220 Yoshinobu Kitamura and Riichiro Mizoguchi
some context-free sense,” though he suggests this function as a (possible) psychological function
(1975: 762).
- The term functional here is intended to represent neither a mathematical dependence relation nor attributes
of functions, but function-oriented properties. The functional property is used as an antonym of the mechanical
or structural property.
References
Boorse, C. (2002). A rebuttal on functions. In: Functions: New Essays in the Philosophy of
Psychology and Biology (Ariew, A., Cummins. R., and Perlman, M., eds.), 63–112. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Chandrasekaran, B., Goel, A. K., and Iwasaki, Y. (1993). Functional representation as design rationale. Computer,
26: 48–56.
Chandrasekaran, B., and Josephson, J. R. (2000). Function in device representation. Engineering with Computers,
16: 162–177.
Chittaro, L., Guida, G., Tasso, C., and Toppano, E. (1993). Functional and teleological knowledge in the multi-
modeling approach for reasoning about physical systems: A case study in diagnosis. IEEE Transactions on
Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 23: 1718–1751.
Cummins, R. (1975). Functional analysis. The Journal of Philosophy, 72: 741–765.
de Kleer, J., and Brown, J. S. (1984). A qualitative physics based on confl uences. Artifi cial Intelligence, 24:
7–83.
Dipert, R. R. (2006). The metaphysical grammar of “function” and the unifi cation of artifactual and natural
function. Presented at the 15th Altenberg Workshop in Theoretical Biology: Comparative Philosophy of Technical
Artifacts and Biological Organisms. Altenberg, Austria: Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition
Research, September 21–24, 2006.
EPSRC (Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council). (2005). http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/ResearchFund-
ing/Programmes/Materials/ResearchPortfolio/EngineeringFunctionalMaterials.htm
Forbus, K. D. (1984). Qualitative process theory. Artifi cial Intelligence, 24: 85–168.
Garbacz, P. (2005). Towards a standard taxonomy of artifact functions. In: Proceedings of the First Workshop
FOMI 2005—Formal Ontologies Meet Industry. CD-ROM.
Hirtz, J., Stone, R. B., McAdams, D. A., Szykman, S., and Wood, K. L. (2002). A functional basis for engineering
design: Reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Research in Engineering Design, 13: 65–82.
Hubka, V., and Eder, W. E. (1988). Theory of Technical Systems. Berlin: Springer.
Hubka, V., and Eder, W. E. (2001). Functions revisited. Proceedings of ICED 01. CD-ROM.
Johansson, I. (2006). The constituent function analysis of functions. In: Science—A Challenge to Philosophy?
(Koskinen, H. J., Pihlstrom, S., and Vilkko, R., eds.), 35–45, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Johansson, I., Smith, B., Munn, K., Tsikolia, N., Elsner, K., Ernst, D., and Siebert, D. (2005). Functional anatomy:
A taxonomic proposal. Acta Biotheoretica, 53: 153–166.
Kitamura, Y., Koji, Y., and Mizoguchi, R. (2006). An ontological model of device function: Industrial deployment
and lessons learned. Applied Ontology, 1: 237–262.
Kitamura, Y., Sano, T., Namba, K., and Mizoguchi, R. (2002). A functional concept ontology and its
application to automatic identifi cation of functional structures. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 16:
145–163.
Kitamura, Y., Takafuji, S., and Mizoguchi, R. (2007). Towards a reference ontology for functional knowledge
interoperability. In Proceedings of ASME IDETC/CIE 2007, DETC2006-35373.
Kitamura, Y., Washio, N., Koji, Y., and Mizoguchi, R. (2006). An ontology-based annotation framework for
representing the functionality of engineering devices. In: Proceedings of ASME IDETC/CIE 2006,
DETC2006-99131.