저작자표시-비영리-변경금지 2.

0 대한민국

이용자는 아래의 조건을 따르는 경우에 한하여 자유롭게

l 이 저작물을 복제, 배포, 전송, 전시, 공연 및 방송할 수 있습니다.

다음과 같은 조건을 따라야 합니다:

저작자표시. 귀하는 원저작자를 표시하여야 합니다.

비영리. 귀하는 이 저작물을 영리 목적으로 이용할 수 없습니다.

변경금지. 귀하는 이 저작물을 개작, 변형 또는 가공할 수 없습니다.

l 귀하는, 이 저작물의 재이용이나 배포의 경우, 이 저작물에 적용된 이용허락조건

을 명확하게 나타내어야 합니다.
l 저작권자로부터 별도의 허가를 받으면 이러한 조건들은 적용되지 않습니다.

저작권법에 따른 이용자의 권리는 위의 내용에 의하여 영향을 받지 않습니다.

이것은 이용허락규약(Legal Code)을 이해하기 쉽게 요약한 것입니다.

Disclaimer
 석 사 학 위 논 문

4차 산업 디지털 트윈의 역량평가

프레임워크 개발
The Development of Digital Twin’s
Capability Evaluation Framework

지도교수 이 종 옥

동국대학교 대학원 경영정보학과

양 위 신(LIANG YUXIN, 梁瑜芯)

2 0 1 8
 석 사 학 위 논 문

4차 산업 디지털 트윈의 역량평가 프레임워크 개발

The Development of Digital Twin’s Capability Evaluation Framework

양 위 신(LIANG YUXIN, 梁瑜芯)

지도교수 이 종 옥

이 논문을 석사학위논문으로 제출함.

2018 년 6월

양위신의 경영대학 석사학위 논문을 인준함.

2018 년 6월

위원장 황 경 태 (인)

위 원 정 덕 훈 (인)

위 원 이 종 옥 (인)

동국대학교 대학원
 목 차
1. Introduction ······················································································ 1
1.1 The purposes of research ·················································································· 1
1.2 Research Structure ······························································································ 3

2. Theoretical background ································································· 6

2.1 The Forth Industrial Revolution ······································································ 6
2.1.1 Industrial Revolution 4.0 ··········································································· 6
2.1.2 Smart Society ····························································································· 12
2.1.3 Smart Factory ···························································································· 19
2.2 Cyber - Physical System & Digital Twin ················································· 23
2.2.1 Cyber - Physical System ······································································· 23
2.2.2 Digital Twin ······························································································· 29
2.3 Autonomy & Intelligence ················································································· 40
2.3.1 Autonomy ···································································································· 40
2.3.2 Intelligence ·································································································· 46

3. The development of Digital Twin’s Autonomy Model ·· 53

3.1 Definition of Framework ·················································································· 53
3.2 Develop of Digital Twin’s Autonomy Model (DTAM) ··························· 55
3.2.1 The Basic Architecture of DTAM ······················································· 55
3.2.2 The Three Aspects of DTAM ······························································ 58
3.2.3 The Three Capabilities of DTAM ······················································· 61
3.2.4 The Capability of Mission Performed and Measure ······················· 63
3.2.5 The Environment Adaptation and measure ······································· 66
3.2.6 The learning levels and measure ························································· 67

4. Conclusion ························································································· 71

Reference ································································································ 74
Abstract ··································································································· 80
<표 차례>

[Table 1] Comparison of today’s factory and an Industry 4.0 factory ··········· 20

[Table 2] The digital twin business values ···························································· 31
[Table 3] The definition of autonomy ······································································ 41
[Table 4] The definition of LOA ··············································································· 45
[Table 5] Human learning & Machine learning ····················································· 49
[Table 6, Part 1 of 3] The Learning Levels ·························································· 68
[Table 6, Part 2 of 3] The Learning Levels ·························································· 69
[Table 6, Part 3 of 3] The Learning Levels ·························································· 70
 <그림 차례>

[Fig. 1] A history of industrial revolutions: Industry evolution with key

developments ·································································································· 8
[Fig. 2] The 9 pillars of technological advancement ············································ 12
[Fig. 3] The Smart city comprehensive schema ··················································· 14
[Fig. 4] The concept of Industry 4.0 ········································································ 18
[Fig. 5] The core technologies for Smart Factory ················································ 21
[Fig. 6] smart factory framework ·············································································· 22
[Fig. 7] 5C architecture for implementation of Cyber-Physical System ········· 26
[Fig. 8] The applications and techniques associated with each level ·············· 29
[Fig. 9] The Digital Twin - the next wave in Simulation ································ 32
[Fig. 10] Digital Twin concept model ······································································· 34
[Fig. 11] Notion of the digital twin in the life-cycle of a product ················· 39
[Fig. 12] The Three Aspects for ALFUS ······························································· 43
[Fig. 13] The Three-Axis Model For ALFUS ······················································ 43
[Fig. 14] Theory of Multiple Intelligence ································································· 47
[Fig. 15] The Bloom’s Taxonomy ·············································································· 51
[Fig. 16] The Three Aspects of DTAM ·································································· 61
[Fig. 17] The Three Capabilities of DTAM ··························································· 63
1. Introduction

1.1 The purposes of research

At the Hannover Messe 2011, the “Industrial 4.0” concept first

published by the German government as a high-tech strategy for
2020. Its purpose is to improve Germany's industrial competitiveness
and seize the opportunity in the new round of industrial revolution.
In recent years, “Industry 4.0” has been widely discussed, and has
become a hot spot for most global industries and the information
industry. Industry 4.0 will be a new industrial revolution, which will
have a great influence on international industry.

After the published of the Industrial 4.0 strategies there is an

increasing number of organizations and countries where Industry 4.0
is becoming adopted. Countries also proposed similar strategies to
‘Industry 4.0’. Such as the National Strategic Plan for Advanced
Manufacturing in the US; the Robot Revolution Initiative Society 5.0
in Japan; the Made in China 2025 in China; the Smart Industry in
Netherlands and the High Value Manufacturing Strategy in UK.

The Industry 4.0 is building on the Third Revolution (the digital

revolution). It can be described as the manufacturing environment as

- 1 -
well as the creation of a digital value chain to enable the
communication between products and manufacturer. As the core
technology of Industry 4.0, Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) have been
proposed as smart embedded and networked systems within
production systems(Lee J. et al., 2015). They operate at virtual and
physical levels interacting with and controlling physical devices,
sensing and acting on the real world(Baheti R. et al., 2011). With
the use of Internet of Things (IoT) and Big Data analytics, Industry
4.0 opens the way to real-time monitoring and synchronization of
the real world activities to the virtual space thanks to the
physical-virtual connection and the networking of CPS elements(Lee J.
et al., 2015). The Digital Twin (DT) is meant as the virtual and
computerized counterpart of a physical system that can be used to
simulate it for various purposes, exploiting a real-time
synchronization of the sensed data coming from the field; such a
synchronization is possible thanks to the enabling technologies of
Industry 4.0 and, as such, the DT is deeply linked with it(Negri E. et
al., 2017).

Autonomy provides the production system with the ability to

respond to unexpected events in an intelligent and efficient manner
without the need for re-configuration at the supervisory level(Rosen
R. et al, 2015). DT can achieve this concept and let the information
created in each stage of the product life-cycle is seamlessly made
available to subsequent stages.

- 2 -
 There are tens of thousands of people in this world, and
everyone’s capability is also different. Digital Twin as one of the
core technologies in the four industrial revolutions which used in
various fields. There are difference between DT and human, human
capabilities can be achieved through the education. The human
education levels can be divided into elementary, middle, and high
school. However DT lacks corresponding metrics, it is meaningful to
create a level to evaluation Digital Twin’s capability.

The focus of this research is describe the process and outcome of

the evaluation framework. In this research a three-axis (Mission
Perform, Environment Adaption, and Learning level) capability
evaluation framework was created which can help us easily to know
the DT's status. And by establishing common term and metrics, the
DT technologies can be analyzed, compared, and assessed in a
formal and methodical manner.

1.2 Research Structure

The purpose of this research is to build a Digital Twin capabilities

evaluation framework in the context of Industry 4.0. This evaluation
framework can provide reference for the capabilities of Digital Twin
in different fields. We use the Hui-Min Huang and Elena Messina’s
Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems(ALFUS) Framework reference

- 3 -
to build a Digital Twin autonomy model(DTAM).

IIn order to establish the corresponding model, the study gives an

explanation of the Industry 4.0 through previous research. And using
the stage approach to build each part of the Digital framework. The
objectives of this paper were to: 1) refine the definition of
autonomy and intelligence. 2) propose a process of determining
levels of Digital Twin autonomy. 3) suggest a framework to identify
potential variables related to autonomy.

The structure of this research is as follows:

Section 1 is through the background and necessity of the research

to indicate the purpose of the research.

Section 2 is through previous research to explain the theoretical

background of the research. Firstly define the Industry 4.0,
summarize smart society of Industry 4.0 and the smart factory.
Secondly define the CPS and DT of Industry 4.0, explain the
importance of the Digital Twin’s autonomy. Thirdly give the concept
of autonomy and intelligence.

Section 3 in this chapter the evaluation framework is described,

step-by-step. And explain what is framework, and the necessary to
built a Digital Twin’s capability evaluation framework. Built the
framework and present overall architecture of a three-axis DTAM,
and establishing common term and metrics.

- 4 -
 In 3.2.1 explain the purpose of this research, why the autonomy
capabilities of DT is need to be developed. In this study, to develop
DTAM, the concepts of ALFUS framework is adapted. The 3.2.2 is a
brief description of the three aspects of DTAM. In 3.2.3 applying the
previous concepts to built a three-aixs model. The three-axis are: the
capability of mission perform, the capability of environment
adaptation, and the capability of learning levels.

In 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.2.6 each aspects of the DTAM three-axis model

are defined in detail to assess the autonomy of DT.

Section 4 summarize the research result and the outlook for the
future.

- 5 -
2. Theoretical background

2.1 The Forth Industrial Revolution

2.1.1 Industrial Revolution 4.0

1. The Industrial Revolution

Revolutions have occurred through human history. When the new

technologies emerge and new perspectives emerge on the world, the
human economic system and social structure will be change greatly.
From the primitive society to agricultural society, and the agricultural
society to industrial society we have experienced changes again and
again. The technology is improving, human labor is gradually
replaced by machinery, and mechanical power is dominated by
information technology. After this, the popularization of technologies
such as information technology, biotechnology, and artificial
intelligence will bring more changes.

The first industrial revolution started in Great Britain and took

place around 1760-1840. It involved the establishment of factories

- 6 -
using mechanical machines and steam or water power to move from
craft production to industrial manufacturing in the textile industry,
the switch from manual production to automated production. The
second industrial revolution was between 1870 and 1914 with the
introduction of mass production with the help of electricity. It is
also called the birth of assembly line and mass production. The
third industrial revolution is dated between 1950 and 1970. It is
often referred to as the Digital Revolution, and came about the
change from analog and mechanical systems to digital ones(KILIÇ T.,
2017).

The first three industrial revolutions have allowed us to see that

every industrial revolution will produce new technologies and
overcome the problems in previous production. With the
development of new infrastructure, new technologies have become
popular. The fourth industrial revolution we are now experiencing is
building on the third digital revolution that has occurred since the
last century. It is characterized by a fusion of technologies that is
blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological
spheres(Schwab K., 2017). See [Fig. 1] for a summary of the
industrial revolutions.

- 7 -
 [Fig. 1] A history of industrial revolutions: Industry evolution with key
developments(Sniderman B. et al., 2016)

2. The Definition of Industry 4.0

The first industrial revolution with water and steam power to

achieve the production mechanization. The second is the use of
electricity to promote mass production. In the third, electronics and
information technology drive the automation of production. Klaus
Schwab think, that the fourth industrial revolution we are now
experiencing is building on the third digital revolution that has
occurred since the last century. It is characterized by a technology
that merges the boundaries between physical, digital and biological
fields.

- 8 -
 The definition for Industry 4.0 was first introduced in 2011 at the
Hannover Messe trade fair, and was the subject of an Industry 4.0
working group established by the German federal government
(Kagermann H. et al., 2013). Germany Trade and Invest (GTAI)
defines Industry 4.0 as:

“A paradigm shift . . . made possible by technological advances

which constitute a reversal of conventional production process logic.
Simply put, this means that industrial production machinery no longer
simply “processes” the product, but that the product communicates
with the machinery to tell it exactly what to do“(McDougall W.,
2014).

Klaus Schwab sees the Industry 4.0 as part of this revolution

"emerging technology breakthroughs" in fields such as artificial
intelligence, robotics, the Internet of Things, autonomous vehicles, 3D
printing, quantum computing and nanotechnology(Klaus S., 2016).

The whole concept of Industry 4.0 is based on six design

principles(Lom M. et al., 2016).

1) Interoperability: the ability of CPS, humans and Industry 4.0

factories connects and communicates with each other
through the Internet of Things and the Internet of Service.

2) Virtualization: virtualization means that CPSs are able to

monitor physical processes. A virtual copy of an Industry 4.0
factory created by linking sensor data (monitoring physical

- 9 -
 processes) with virtual factory models and simulation
models.

3) Decentralization: growing demand for individual products

makes it increasingly difficult to centralize control systems.
Decentralization means the ability of CPSs within Industry
4.0 factories to make decisions on their own.

4) Real-Time Capability: the capability to collect and analyze

data and immediately provide derivative insights. Thus, the
plant can react to the failure of a machine and reroute
products to another machine.

5) Service Orientation: companies, CPS and human services

available through IoS and available to other participants. It
can be provided internally and across company boundaries.

6) Modularity: change the demand by replacing or extending

individual modules and by replacing or extending individual
modules, flexibly adapting to changes in the requirements of
the Industry 4.0 factories. Modular systems can be easily
adjusted in case of seasonal fluctuations or changed product
characteristics.

The main characteristics of Industry 4.0(Lom M. et al., 2016)

include:

1) horizontal integration through networks in order to facilitate

- 10 -
 an internal cooperation,

2) vertical integration of subsystems within the factory in order

to create a flexible and adaptable manufacturing systems
and through-engineering integration across the entire value
chain to enable customization of the product.

3. The 9 Pillars of Technological Advancement

The core of the new round of industrial revolution is smart

manufacturing. The Industry 4.0 in Germany, the Industrial Internet
in US, and Made in China 2025 strategy. Although these three major
national strategies differ in their presentation, they are essentially
designed to develop intelligent manufacturing. Therefor, in order to
building the smart manufacturing the 9 pillars of technologies
include simulation, horizontal and vertical system integration, big
data and analytics, autonomous robot, the industrial Internet of
Thing (IoT), cyber-security, the cloud, additive manufacturing, and
augmented reality, are the targets of attention of all countries.
Recently many of the nine advances in technology that form the
foundation for Industry 4.0 are already used in manufacturing. The 9
pillars of technological show in the [Fig. 2](Rüßmann M., 2015).

- 11 -
 [Fig. 2] The 9 pillars of technological advancement(Rüßmann M., 2015)

2.1.2 Smart Society

A cluster of technological advances are changing how people live,

work and play. Physical and virtual areas of our lives are
increasingly becoming intertwined. More and more of our
interactions are mediated by machines. A smart society leverages the

- 12 -
power and the potential of technology to make human beings more
productive; to allow us to focus our resources on activities and
relationships that matter; and ultimately to improve health, wellbeing
and the quality of life. Charles Levy and David Wong define a
‘smart society’ as: One that successfully harnesses the potential of
digital technology and connected devices and the use of digital
networks to improve people’s lives(Levy C. & Wong D., 2014).

With the accelerated integration of artificial intelligence and other

technologies with innovation and fusion, life will continue to become
intelligent. A smart society is a new concept following the
agricultural society, industrial society, and information society. It is a
more advanced social form and is currently accompanied by the
arrival of a global wave of intelligence.

1. Smart City

Recently, there are two important imaginations: information and

communication technologies (ICT) and urbanization.

The visions of the ‘smart city’ is intended chiefly as an efficient,

technologically advanced, green and socially inclusive city. Margarita
Angelidou define the ‘smart cities’ as: Smart cities are all urban
settlements and consciously strive to use strategically new
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) patterns to seek
prosperity, efficiency, and competitiveness on multiple socioeconomic

- 13 -
levels (Angelidou M., 2014) .Dameri gives a comprehensive definition
of the smart city that “a smart city is a well defined geographical
area, in which high technologies such as ICT, logistic, energy
production, and so on, cooperate to create benefits for citizens in
terms of well being, inclusion and participation, environmental
quality, intelligent development; it is governed by a well defined
pool of subjects, able to state the rules and policy for the city
government and development(Dameri R. P., 2013). The Smart city
comprehensive schema show in [Fig. 3].

[Fig. 3] The Smart city comprehensive schema(Dameri R. P., 2013)

The smart city is based on the six key areas: Smart People, Smart

- 14 -
Economy, Smart Living, Smart Governance, Smart Mobility and Smart
Environment. And the main purpose of the Smart City Initiative is
thus ensuring the sustainability of cities, improving quality of life
and safety of their citizens, and providing maximum energy
efficiency, all of those in the six key areas: economy, environment,
mobility, people, living, and governance, with the contribution of the
latest technologies(Lom M. et al., 2016).

Caragliu A. et al. summarized the characteristics proper to a smart

city as follows:

1) The “utilization of networked infrastructure to improve

economic and political efficiency and enable social, cultural
and urban development”, where the term infrastructure
indicates business services, housing, leisure and lifestyle
services, and ICTs (mobile and fixed phones, satellite TVs,
computer networks, e-commerce, internet services)(Arc O. U.
N., 2014).

2) Underlying emphasis on business-led urban development.

3) A strong focus on urban public services to achieve the goal

of social integration.

1) Stressed the key role of high-tech and creative industries in

the city long-term development.

4) Deeply concerned about the role of social and relationship

- 15 -
 capital in urban development. A smart city will be a city
whose community has learned to learn, adapt and innovate.

5) Social and environmental sustainability as a major strategic

component of smart cities(Caragliu A. et al., 2011).

2. Smart Industry

ICT promotes the development of Smart Industry. Smart Industry

is driven by a smart use of ICT, where machines are interconnected
and can be managed intelligently. This connection applies not only
within the factory, but also between companies and between
companies and customers. It concerns smart products, processes and
services.

First, Smart Industry uses sensors and high-quality ICT networks to

realize far-reaching product digitization of process information.
Secondly, new manufacturing technologies are an important one
pillar under Smart Industry. Third, production systems change in a
network-centric production system, in which production equipment
and people are even connected to each other across the value
chain.

These developments lead to the following six business changes,

see [Fig. 4]:

Ÿ The value of information increases on the basis of

- 16 -
 digitization. In this way, information can be earned through
the use of big data.

Ÿ The 'customer intimacy' is increasing. Not only because

more customization is provided, but also because customers
get the opportunity to participate in the design process.

Ÿ This also has consequences for the organization of the

value chain. Through digitization and network centric
production, value chains will change and cooperation will
be strengthened.

Ÿ New production technologies give a lot of freedom in

production. The easy adaptation of production processes
leads to a high degree of flexibilization.

Ÿ The availability of data and the new production

technologies strengthen the knowledge and control of the
production process, which improves the quality (eg. zero
defect).

Ÿ Finally, far-reaching robotization of production leads to

further automation of the production process(Industry S.,
2014).

- 17 -
 [Fig. 4] The concept of Industry 4.0(Lom M. et al., 2016)

Smart Industry potentially has a big impact on companies.

1) production processes can be organized much more

efficiently, which leads to lower costs and a lower total
cost of ownership for the customer.

2) It is possible to respond much more effectively to customer

demand with customer-specific, tailor-made products.

3) Business models will change. Many more services can be

added, which is a further fusion of industry and
services(Industry S., 2014).

- 18 -
2.1.3 Smart Factory

Industrial 4.0 was initially a concept proposed by some German

industrial organizations at the Hannover Messe 2013, which was
followed by global attention. Linking production, sales, and
consumption links through the Internet of Things and big data
technologies, and smart factories that realize automation in
production and monitoring are the future trends.

Now the Industry 4.0 is a synonym for the transformation of

today's factories into smart factories, which are intended to address
and overcome the current challenges of shorter product life-cycles,
highly customized products and stiff global competition. A high
product variability and at the same time shortened product-life-cycles
require agile and flexible production structure, which can be
reconfigured rapidly for new product demands(Stephan Weyer. et al.,
2015). A brief comparison between current and Industry 4.0 factories
is presented in [Table 1].

- 19 -
[Table 1] Comparison of today’s factory and an Industry 4.0 factory(Lee J. et
al., 2014)

Data Today’s factory

source Attributes Technologies
Component Sensor Precision Smart sensors and fault
detection
Machine Controller Producibility Condition-based
& monitoring &
performance diagnostics
Production Networked Productivity & Lean operations: work
system system OEE and waste reduction

Data Industry 4.0

source Attributes Technologies
Component Sensor Self-aware Degradation monitoring
& remaining useful
Self-predict life prediction
Machine Controller Self-aware Up time with predictive
health monitoring
Self-predict
Self-compare
Production Networked Self-configure Worry-free productivity
system system
Self-maintain
Self-organize

With the use of CPS technology, machines will become “Smart”

self-tuning, auto-configured and able to do self-diagnostics. In this
way industrial processes in the production, engineering, the usage of
materials, supply chain and life cycle management can be
substantially improved. Smart products have unique identified ability

- 20 -
and can locate and understand their own history at any time,
current status and alternative routes to achieve target status(Veza I.
et al., 2015).

Embedded manufacturing systems are vertically networked with

business processes within factories and enterprises and horizontally
connected to disperse value networks that can be managed in real
time(Korpela K. et al., 2017). Smart Factory allows to meet individual
customer needs Dynamic business and engineering processes enable
last minute and flexible changes to production. Provides end-to-end
transparency in the manufacturing process to facilitate optimal
decision-making.

[Fig. 5] The core technologies for Smart Factory

- 21 -
 [Fig. 6] describes a smart factory framework consisting of four
tangible layers, namely industrial network layer, physical resource
layer, monitoring terminal layer, cloud layer and(Wang S. et al.
2016). Physical resources are implemented as smart objects that can
communicate with each other over an industrial network. Information
systems (e.g., ERP) in the presence of the cloud, mass data can be
collected from the physical layer resources, and interact with the
user through the terminal. Therefore, the tangible framework enables
the free flow of intangible information in the cyber world. This
actually formed a CPS with deep integration of physical artifacts and
information entities(Wang S. et al., 2016).

[Fig. 6] smart factory framework(Wang S. et al, 2016)

Physical resource layer. It includes various physical artifacts such

as smart conveyors, smart products, and smart machines(Wang S. et
al., 2016). These smart artifacts can communicate with each other
over industrial networks. In addition, they can work together to
achieve system-wide goals.

Industrial network layer. It forms an important infrastructure that

not only enables interpersonal communication, but also connects

- 22 -
physical resource layers with clouds(Wang S. et al., 2016).

Cloud Layer. It is another kind of important infrastructure that

supports the smart factory. In operation, smart artifacts can generate
large amounts of data that can be transmitted to the cloud via the
IWN for processing by the information system(Wang S. et al., 2016).

Supervision and Control Terminal Layer. It connects people with

smart factories. Through terminals such as PCs, tablets, and mobile
phones, people can access the statistics provided by the cloud, apply
different configurations, or perform maintenance and diagnostics,
even remotely through the Internet(Wang S. et al., 2016).

2.2 Cyber - Physical System & Digital Twin

2.2.1 Cyber - Physical System

Industry 4.0 has mass customization, flexible production, tracking

and self-awareness of parts and products, and communication and
other features with the machine. So in the context of the Industry
4.0, factory, machines, and the products will be connected to a
network.

In 2006, the National Science Foundation (NSF) explain the

- 23 -
connotation of CPS as: the communication, computation and control
in the cyber space integration with the physical systems at all
scales. So as the name suggests, the cyber-physical systems (CPS) is
integrates the cyber space and physical Space. We can analyze the
data obtained from cyber space and use it to guide specific
activities in physical space. For example, human relationships in
social software are not visible in physical space. However, we can
use it to find out the person's social group, behavioral habits and
other information.

In the context of Industry 4.0, the term cyber-physical systems

(CPS) is used to describe the interaction of physical and computing,
including embedded intelligence at all levels, including machines,
sensors, actuators, production parts, sub-assemblies, and products
being produced. CPS are composed of physical entities, such as
mechanisms controlled or monitored by computer-based algorithms.
A current example of the application of CPS is mechatronic drive
systems that use processors and communications embedded in motor
drives to accomplish coordinated operations in a packaging machine
without physical gearing. This saves significant cost, providing greater
flexibility and improved reliability(Lydon B., 2016).

CPS are networks of computers, sensors and actuators that can be

embedded in materials, devices or machines and are connected to
the internet(Burmeister C. et al., 2015). The implementation of CPS
in industrial production systems will enable the alignment of

- 24 -
processes within firms, but perhaps more crucially, also outside
firms. This way, multiple companies can be integrated flexibly along
the value chain, essentially creation value networks(Burmeister C. et
al., 2015)

The technology in CPS can be divided into multiple layers such as:

Ÿ A device or physical layer with added logical capability

through sensors and actuators;

Ÿ A network layer enabling communication;

Ÿ A content layer containing the data and meta-data;

Ÿ A service layer for the functionality of the CPS(Montanus

M. L., 2016).

1. CPS 5C level

In general, a CPS consists of two main functional components: (1)

the advanced connectivity that ensures real-time data acquisition
from the physical world and information feedback from the cyber
space; and (2) intelligent data management, analytics and
computational capability that constructs the cyber space(Lee J. et al.,
2014).

Lee J. et al. think CPS is not a separate technology, but a

technical framework with obvious systematization features, that is
based on modeling of multi-source data, and using connection,

- 25 -
conversion, cyber, cognition, and configuration as its 5C technology
architecture. As illustrated in [Fig. 7], the detailed 5C architecture is
outlined as follows:

[Fig. 7] 5C architecture for implementation of Cyber-Physical System(Lee J. et al.,

2014)

(1) Smart connection level

Acquiring accurate and reliable data from machines and their

components is the first step in developing a Cyber-Physical System

- 26 -
application. The data might be directly measured by sensors or
obtained from controller or enterprise manufacturing systems such as
ERP, MES, SCM and CMM(Lee J. et al., 2014). The core of smart
connection can be seen as selective and focused data collection
based on the needs of activity objectives and information analysis.

(2) Data-to-information conversion (Smart analytics level)

Inferring meaningful information from data. The core of the smart

analytics level can be seen as "self-remembering", that is, it can
re-adapt to adaptive and dynamic "data-information" conversion
according to the frequency and focus of information analysis.

(3) Cyber level

The cyber level serves as the central information center in this

architecture. Information is being pushed from each connected
machine to form a machine network. Having massive information
gathered, specific analytics have to be used to extract additional
information that provide better insight over the status of individual
machines among the fleet(Lee J. et al., 2014). The goal is to achieve
a quantitative assessment, correlation analysis, impact analysis, and
prediction of future conditions for different targets under
multidimensional factors.

- 27 -
(4) Cognition level

Implementing CPS at this level gives you a complete picture of

the system being monitored. It can be said that the Cognition level
is to further analyze and mine the available information, to make
more effective and scientific decision-making activities. It includes the
two processes of assessment and decision making.

(5) Configuration level

The configuration level is the feedback from the cyberspace to the

physical space, acting as a supervisory control, allowing the machine
to self-configure and adapt itself. This stage acts as resilience control
system (RCS) to apply the corrective and preventive decisions, which
has been made in cognition level, to the monitored system. [Figure
8] is the applications and techniques associated with each level of the 5C
architecture(Lee J. et al., 2014).

- 28 -
 [Fig. 8] The applications and techniques associated with each level(Lee J. et
al., 2014)

2.2.2 Digital Twin

With the development of technology, many different products can

be produced on the same production line. Customers can customize
different models and configurations according to their preferences.
After the factory receives the order, it can also do not have to
manually change the program. It only needs to “tell” the machine
that the machine can take different operations. The use of Digital
Twin (DT) can greatly realize this process. The DT that exist in all
physical aspects of the plant can be intelligently connected,

- 29 -
communicated and coordinated with each other via the network.
The real-time data feedback can also find and solve problems at the
first time. With I4.0 in factories in some countries, these become a
reality.

Recently, Gartner conducted a survey on the implementation of

the Internet of Things. The results showed that 48% of organizations
that have deployed Internet of Things indicated that they have
adopted or plan to use digital twins in 2018. In addition, by 2022,
the number of corporate organizations involved in the use of Digital
Twin (a total of 202 companies from the United States, Germany,
China, and Japan) will increase by threefold. DT can provide a digital
model for physical devices so that these devices can be quickly
calibrated and continuously upgraded to maintain good condition,
enhance functionality, enhance reliability and adaptability, and create
more value. The digital twin business values show in [Table 2].

- 30 -
[Table 2] The digital twin business values(Parrott A. & Warshaw L.., 2017)

Category of business
Potential specific business values
value
Quality • Improve overall quality
• Predict and detect quality trend defects
sooner
• Control quality escapes and be able to
determine when quality issue started
Warranty cost and • Understand current configuration of
services equipment in the field to be able to service
more efficiently
• Proactively and more accurately determine
warranty and claims issues to reduce overall
warranty cost and improve customer
experiences
Operations cost • Improve product design and engineering
change execution
• Improve performance of manufacturing
equipment
• Reduce operations and process variability
Record retention • Create a digital record of serialized parts and
and serialization raw materials to better manage recalls and
warranty claims and meet mandated
tracking requirements
New product • Shorten time to market for new products
introduction cost • Reduce overall cost to produce new product
and lead time • Better recognize long-lead-time components
and impact to supply chain
Revenue growth • Identify products in the field that are ready
opportunities for upgrade
• Improve efficiency and cost to service product

- 31 -
 Over the past few decades, simulations have evolved from a
technique restricted to computers and digital experts to a standard
tool that engineers typically use to answer specific design and
engineering problems(Rosen R. et al., 2015). Now the digital twin is
become one of the main concepts associated to the Industry 4.0
wave see [Fig 9].

[Fig. 9] The Digital Twin - the next wave in Simulation(Rosen R. et al.,

2015)

- 32 -
 1. Definite of Digital Twin

The concept of using "twins" can be traced back to NASA's Apollo

plan, in which at least two identical aerospace vehicles were built to
map the spacecraft during missions. The remaining vehicle is called a
twin. The twins are widely used for training during flight
preparation. During the flight mission it was used to simulate
alternatives on the earth based model, where the available flight
data were used to mirror the flight conditions as precise as possible,
and thus to assist the astronauts in orbit in critical situations(Rosen
R., 2015). In this sense, each prototype used to simulate the real
operating conditions of real behavior can be thought of as a pair of
twins.

With the developments of the simulation, the concept of Digital

Twin was first introduced in 2003 at the University of Michigan
Executive Course on Product Life-cycle Management(PLM)(Grieves M.,
2014). Dr. Michael Grieves put forward the concept of "virtual digital
expression equivalent to physical products" with all the elements of
DT, namely physical space, virtual space, and the relationship or
interface between them. This conceptual model can be seen as a
prototype of DT.

The Concept of Digital Twin model is shown in [Fig. 10]. This

model contains three main parts:

- 33 -
 1) existence of physical products in real space.

2) existence of virtual products in virtual space.

3) the connections of information and data that ties the real

and virtual products together.

[Fig. 10] Digital Twin concept model

By using the concept of digital twins it is possible to create

light-weight versions of the virtual model. So these light-weight
models permits simulation products to simulate and visualize
complex systems in real-time.

The first definition of the digital twin was forged by the NASA
in(Glaessgen E. & Stargel D., 2012) as an integrated multiphysics,
multiscale, probabilistic simulation of an as-built vehicle or system
that uses the best available physical models, sensor updates, fleet
history, etc. to mirror the life of its corresponding flying twin.

- 34 -
 With the definition and explain of DT, the following characteristics
of digital twin are summarized(Tao F. et al., 2017):

1) Real-time reflection. Two spaces exist in digital twin,

physical space and virtual space. The virtual space is the
real reflection of the physical space, and it can keep
ultra-high synchronization and fidelity with the physical
space.

2) Interaction and convergence. This characteristic can be

explained from three aspects.

① Interaction and convergence in physical space. Digital

twin is a kind of full-flow, full-element, and full-service
integration. So the data generated in various phases in
physical space can connect with each other.

② Interaction and convergence between historical data

and real-time data. Digital twin data is more
comprehensive. It not only depends on expert
knowledge but also collects data from all deployed
systems real-timely. Therefore, the data can be mined
deeply and used more fully through the convergence.

③ Interaction and convergence between physical space

and virtual space. The physical space and virtual space
are not isolated in digital twin. There exit smooth
connection channels between the two spaces, which

- 35 -
 makes them interact easily.

3) Self-evolution. Digital twin can update data in real time, so

that virtual models can undergo continuous improvement
through comparing virtual space with physical space in
parallel.

2. Digital Twin capability

The digital twin capability supports three of the most powerful

tools in the human knowledge tool kit. They are: Conceptualization,
Comparison, and Collaboration. These attributes form the foundation
for the next generation of problem solving and innovation(Grieves
M., 2014).

(1) Conceptualization

The capability of the digital twin lets us directly see the situation
and eliminate the inefficient and counterproductive mental steps of
decreasing the information and translating it from visual information
to symbolic information and back to visually conceptual information.
With the digital twin to build a common perspective, we can
directly see both the physical product information and the virtual
product information, simultaneously. Instead of looking at a report of
factory performance and re-conceptualizing how the product is
moving through the individual stations, looking at digital twin

- 36 -
simulations allows us to see the progress of the physical product as
it is moving and actually see information about the characteristics of
the physical product(Grieves M., 2014).

(2) Comparison

Comparison is one of most powerful intellectual tools that we

possess. When we have the virtual product information and the
physical product information completely separate, we still can do
that comparison. However, it is inefficient, as we have to look at
the physical product information, find the corresponding virtual
product information, and then work out the differences. With the
digital twin model, we can view the ideal characteristic, the
tolerance corridor around that ideal measurement, and our actual
trend line to determine for range of products whether we are
where we want to be(Grieves M., 2014).

(3) Collaboration

The digital twin model allows a shared conceptualization that can

be visualized in exactly the same way by an unlimited amount of
individuals and by individuals who do not need to share the same
location. With the digital twin capability, we can look at any
physical product at any stage on the factory floor and overlay the
virtual, product on top of it. This capability of virtual products can

- 37 -
be extended across multiple factories. This means that individuals
across the world can not only looking at the performance of their
own factory, but they can be monitoring how they are doing against
factories in other parts of the world(Grieves M., 2014).

3. The Digital Twin’s Autonomy

To be able to quickly respond to unexpected events without a

central re-plan, future manufacturing systems will need to become
more autonomous. Autonomous systems are intelligent machines that
perform advanced tasks without the need for manual control and
without detailed programming. They know their capabilities (that a
modeled as “skill”) and the state they are in. They can make
decisions at critical moments to deal with emergencies. In the
product life-cycle, DT can created the information in each stage
seamlessly made available to subsequent stages without the need for
re-configuration at the supervisory leve, it show in [Fig. 11](Rüßmann
M., 2015).

- 38 -
 [Fig. 11] Notion of the digital twin in the life-cycle of a
product(Rosen R. et al., 2015)

Autonomy is an entity determines its behavior and ability to

perform the act. Digital Twin's autonomy is that it does not require
human operation and it is self-determined to handle accidents on its
own. Digital Twin's autonomy capability can be represented with
self-X as follows:

1) grasping its own and surrounding conditions: self-tracking,

self-aware, self-compare, self-learning.

2) corresponding system formed at the time of the event:

self-organized, self-configure, self-reconfigure.

3) solve the problem: self-repair, self-maintenance, self-adjust.

4) improve and reduce costs: self-prediction, self-optimize,

self-adapt.

- 39 -
2.3 Autonomy & Intelligence

2.3.1 Autonomy

1. Definition of Autonomy

Autonomy has been of both philosophical and psychological

interest in many years. In psychology, autonomy has been primarily
discussed in relation to child development. Autonomy is discussed as
a subjective construct involving self-control, governing, and free
will(Beer J. M. et al., 2014).

Now the definition of autonomy is not only used to denote

autonomous capabilities of human but also for the machines. Ziemke
considered that the phenomenon of psychological autonomy (and the
underlying variables) is different than the phenomenon of artificial
autonomy that engineers would like to construct in machines and
technology(Beer J. M. et al., 2014). Example, the term used in the
automation, which is based on autonomous functions (e.g., without
human intervention in the implementation of task) to discuss. The
term autonomy in the literature is described with many aspects.
[Table 3] gives various definitions of autonomy.

- 40 -
[Table 3] The definition of autonomy

No. Definitions of Autonomy

1
The extent to which a system can carry out its own
processes and operations without external control (Beer J.
M. & Fisk A. D., 2014).
2
An autonomous agent is a system situated within and a
part of an environment that senses that environment and
acts on it, over time, in pursuit of its own agenda and so
as to effect what it senses in the future (Franklin S. &
Graesser A., 1996).
3
Autonomy: agents operate without the direct intervention
of humans or others, and have some kind of control over
their actions and internal states (Rosen R. et al., 2015).
4
Autonomy: 1. The conditions or quality of autonomy. 2.
The right to self-government or self-government;
self-determination, independence. 3. Autonomous countries,
communities or groups(Gunderson J. P. & Gunderson L. F.,
2004).
5
Autonomy: agents operate without the direct intervention
of humans or others, and have some kind of control over
their actions and internal states (Wooldridge M. & Jennings
N., 1995).

- 41 -
 2. The Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems

ALFUS aims at formulating, through a consensus-based approach, a

logical framework for characterizing the UMS autonomy, covering
issues of levels of autonomy, mission complexity, and environmental
complexity. The Framework is to provide standard definitions,
metrics, and process for the specification, evaluation, and
development of the autonomous capabilities of UMSs. The
Framework is also intended to facilitate communication among the
practitioners(Huang H. et al., 2007).

In reference paper, the Unmanned Systems’ Contextual

Autonomous Capability (CAC) is characterized by the missions that
the system is capable of performing, the environments within which
the missions are performed, and human independence that can be
allowed in the performance of the missions. Each aspect or axis, ie
Environmental Complexity (EC), Mission Complexity (MC), and Human
Independence (HI) is further attributed to a set of metrics to
facilitate CAC specification, analysis, evaluation and measurement of
specific UMSs(Huang H. et al., 2007). The Three Aspects for ALFUS
show in [Fig. 12].

The CAC model promotes the characterization of UMS in terms of

requirements, capabilities, difficulty, complexity, or complexity. The
model also provides a means of characterizing the UMS autonomous

- 42 -
mode of operation. The three-axis can also be used independently
to evaluate MC, EC and HI levels of UMS(Huang H. et al., 2007).
The Three-Axis Model For ALFUS show in [Fig. 13].

[Fig. 12] The Three Aspects for ALFUS(Huang

H. et al., 2007)

[Fig. 13] The Three-Axis Model For ALFUS(Huang

H. et al., 2007)

- 43 -
 3. The Level of Autonomy

In order to development the evaluation framework, it is useful

to identify the level of autonomy (LOA). The DT capability can be
positioned along a linear axis, manually operated at one end, and
fully autonomous at the other end. So this study use the
level-of-autonomy scale, created by the DARPA/U.S. Air Force
(USAF)/Boeing X-45 program team, represents a rather high-level,
broad-brush view of autonomy, with only four levels(Board N. S.,
2005), as a DT LOA evaluation standard. The four levels’ definition
as [Table 4] follow:

- 44 -
[Table 4] The definition of LOA

No. Level Definition

1 Manual
The human operator directs and controls all
Operation
mission functions(Board N. S., 2005).

2 Management
• The system automatically recommends actions
by Consent
for selected functions.
• The prompts the operator at key points for
information or decision(Board N. S., 2005).

3 Management
• When the response time is too short for operator
by Exception
intervention, the system automatically performs
task-related functions.
• The operator is warned functional progress.
• Operators can override or change parameters and
cancel or redirect actions within a defined
time-line.
• Exceptions are brought to the operator’s
attention for decisions(Board N. S., 2005).

4 Fully
• The system automatically executes
Autonomous
mission-related functions when response times
are too short for operator intervention.
• The operator is alerted to function progress
(Board N. S., 2005).

- 45 -
2.3.2 Intelligence

Intelligence has been defined in many different ways. Many

people regard intelligence as

1) the intelligence is the capability for logic, understanding,

self-awareness, learning, emotional knowledge, reasoning,
planning, creativity, and problem solving.

2) the ability to perceive or infer information and apply it as

knowledge to adaptive behavior in the environment or the
environment.

Albus and Meystel have proposed defining intelligence as “the

ability to behave appropriately in an uncertain environment,” where
appropriate behavior will maximize the likelihood of goal
satisfaction(Gunderson J. P., 2004). The intelligence can help DT be
more autonomy.

1. Theory of Multiple Intelligence

Multiple intelligence theory, developed by psychologist Howard

Gardner, is a scientifically supported system of classifying human
abilities. Individuals draw on these intelligences, individually and
corporately, to create products and solve problems that are relevant
to the societies in which they live(Davis K. et al., 2011). The nine

- 46 -
identified intelligences include naturalist intelligence, linguistic
intelligence, visual-spatial intelligence, inter-personal intelligence,
existential intelligence, logical-mathematical intelligence, bodily
kinesthetic intelligence, musical intelligence, intrapersonal intelligence.
See [Fig. 14].

[Fig. 14] Theory of Multiple Intelligence(Gardner, H.,

& Hatch, T., 1989)

1) Naturalist intelligence. An ability to identify and distinguish

among different types of plants, animals, and weather
formations that are found in the natural world(Castelan
Valles A. L., 2012).

- 47 -
2) Linguistic intelligence. An ability to analyze information and
create products involving oral and written language such as
speeches, books, and memos(Castelan Valles A. L., 2012).

3) Visual-spatial intelligence. An ability to recognize and

manipulate large-scale and fine-grained spatial
images(Castelan Valles A. L., 2012).

4) Inter-personal intelligence. to recognize and understand ones

own moods, desires, motivations, and intentions.

5) Existential intelligence. Sensitivity and capacity to tackle

deep questions about human existence.

6) Logical-mathematical intelligence. An ability to develop

equations and proofs, make calculations, and solve abstract
problems(Castelan Valles A. L., 2012).

7) Bodily kinesthetic intelligence. An ability to use one’s own

body to create products or solve problems(Castelan Valles A.
L., 2012).

8) Musical intelligence. It can produce, and remember different

sound patterns have meaning.

9) Intrapersonal intelligence. To recognize and understand other

people’s moods, desires, motivations, and intentions(Castelan
Valles A. L., 2012).

- 48 -
 2. Learning Levels

Learning is the process of acquiring new or modifying existing

knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, or preferences. Recently the
learning ability is not only for the people but also for machines.
The difference between Human learning and machine learning show
in [Table 5]. Human learning begins before birth and continues until
death as a consequence of ongoing interactions between person and
environment. Constant learning can make people more intelligence.
The learning level determines the capability, so it is need to define
the learning level first in order to develop the DT capability
evaluation framework.

[Table 5] Human learning & Machine learning

Human learning Machine learning

The product of experience The product of data training

• Empirical verification • Using the data training to make

• Gain knowledge/intelligence the judging riteria generalization
• Taxonomy • Taxonomy

• Determine the problem and make

Determine the problem and make a
a reasonable decision
reasonable decision
• Identify emerging data
• Artificial intelligence network
The development of the brain
optimization
(Intelligent Network)
• Minimize the error

- 49 -
 There are many definition of learning, but they all share three
characteristics:

1) A “Change” in behavior.

2) The change must be enduring.

3) The change must result from practice or experience.

The study use the Bloom’s taxonomy of learning to definition the

learning levels. The Bloom’s Taxonomy developed by Benjamin Bloom
in the 1950’s, to categorized and ordered thinking skills and
objectives. In the 1990’s, it was revised by a former student of
Bloom, and arrange them in ascending order from low to high.
Wikipedia defined the Bloom’s taxonomy as: a set of three
hierarchical models used to classify educational learning objectives
into levels of complexity and specificity. [Fig. 15] is the Bloom’s
Taxonomy.

- 50 -
 [Fig. 15] The Bloom’s Taxonomy(Bloom, B. S., & Committee of
College and University Examiners, 1964)

The new terms are defined as follow:

Ÿ Remember (Knowledge): Retrieving relevant knowledge from

long-term memory. (Recognizing/Recalling)

Ÿ Understand (Comprehension): Constructing meaning from

oral, written, and graphic messages through interpreting,
exemplifying, classifying, summarizing, inferring, comparing,
and explaining(Forehand M., 2010).

- 51 -
Ÿ Applying (Application): Carrying out or using a procedure
through executing, or implementing(Forehand M., 2010).
(Executing/Implementing)

Ÿ Analyzing (Analysis): Breaking material into constituent parts,

determining how the parts relate to one another and to an
overall structure or purpose through differentiating,
organizing, and attributing(Forehand M., 2010).

Ÿ Evaluate (Evaluation): Making judgments based on criteria

and standards through checking and critiquing(Forehand M.,
2010).

Ÿ Create: Putting element together to form a coherent or

functional whole; reorganizing elements into a new pattern
or structure through generating, planning, or
producing(Forehand M., 2010).

- 52 -
3. The development of Digital Twin’s Autonomy
Model

3.1 Definition of Framework

Merriam-Webster Online give the definition of framework as:

1) a basic conceptional structure.

2) frame of reference.

3) the larger branches of a tree that determine its shape.

In general, the framework is a real or conceptual structure,

designed to extend the building structure useful things as support or
guidance.

Margarent A. Esienhart explained the framework defined as a

“skeletal structure designed to support or enclose something”. As
used metaphorically by researchers to "support or enclose' their
investigation, framework come in various shapes and size; may fit
loosely or tightly; are sometimes made explicit, sometimes
not(Eisenhart M., 1991).

The theoretical framework is a structure that guides research by

- 53 -
relying on a formal theory; that is, the framework is constructed by
using an established, conherent explanation of certain phenomena
and relationships(Eisenhart M., 1991).

Sharon Ravitch and Matthew Riggan define “conceptual

framework” as: not only the relevant theoretical literature, but also
the empirical findings of prior research and the researcher's own
experiential knowledge, beliefs, commitments and values.

And Margarent A. Esienhart defined the conceptual framework as

a skeletal structure of justification, rather than a skeletal structure
of explanation based on formal logic (i.e. formal theory) or
accumulated experience (i.e. practitioner knowledge). A conceptual
framework is an argument including different points of view and
culminating in a series of reasons for adopting some point i.e.,
some ideas or concepts and not others. The adopted ideas or
concepts then serve as guides: to collecting data in a particular
study, and/or to ways in which the data from a particular study will
be analyzed and explained. A conceptual framework is an argument
that the concepts chosen for investigation or interpretation, and any
anticipated relationships among them, will be appropriate and useful,
given the research problem under investigation(Eisenhart M., 1991).

To compare with other framework the conceptual frameworks

facilitate more comprehensive ways of investigating a research
problem.

- 54 -
 Ellington et al. defined “Evaluation in the collection of analysis
and interpretation of information about any aspect of a programme
as part of a recognised process of judging its efficiency and any
other outcomes it may have.”(Crompton P., 1988). In this chapter
the evaluation framework will be described, step-by-step. Supporting
the framework through corresponding theory.

3.2 Develop of Digital Twin’s Autonomy Model (DTAM)

3.2.1 The Basic Architecture of DTAM

The Digital Twin (DT) is meant as the virtual and computerized

counterpart of a physical system that can be used to simulate it for
various purposes, exploiting a real-time synchronization of the sensed
data coming from the field; such a synchronization is possible thanks
to the enabling technologies of Industry 4.0 and, as such, the DT is
deeply linked with it(Negri E. et al., 2017). Autonomy provides the
production system with the ability to respond to unexpected events
in an intelligent and efficient manner without the need for
re-configuration at the supervisory level(Rosen R. et al., 2015). Thus
the level of autonomy capability of Digital Twin(DT) is attracting as
an core technology to lead the smart Industry Society 4.0.

- 55 -
 The overall objectives for DTAM are:

Ÿ Standard terms and definitions for characterizing the

autonomy capability for Digital Twin.

Ÿ Metrics, processes, and tools for facilitating measuring and

evaluating the autonomy if Digital Twins.

To develop Digital Twin's Autonomy Model (DTAM), the concepts

of Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) framework is
adapted.

Huang H. et al. proposed the establishment of the three-axis

conceptual model for the Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems
(ALFUS) framework to strive for technical flexibility in order to
maximize the workshop productivity(Huang H. et al., 2007).

The ALFUS aims at formulating, through a consensus-based

approach, a logical framework for characterizing the UMS autonomy,
covering issues of levels of autonomy, mission complexity, and
environmental complexity. The Framework is to provide standard
definitions, metrics, and process for the specification, evaluation, and
development of the autonomous capabilities of UMSs. The
Framework is also intended to facilitate communication among the
practitioners(Huang H. et al., 2007).

In order to develop DTAM, some concepts need to be modified

rather than directly borrowing the ALFUS framework.

- 56 -
 In other words, the ALFUS framework identifies the autonomy
level of the robot with composed of the three axes representing the
Mission Complexity, Environmental Complexity, and Human
Independence. However, because DT is a complete autonomous
object without any human interference, the axis of Human
independence is not suitable for DTAM. For DT, instead of the level
of Human Independence, the level of intelligence of DT is very
important. Therefore, in this research, the Intelligence Complexity is
substituted instead of human independence axis of ALFUS
framework.

Therefore, the basic principles of DTAM framework proposed in

this study is defined as follows:

Ÿ The DTAM representing the autonomous capability of DT is

represented in three dimensions.

Ÿ The three-dimensional DTAM represents the autonomous

capability level of DT, and consists of Mission Complexity,
Environmental Complexity, and Intelligence Complexity,
respectively.

Ÿ Mission Complexity, Environmental Complexity, and

Intelligence Complexity of DTAM are the factors that
determine the autonomy capability level of DT, and each
factor consists of a precise measure that can determine the
capability level of the DT in that factor.

- 57 -
3.2.2 The Three Aspects of DTAM

DTAM is built with reference to the Huang H and Messina E’s

ALFUS. ALFUS has developed an evaluation framework for
characterizing robots. Features the Unmanned Systems’ Contextual
Autonomous Capability(CAC) is a system capable of performing the
mission, the mission execution environment and perform mission can
allow human independence. Each aspect or axis, i.e. the complexity
of the mission, the complexity of the environment and human
independence due to a further set of measurements to facilitate the
CAC specification, analysis, measurement and evaluation of specific
UMSs.

In this study, DTAM which can evaluate DT autonomy was

developed by referring to ALFUS framework. The ALFUS framework is
a useful measure of evaluating autonomy level of robot and consists
of three dimensions: Mission Complexity, Environmental Complexity,
and Human Independence.

The Mission Complexity refers to the degree of complexity of the

task the robot should perform. The Environmental Complexity
indicates the degree of complexity of the environment in which the
robot should perform its tasks. If the environment is complex, it
means that the robot must understand more complex situations and
also collaborate with more nearby objects.

- 58 -
 The robot can perform tasks alone without human intervention in
performing a simple task in a simple environment. However, if the
environment is complex or if the tasks to be performed are
complex, some human intervention or interference may be required.
Human independence is thus defined as one of the measure of the
autonomy level of a robot.

The structure of the DTAM for evaluating the autonomy level of

DT to be defined in this study is also defined in 3 dimensions like
ALFUS.

Mission Complexity and Environmental Complexity are defined as

dimension elements of DTAM as defined in ALFUS. In other words,
the level of autonomy of DT is defined as a dimension of Mission
Complexity, which indicates to what degree DT can support the
missions of a real world entity that DT is linked to.

Environmental Complexity of DTAM is another dimension that

represents autonomy level of DT. The Environmental Complexity of
DT means the complexity of the environment in which the real
world entity, that DT is linked to, exist. The more complex the
environment of the real world object, the more complicated the
level to be recognized by DT, and also the more nearby objects DT
should collaborate with.

However, DT is similar to robots in terms of Mission Complexity

and Environmental Complexity, but unlike robots, DT is not need

- 59 -
human intervention at all. DT is a software object implemented in
the CPS, which means a fully autonomous entity that does not need
to interact with any human, including the operator of the CPS.
Therefore, DTAM does not need human independence as in ALFUS.
However, it is necessary to introduce a measure to determine the
intellectual level of DT in DTAM. Human beings believe that the
next level of education has higher intellectual levels. The higher
intellectual level of man means the higher autonomy of human.

In this study, the three dimensions of DTAM (see [Fig. 16]) that
can evaluate DT autonomy level is defined as follows.

Ÿ Mission Complexity(MC): The degree of complexity of the

missions that DT has to perform. Or a aspect that indicates
to what extent DT can support the complex task of real
world objects that DT is linked.

Ÿ Environment Complexity(EC): The degree of complexity of

the environment that DT needs to understand. Or a aspect
that indicates the level of DT support for a complex
environment in which real-world objects associated with DT
exist.

Ÿ Intelligence Complexity(IC): The degree of complex

intellectual abilities that DT can perform. Or a aspect of
that indicate to what extent DT can support intellectually
to a real world object that DT is linked with.

- 60 -
 [Fig. 16] The Three Aspects of DTAM

3.2.3 The Three Capabilities of DTAM

Thee dimension or three aspects are defined in DTAM to

represent the autonomy level of DT, including Mission Complexity,
Environmental Complexity, and Intelligence Complexity. Each
dimension represents “The degree of complexity of the missions that
DT has to perform”, “The degree of complexity of the environment
that DT needs to understand”, and “The degree of complex
intellectual abilities that DT can perform”, respectively.

The three capabilities are defined as the respective competencies

that can be used to evaluate the autonomy level of DTs represented
by each dimension, including Mission Complexity, Environmental

- 61 -
Complexity, and Intelligence Complexity. Capability of Mission
Perform(MP) for Mission Complexity dimension, Capability of
Environmental Adaptation for Environmental Complexity dimension,
and Capability of Learning Level(LL) for Intelligence Complexity are
defined to measure DT’s autonomy level.

In this study, the three axis of DTAM (see [Fig. 17]) to determine
the DT autonomy level is defined as follows.

Ÿ Capability of Mission Perform(MP): A measure of the level

of support for DT's Mission Complexity dimension. The
higher the level of Capability of Mission Perform of DT, the
more complex the mission can be performed by DT. The
higher the level of Capability of Mission Perform of DT, the
more the DT can support to the linked the real world
object to perform complex mission.

Ÿ Capability of Environment Adaptation(EA): The higher the

level of Capability of Environmental Adaptation of DT, the
more complex the environment can be managed by DT.
The higher the level of Capability of Environmental
Adaptation of DT, the more the DT can support a real
world object (that is linked with DT) in more complex
environment and support a real world object to collaborate
other objects in complex environment.

Ÿ Capability of Learning Level(LL): The higher the level of

- 62 -
 Capability of Learning Level of DT, the more intellectual
power DT can have. The higher the level of Capability of
Learning Level of DT, the more the DT can support a real
world object (that is linked with DT) intellectually.

[Fig. 17] The Three Capabilities of DTAM

3.2.4 The Capability of Mission Performed and Measure

Mission autonomy is made up of two degrees of

freedom—mission performed and degree of autonomy. “Mission
Performed” captures the number of functional mission capabilities
inherent in any given system or the number of different mission
activities that can be implemented by the system, independent of

- 63 -
whether they are accomplished autonomously or not. “Degree of
autonomy” captures the amount of autonomy used to implement
any specific mission activity or functional capability(Board N. S.,
2005).

System complexity results, in part, from the selection of mission

autonomy requirements. A mission is a set of grades of a series of
mission activities that complete the missions in order. High level of
activity is broken down into subordinate activities, which itself is
further broken down into the original activity. Each mission activity
can be accomplished by how intelligence the DT is. In simple terms,
the level of intelligence will affect the degree of mission completion.

The different uses of DT summarized by Negri E. et al. as follows:

1) To support health analyses for an improved maintenance

activity and planning.

① Monitor anomalies, fatigue, crack paths in the physical

twin;

② Monitor geometric and plastic deformation on the

material of the physical twin;

③ Model reliability of the physical system.

2) To digitally mirroring the life of the physical entity.

① To study the long term behaviour of the system and

predict its performances by keeping into account the

- 64 -
 different synergistic effects of environmental conditions;

② To provide information continuity along the different

phases of the life-cycle;

③ For the Virtual Commissioning of the system;

④ To manage the life-cycle of the Internet of Things

device.

3) To support decision making through engineering and

statistical analyses.

① Optimization of system behaviour during design phase;

② Optimization of product life-cycle, knowing the past

and present states, it is possible to predict and
optimize the future performances(Negri E. et al., 2017)

The mission performed depending on:

Ÿ mission time constraint

Ÿ authority hierarchy, for data access, plan execution, etc.

Ÿ precision constraints and repeatability, in surveillance,

evaluation, planing, manipulation

Ÿ sensor data

Ÿ knowledge dependence-types and amounts of information

required correlate to mission perform and many more.

- 65 -
 How intelligence the DT is can also affect mission planning and
execution, thus affecting mission performed. Furthermore,
environment adaptation is also a critical demand to consider when
defining autonomy.

3.2.5 The Environment Adaptation and measure

Before this it can be sure that functioning in a difficult

environment will certainly influence the DT capability. A Digital
Twin’s capability to sense, plan, and act with its environment is
what determines autonomy(Beer J. M. et al., 2014). The DT
application realized so far cover mainly the three application areas
space, industrial production and logistics and environment(Schluse M.
et al., 2016).

Localization of Forest Machines: In this application, the rigid body

representation of a digital twin of a forest harvester operating in a
close-to-reality forest environment has been enhanced by laser
scanners and stereo cameras to develop an intelligent sensor
measuring the surrounding forest for localization and forest inventory
purposes.

On-Orbit Servicing: illustrates the digital twins involved in on-orbit

servicing. The entire servicing process including rendezvous and
docking as well as robotic manipulation can be simulated on the

- 66 -
system level by integrating orbital mechanics, rigid-body, sensor and
actuator dynamics as well as satellite and robot control algorithms
etc. into the models of the digital twins(Schluse M. et al., 2016).

These two examples show the DT applied to different

environments. The requirements for DT capabilities in different
environments are not the same, the adaptation of the environment
will affect the performed of the mission.

The mission performed depending on: Electromagnetic interference,

affecting communication, control, and sensors, dynamic nature, object
size, type, density, and intent; including natural or man made and
so on etc.

3.2.6 The learning levels and measure

For robots, higher robot autonomy requires less interaction. DT

intelligence capability influence the autonomy, higher DT intelligence
representing it with a high degree of autonomy. And the learning
levels depends on the level of learning. The study is use the
Bloom’s taxonomy refine the definition of intelligence as follow, see
[Table 6].

- 67 -
[Table 6, Part 1 of 3] The Learning Levels

No. Level Definition

1 Remember • Retrieving knowledge from long term
memory(Anderson L. W. et al., 2001, p.
67). It includes recognizing (such as
identifying a piece of information that
corresponds to knowledge in long-term
memory) and recalling (such as finding
relevant knowledge in long-term memory)
• Recall data or information or specific items,
remember definition of some terms(Yahya
A. A. et al., 2011)
2 Understand • Constructing meaning from instructional
messages(Anderson L. W. et al., 2001, p.
67).
• Recall but do a little more (e.g. paraphrase,
define and discuss to some extend),
understand the meaning, translation,
interpolation, and interpretation of
instructions and problems(Yahya A. A. et
al., 2011).
3 Apply • Carrying out a procedure in a given
situation(Anderson L. W. et al., 2001, p.
67). It includes executing (such as carrying
out a procedure in a familiar task) and
implementing (such as carrying out a
procedure in an unfamiliar task)
• Do all of the above, but can take
information of an abstract nature and use
in a new situation or unprompted use of
an abstraction(Yahya A. A. et al., 2011).

- 68 -
[Table 6, Part 2 of 3] The Learning Levels

No. Level Definition

4 Analyze • Breaking material into constituent parts and
determining how the parts relate to one
another and to an overall structure or
purpose(Anderson L. W. et al., 2001, p. 68).
It includes differentiating (such as
distinguishing important from unimportant
parts), organizing (such as determining how
parts fit or function within a whole
structure), and attributing (such as
determining the point of view underlying
presented material)
• Decompose communication into its
components and reveal the relationship
between them(Yahya A. A. et al., 2011).
5 Evaluate • Making judgments based on criteria and
standards(Anderson L. W. et al., 2001, p.
68). It includes checking (such as
determining the consistency or effectiveness
of a procedure or product) and critiquing
(such as judging the appropriateness of a
procedure or product).
• Determine the value of the material or method.
Make judgments about the value of ideas or
materials(Yahya A. A. et al., 2011).

- 69 -
 [Table 6, Part 3 of 3] The Learning Levels

No. Level Definition

6 Create
• Putting elements together to form a coherent
or functional whole(Anderson L. W. et al.,
2001, p. 68). It includes generating (such as
generating alternative hypotheses), planning
(such as devising a plan for accomplishing
some task), and producing (such as
inventing a product).

By establishing the terms and metrics the DT can be analyzed,

compared, and assessed. Suppose to rate the DT's mission perform
as 5, the environmental complexity as 3, and the learning level as
4, the DT's capabilities can be evaluated.

It can determine that higher capability have higher autonomy, how

intelligence the DT is determined the DT’s level of autonomy. DT
with a high level of autonomy can: grasping its own and
surrounding conditions, corresponding system formed at the time of

the event, solve the problem, and improve and reduce costs.

- 70 -
4. Conclusion

Recently, the Industry Revolution 4.0 has become a global issue.

The ICT technologies of the Industry Revolution 4.0 are expected to
provide a new paradigm to the Industry Society 4.0 and Smart
Factories through the provision of a Prognostic Before Service(PBS)
that can make our society healthier and safer. This study is based
on the Industry Revolution 4.0 background, introduced the related
concepts of the Industry 4.0 (smart society, smart city, smart
Industry, and core technologies), and suggested a evaluation
framework for Digital Twin.

The 48% of organizations that they have adopted or plan to use

DT in 2018. In addition, by 2022 the number of corporate
organizations involved in the use of DT will increased greatly. DT
can provide a digital model for physical devices so that these
devices can be quickly calibrated and continuously upgraded to
maintain good condition, enhance functionality, enhance reliability
and adaptability, and create more value.

A critical construct related to DT is autonomy. The level of

autonomy capability of Digital Twin(DT) is attracting as an core
technology to lead the smart Industry Society 4.0. So the framework
suggested in this study is to identify potential variables related to
autonomy, evaluation the DT’s capability. In order to development

- 71 -
the evaluation framework, the level of autonomy (LOA) have been
identify.

This study cites the Huang H. et al.'s ALFUS framework to identify

the autonomy level of the robot with composed of the three axes
representing the Mission Complexity, Environmental Complexity, and
Human Independence. However, DT is a complete autonomous object
without any human interference, the axis of Human independence is
not suitable for DTAM. For DT, instead of the level of Human
Independence, the level of intelligence of DT is very important.
Therefore, in this research, the Intelligence Complexity is substituted
instead of human independence axis of ALFUS framework.

The standard terms and definitions for characterizing the

autonomous capability for DT was given. The three aspects for
DTAM include the capability of Mission Perform(MP), the capability
of Environment Adaptation, and capability of Learning Levels (LL).
Each of the aspects can define as a set of metrics, can help
researchers determine the appropriate level of DT autonomy for any
given mission in different environments, and the potential impact on
intelligence.

With the definition the DT can be analyzed, compared, and

assessed. Suppose to rate the DT's mission perform as 5, the
environmental adaptation as 3, and the learning levels as 4, that the
DT's capabilities level can be drawn. It shows that higher capability

- 72 -
have higher autonomy, how intelligence the DT is determined the
DT’s level of autonomy. DT with a high level of autonomy can:
grasping its own and surrounding conditions, corresponding system
formed at the time of the event, solve the problem, and improve
and reduce costs. In the future, the validation of DTAM's capability
level will be necessary through empirical studies.

But the DTAM still just an initial framework. Many variables

included in the framework of further research is needed to better
understand the autonomy of DT. At present, DT is still in the
development stage, after which the supplement of related concepts
will make the model more perfect.

- 73 -
 Reference

Airbus Industries, Innovation.

http://www.airbus.com/innovation/proven-concepts/in-design/iron-bird/.
Retrieved 2015-02-22

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A.,

Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., ... & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A
taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of
Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, abridged edition.
White Plains, NY: Longman.

Artz, AF, & Armour-Thomas, E.(1992). Development of a

cognitive-metacognitive framework for protocol analysis of
mathematical problem solving in small groups. Cognition and
Instruction, 2001, 9(2): 137-175.

Angelidou M. Smart city policies: A spatial approach[J]. Cities, 2014,

41: S3-S11.

Arc O U N. SMART ENVIRONMENTS–EVOLVING TRENDS IN

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND HUMAN CAPACITY BUILDING IN
THIRD WORLD NATIONS[J]. 2014.

Baheti R, Gill H. Cyber-physical systems[J]. The impact of control

technology, 2011, 12(1): 161-166.

Beer J M, Fisk A D, Rogers W A. Toward a framework for levels of

- 74 -
 robot autonomy in human-robot interaction[J]. Journal of
Human-Robot Interaction, 2014, 3(2): 74.

Bloom, B. S., & Committee of College and University Examiners.

(1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives (Vol. 2). New York:
Longmans, Green.

Board N S, National Research Council. Autonomous vehicles in

support of naval operations[M]. National Academies Press, 2005.

Burmeister C, Lüttgens D, Piller F T. Business Model Innovation for

Industrie 4.0: Why the Industrial Internet Mandates a New
Perspective on Innovation[J]. vol. 0, 2015: 1-31.

Caragliu A, Del Bo C, Nijkamp P. Smart cities in Europe[J]. Journal of

urban technology, 2011, 18(2): 65-82.

Castelan Valles A L. Creativity with Images: A workshop for Learning

and Practicing Ideational Thinking for Visual Thinkers[J]. 2012.

Churches A. Bloom's taxonomy blooms digitally[J]. Tech & Learning,

2008, 1: 1-6.

Crompton P. 12: Evaluation: A practical guide to methods[J]. Learning

Technology Dissemination Initiative, 1996, 66.

Dameri R P. Searching for smart city definition: a comprehensive

proposal[J]. International Journal of Computers & Technology,
2013, 11(5): 2544-2551.

Davis K, Christodoulou J, Seider S, et al. The theory of multiple

- 75 -
 intelligences[J]. 2011.

Eisenhart M. Conceptual Frameworks for Research Circa 1991: Ideas

from a Cultural Anthropologist; Implications for Mathematics
Education Rese[J]. 1991.

Forehand M. Bloom’s taxonomy[J]. Emerging perspectives on learning,

teaching, and technology, 2010, 41: 47.

Franklin S, Graesser A. Is it an Agent, or just a Program?: A

Taxonomy for Autonomous Agents[C]//International Workshop on
Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages. Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg, 1996: 21-35.

Gardner H. The theory of multiple intelligences[J]. Annals of Dyslexia,

1987, 37(1): 19-35.

Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1989). Educational implications of the

theory of multiple intelligences. Educational researcher, 18(8),
4-10.

Glaessgen E, Stargel D. The digital twin paradigm for future NASA

and US Air Force vehicles[C]//53rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC
Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference 20th
AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference 14th AIAA. 2012:
1818.

Grieves M. Digital twin: Manufacturing excellence through virtual

factory replication[J]. White paper, 2014.

Gunderson J P, Gunderson L F. Intelligence (is not equal to)

- 76 -
 Autonomy (is not equal to) Capability[R]. GAMMA TWO DENVER
CO, 2004.

Huang H, Messina E, Albus J. AUTONOMY LEVELS FOR UNMANNED

SYSTEMS (ALFUS) Volume II: Framework Models[J]. vol. II, no,
2007.

Industry S. Dutch Industry Fit for the Future[J]. 2014.

Kagermann H, Helbig J, Hellinger A, et al. Recommendations for

implementing the strategic initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0: Securing the
future of German manufacturing industry; final report of the
Industrie 4.0 Working Group[M]. Forschungsunion, 2013.

KILIÇ T. 4.0 HEALTH APPLICATIONS IN TURKEY[J]. Annals of the

Constantin Brancusi University of Targu Jiu-Letters & Social
Sciences Series, 2017 (2).

Klaus S. The fourth industrial revolution[C]//World Economic Forum.

2016.

Korpela K, Hallikas J, Dahlberg T. Digital supply chain transformation

toward blockchain integration[C]//proceedings of the 50th Hawaii
international conference on system sciences. 2017.

Lee J, Bagheri B, Kao H A. A cyber-physical systems architecture for

industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems[J]. Manufacturing
Letters, 2015, 3: 18-23.

Levy C, Wong D. Towards a smart society[J]. The Big Innovation

Centre, London, 2014.

- 77 -
Lom M, Pribyl O, Svitek M. Industry 4.0 as a part of smart
cities[C]//Smart Cities Symposium Prague (SCSP), 2016. IEEE,
2016: 1-6.

Lydon B. Industry 4.0: Intelligent and flexible production[J]. InTech: A

publication of the International Society of Automation, 2016:
12-17.

McDougall W. World chaos: The responsibility of science[M].

Routledge, 2014.

Montanus M L. Business Models for Industry 4.0: Developing a

Framework to Determine and Assess Impacts on Business Models
in the Dutch Oil and Gas Industry[J]. 2016.

Negri E, Fumagalli L, Macchi M. A Review of the Roles of Digital

Twin in CPS-based Production Systems[J]. Procedia Manufacturing,
2017, 11: 939-948.

Parrott A, Warshaw L. Industry 4.0 and the digital twin[J]. 2017.

Rosen R, von Wichert G, Lo G, et al. About the importance of

autonomy and digital twins for the future of manufacturing[J].
IFAC-PapersOnLine, 2015, 48(3): 567-572.

Rüßmann M, Lorenz M, Gerbert P, et al. Industry 4.0: The future of

productivity and growth in manufacturing industries[J]. Boston
Consulting Group, 2015, 9.

Schluse M, Rossmann J. From simulation to experimentable digital

twins: simulation-based development and operation of complex

- 78 -
 technical systems[C]//Systems Engineering (ISSE), 2016 IEEE
International Symposium on. IEEE, 2016: 1-6.

Schwab K. The fourth industrial revolution[M]. Crown Business, 2017.

Sniderman B, Mahto M, Cotteleer M J. Industry 4.0 and

manufacturing ecosystems: Exploring the world of connected
enterprises[J]. Deloitte Consulting, 2016.

Tao F, Cheng J, Qi Q, et al. Digital twin-driven product design,

manufacturing and service with big data[J]. The International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2017: 1-14.

Veza I, Mladineo M, Gjeldum N. Managing innovative production

network of smart factories[J]. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 2015, 48(3):
555-560.

Wang S, Wan J, Li D, et al. Implementing smart factory of industrie

4.0: an outlook[J]. International Journal of Distributed Sensor
Networks, 2016, 12(1): 3159805.

Wooldridge M, Jennings N. Intelligent Agents: Theory and Practice

(1997)[J]. Capturado em, 2006, 18(03).

Yahya A A, Osama A. Automatic classification of questions into

Bloom's cognitive levels using support vector machines[J]. 2011.

- 79 -
 Abstarct

The Development of Digital Twin’s Capability Evaluation

Framework
Liang Yuxin

Department of Management Information System

Graduate School of Dongguk University

Recently, the Industry Revolution 4.0 has become a global issue. The ICT
technologies of the Industry Revolution 4.0 are expected to provide a new
paradigm to the Industry Society 4.0 and Smart Factories through the
provision of a Prognostic Before Service(PBS) that can make our society
healthier and safer. Especially, the level of autonomy capability of Digital
Twin(DT) is attracting as an core technology to lead the smart Industry
Society 4.0.

In this study, the autonomy capability of DT is defined and the

framework, Digital Twin's Autonomy Model(DTAM), to evaluate the
autonomy capacity of DT is developed nd presented. DTAM was developed
with three axes consisting of the capability of mission perform, the
capability of environmental adaptation, and capability of learning, to define
the level of the three areas of autonomy of DT, and the level of each
axis was defined.

In the future, the validation of DTAM's capability level will be necessary

through empirical studies.

Key Words: Industry 4.0, CPS, Digital Twin, Level of autonomy,

Intelligence, Evaluation Framework

- 80 -