind.202 2022

  36. [36]

    : Event log imperfection patterns for process mining: Towards a system atic ap- proach to cleaning event logs

    Suriadi, S., Andrews, R., ter Hofstede, A.H., Wynn, M.T. : Event log imperfection patterns for process mining: Towards a system atic ap- proach to cleaning event logs. Information Systems 64, 132–150 (3 2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IS.2016.07.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.is.2016.07.011 2017

  37. [37]

    In: Internation al Conference on Business Process Management

    Swevels, A., Dijkman, R., Fahland, D.: Inferring Missin g Entity Identifiers from Context Using Event Knowledge Graphs. In: Internation al Conference on Business Process Management. pp. 180–197. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham (9 2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41620-0{\ _}11/TABLES/3

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-41620-0 2023

  38. [38]

    Teymourian, K.: A Framework for Knowledge-Based Comple x Event Processing. Ph.D. thesis, Freie Universität Berlin, Berli n (11 2014). https://doi.org/10.17169/REFUBIUM-11103

    work page doi:10.17169/refubium-11103 2014

  39. [39]

    w3.org/TR/2013/REC-sparql11-overview-20130321/ A Reference Model and Patterns for Production Event Data Enr ichment 25

    The W3C SPARQL Working Group: SPARQL 1.1 Overview (2013) , https://www. w3.org/TR/2013/REC-sparql11-overview-20130321/ A Reference Model and Patterns for Production Event Data Enr ichment 25

    work page 2013

  40. [40]

    In: Internat ional Experiences and Directions Workshop on OWL

    Tommasini, R., Bonte, P., Della Valle, E., Mannens, E., D e Turck, F., Ongenae, F.: Towards ontology-based event processing. In: Internat ional Experiences and Directions Workshop on OWL. vol. 10161 LNCS, pp. 115–127. Sp ringer Verlag (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54627-8{\_}9/TABLES/1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-54627-8 2017

  41. [41]

    Intern ational Journal of Pro- duction Research 51(22), 6553–6572 (2013)

    Usman, Z., Young, R.I.M., Chungoora, N., Palmer, C., Cas e, K., Harding, J.A.: Towards a formal manufacturing reference ontology. Intern ational Journal of Pro- duction Research 51(22), 6553–6572 (2013)

    work page 2013

  42. [42]

    Long: Construct MES Ontology with OWL

    W. Long: Construct MES Ontology with OWL. In: ISECS Inter national Collo- quium on Computing, Communication, Control, and Managemen t. pp. 614–617. IEEE, Guangzhou (2008)

    work page 2008

  43. [43]

    Advanced Engineering Informatics 58, 102185 (10 2023)

    Yang, C., Zheng, Y., Tu, X., Ala-Laurinaho, R., Autiosal o, J., Seppänen, O., Tammi, K.: Ontology-based knowledge representation of industrial pro- duction workflow. Advanced Engineering Informatics 58, 102185 (10 2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AEI.2023.102185

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aei.2023.102185 2023