Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
DOI 10.1007/s10111-015-0354-y
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Experts’ knowledge renewal and maintenance actions
effectiveness in high-mix low-volume industries, using Bayesian
approach
Anis Ben Said1,2 • Muhammad Kashif Shahzad2
Stéphane Hubac1 • Michel Tollenaere2
Received: 20 July 2015 / Accepted: 5 October 2015 / Published online: 19 October 2015
Ó Springer-Verlag London 2015
Abstract Increasing demand diversity has resulted in
high-mix low-volume production where success depends on
the ability to quickly design and develop new products. This
requires sustainable production capacities and efficient
equipment utilization which are ensured through appropriate
maintenance strategies. Presently, these are derived from
experts’ knowledge, capitalized in FMECA (failure mode,
effect and criticality analysis), and effective maintenance
procedures. Abu-Samah et al. (Failure prognosis methodol-
ogy for improved proactive maintenance using bayesian
approach. In: 9th IFAC symposium on fault detection,
supervision and safety for technical processes. Paris, France,
2015) found increasing unscheduled breakdowns, failure
durations and number of repair actions in each failure as the
key challenges while sustaining production capacities in
complex production environment. Obviously, maintenance
based on the historical knowledge is not always effective to
cope up with an evolving nature of equipment failure
behaviors. Therefore, this paper presents an operational
& Muhammad Kashif Shahzad
muhammadkashif.shahzad@g-scop.inpg.fr
Anis Ben Said
anis.bensaid@st.com
Eric Zamai
eric.zamai@grenoble-inp.fr
Stéphane Hubac
stephane.hubac@st.com
Michel Tollenaere
michel.tollenaere@grenoble-inp.fr
1
STMicroelectronics, 850 Rue Jean Monnet, 38926 Crolles,
France
2
G-SCOP, Université de Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble,
France
• Eric Zamai2 •
methodology based on Bayesian approach and an extended
FMECA method to support experts’ knowledge renewal and
maintenance actions effectiveness. In the proposed
methodology, FMECA files capitalize and model experts’
existing knowledge as an operational Bayesian network (O-
BN) to provide real-time feedback on poorly executed
maintenance actions. The accuracy of O-BN is monitored
through drifts in maintenance performance measurement
(MPM) indicators that result in learning an unsupervised
Bayesian network (U-BN) to discover new causal relations
from historical data. The structural difference between
O-BN and U-BN highlights potential new knowledge which
is validated by experts prior to updating existing FMECA
and associated maintenance procedures. The proposed
methodology is evaluated in a well-reputed high-mix low-
volume semiconductor production line to demonstrate its
ability to dynamically renew experts’ knowledge and
improve maintenance actions effectiveness.
Keywords Maintenance optimization  Dynamic
knowledge management  Bayesian network  FMECA 
High-mix low-volume production
1 Introduction
Production lines, like semiconductor industry (SI), are
presently challenged by short product life cycles that lead
to the everlasting development of new products and tech-
nologies. In addition, increasing demand diversity and
volume that often result in high-mix low-volume produc-
tion turn manufacturing into a highly complex production
environment. Success in such a competitive environment
requires not only sustainable capacities but also their effi-
cient utilization rate which are ensured through appropriate
123
194
maintenance strategies. The product mix fluctuations
resulting from high-mix low-volume production and short
product life cycles are found to have strongest impact on
overall equipment efficiency (OEE) due to unstable cor-
rective and preventive maintenance actions. This leads to
unstable production capacities. Abu-Samah et al. (2014)
have found drifting equipment failure behaviors as an
evidence of product mix fluctuations that are directly pro-
portional to failure occurrences and durations. This signi-
fies that knowledge about the failure behaviors, which is
capitalized in FMECA and/or maintenance procedures, is
not well understood. It also signifies that existing mainte-
nance procedures, used for repairs and derived from
experts’ knowledge, have become ineffective to repair
unscheduled equipment breakdowns.
There exist multiple systems (Fig. 1) in the production
line to store and share experts’ knowledge, such as
advanced documentation and control system (ADCS), e.g.,
maintenance procedures, advanced process control (APC),
recipe management systems (RMS), e.g., automatic recipe
design protocols on some advanced equipment. These are
based on the experts’ knowledge mainly stored in FMECA
files that are not dynamically updated at an appropriate
frequency to cope with the emerging of OEE challenges for
controlling equipment behavior, in a highly competitive
and complex manufacturing context.
Figure 1 provides a global view of the characteristics
and challenges versus equipment constraints and experts’
knowledge across the production line. At present, the
equipment breakdowns and maintenance strategy opti-
mization issues are addressed with classical approaches
such as reliability-centered maintenance (RCM) and con-
dition-based maintenance (CBM). Yssaad et al. (2014)
Fig. 1 Characteristics and challenges versus equipment constraints and expert knowledge
123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
propose to use RCM methodology based on FMECA
approach to develop a cost-effective maintenance program
for electric power distribution system. It is also used by
Bertling et al. (2005) to provide quantitative relationship
between preventive maintenance (PM) of assets and the
total maintenance cost. Similarly, APC is associated with
capitalized knowledge and risk-based methodologies to
implement process and equipment control strategies. Both
of these domains require experts’ knowledge capitalization
to handle the equipment failures, maintenance policies
optimization and finding links between causes and effects
to define an appropriate control plan. Ison and Spanos
(1996) and Moore et al. (2006) show the use of APC
techniques as fault detection and classification (FDC) to
characterize and control variability on semiconductor
manufacturing equipment. In this context, Mili et al. (2009)
have proposed an enhanced FMECA protocol to dynami-
cally manage a risk-based maintenance actions plan
(RBAP) linked to the equipment failure causes and effects.
To measure maintenance policies efficiency and support
analysis of equipment-related unstable production capaci-
ties, many studies have proposed maintenance performance
measurement (MPM) indicators. Parida and Kumar (2006)
present a brief review of existing MPM. Crocker (1999)
considers the maintenance effectiveness along three axes:
inspection effectiveness, repair effectiveness and mainte-
nance-induced failures. It can be noticed here that
approaches like RCM, CBM and APC are strictly based on
experts’ qualitative judgments. However, to deal with
drifting equipment behaviors in a dynamic manufacturing
environment, such capitalized knowledge should be upda-
ted dynamically from historical data as highlighted by
Redmill (2002), Hubac and Zamai (2013).
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
In high-mix low-volume production context where equip-
ment behavior is evolving, the existing approaches suppose
that corrective and preventive maintenance knowledge is
properly capitalized and renewed at an appropriate frequency
through experts’ intervention. The failure misdiagnosis and
increasing number of failure occurrences and durations (Abu-
Samah et al. 2014) confirm that we do not only need to
dynamically update the experts’ knowledge but also need to
improve the effectiveness of maintenance actions executed by
technicians. The frequency to update experts’ knowledge can
be triggered based on the drifts of MPM indicators. The causes
associated with equipment failures drifts may be related not
only to maintenance procedures and ineffectiveness of exist-
ing diagnosis protocols, but also to other causes like process
types, equipment recipes designs, products and technologies
mix fluctuation in production.
In this paper, we present an operational methodology
based on Bayesian approach and an extended FMECA
method to support experts’ knowledge renewal and main-
tenance actions effectiveness. In the proposed methodol-
ogy, we capitalize and model experts’ existing knowledge
from FMECA files as an operational Bayesian network (O-
BN) to provide real-time feedback on poorly executed
maintenance actions. The accuracy of O-BN is monitored
through drift in MPM indicators that results in learning an
unsupervised Bayesian network (U-BN) to discover new
causal relations from historical data. The structural differ-
ence between O-BN and U-BN highlights potential new
knowledge which is validated by experts prior to modifying
existing FMECA and associated maintenance procedures.
The proposed methodology is evaluated in a well-reputed
high-mix low-volume semiconductor production line to
demonstrate its ability to dynamically renew experts’
knowledge and improve maintenance actions effectiveness.
This paper is divided in three sections. The literature
review, in Sect. 2, addresses the topics linked to mainte-
nance strategies optimization, knowledge management,
maintenance actions effectiveness and human factors and is
concluded by a literature review synthesis. Then, Sect. 3
describes the proposed operational methodology to over-
come the issues concerning dynamic renewal of experts’
knowledge and maintenance actions effectiveness. Then,
the methodology is evaluated step by step using data col-
lected from a well-reputed high-mix low-volume semi-
conductor production line. In Sect. 4, the paper concludes
with perspectives and conclusions.
2 Literature review
The literature review has been performed across (1) anal-
ysis of existing approaches to handle maintenance strate-
gies optimization, (2) associated knowledge management
195
approaches and (3) how maintenance performance evalu-
ation is taken into consideration while executing effec-
tiveness and human factor impacts.
2.1 Maintenance strategies optimization
In a high-mix low-volume production environment like SI,
maintenance is a key contributor to improve and sustain
production capacities. There are mainly three well-known
and adapted maintenance strategies as corrective (run to
failure), preventive (time and usage based) and predictive
maintenance (Mili et al. 2009). The corrective maintenance
(CM) deals with unpredictable failures that destabilize the
equipment performance and availability, and consequently
OEE. In order to reduce unscheduled breakdown occur-
rences and durations, preventive maintenance is introduced
to avoid known causes and failures as the source of pro-
duction capacity variations. At present, the industry has
relied on systematic preventive maintenance (PM) based on
historical knowledge and calendar to optimize production
capacities while ensuring product quality. The OEE and
maintenance policies are supported at field level by the well-
known total preventive maintenance (TPM) philosophy that
integrates and shares the ownership of maintenance tasks and
responsibilities at all levels of the organizations (McKone
et al. 1999; Lin et al. 2015). However, the main drawbacks of
PM are over- and under-engineering that lead to increased
costs and/or reduced production capacities. Consequently,
condition-based maintenance (CBM) is introduced as an
alternative strategy where maintenance actions are triggered
according to equipment condition monitoring and/or poten-
tial failure occurrence anticipation, also known as predictive
CBM. The non-predictive CBM consists of controlling a set
of significant parameters to monitor equipment health with
defined thresholds (Susto et al. 2012; Krishnamurthy et al.
2005). Besides this, predictive CBM concept is based on
real-time monitoring of the equipment health indexes (EHI)
drift detection for failure predictions, and if an accurate
cause diagnosis probability (CDP) is available, execute pre-
failure interventions. Recently, prediction of failures has
been enabled by the availability of artificial intelligent
techniques and sufficient recorded data, also known as pre-
dictive maintenance (PdM). Few prominent PdM approa-
ches are classification methods (Baly and Hajj 2012),
prediction approaches (Susto et al. 2011; Schirru et al. 2010)
and regression methods (Hsieh et al. 2013; Susto et al. 2012).
The CBM and PdM are advanced maintenance strategies,
which require known and stable variability distributions
(otherwise statistical models are unstable) of equipment
failures and causes; however, none of these approaches
consider model updating when the production equipment
behavior is subject to high-mix low-volume drifting
environment.
123
196
The CBM and PdM are addressed with the classical
approaches such as APC for detection and RCM for
knowledge capitalization with an objective to share and
reuse experts’ knowledge to optimize CM and PM actions
efficiency and duration, also known as effectiveness. As
highlighted above, RCM is the maintenance strategy
mainly based on FMECA to prioritize maintenance activ-
ities as well as to capitalize experts’ knowledge for
equipment reliability. This keeps an appropriate balance
between CM and PM (Bertling et al. 2005; Yssaad et al.
2014). The APC approach uses fault detection and classi-
fication (FDC) methods to deal with detection challenges
using complex algorithms (e.g., He and Wang 2010).
Verdier and Ferreira (2011) use K-nearest neighbor (KNN)
approach to improve detection extracted from equipment
sensor signals. The Bayesian network (BN)-based algo-
rithms have emerged as a prominent approach for equip-
ment failures diagnosis considering its capability to
represent the causal dependency between variables with
visual graphs and to combine multisource historical data
and experts’ knowledge (Bouaziz et al. 2013). Weber and
Jouffe (2006) used BN for dynamic condition monitoring
and failure diagnosis to support CBM strategy in complex
industries (e.g., SI and aircraft). These studies focus their
research strictly on the equipment-related causes of fail-
ures, and none of them take into account non-equipment
failure sources such as product, process, recipe design
associated with products and technology mix and/or
maintenance procedures ineffectiveness.
We conclude that existing maintenance strategy opti-
mization approaches are based on the hypothesis that
variability distributions of equipment failures and causes
are stable (otherwise statistical models are not reliable),
and none of these approaches consider model updating
when production equipment behavior is subject to high-
mix low-volume environment. So it becomes crucial to
address another aspect of drifting behaviors: How to update
the knowledge at the convenient frequency, for example in
FMECA and maintenance procedures and statistical
models?
2.2 Knowledge management
Industry has historically based its competitiveness strategy
on time to market, then on time to volume and finally on
time to quality. Nowadays, in a high-mix low-volume
production environment, stressed by product and technol-
ogy obsolescence speed, knowledge management is rec-
ognized as a key issue to sustain competitiveness and
innovation. The organizations need to turn from informa-
tion-based to knowledge-based organizations which require
learning loops while integrating technical systems and
human actors. The maintenance strategies optimization and
123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
variability control in competitive high-mix low-volume
environment also require an effective knowledge manage-
ment (KM) system to maintain up-to-date operating pro-
cedures. The KM subject is often addressed in the literature
(e.g., Teece 2000). Mustapha et al. (2015) present an
overview of knowledge management strategies and their
respective performance in industrial context and Meihami
and Meihami (2014) highlight the impact of KM on
learning, innovation and organizational performance
enhancement. The successful use of FMECA for experts’
knowledge capitalization to prevent failures is demon-
strated by Luo and lee (2015), whereas KM strategy is also
used by Medina-Oliva et al. (2015) for dependability
investigation of different concepts in industrial systems
through semantic rules that are used to build a probabilistic
relational model (PRM), to assess maintenance strategies.
Similarly, it can be found that reliability modeling methods
(Dai et al. 2015) use capitalized knowledge to build an
analytic network of a process including different process
components dependencies.
In above examples, the proposed KM models suppose a
static approach in terms of causal structure, as well as
stable dependencies between functional components of the
described system and/or processes, or do not take into
account rapid drifts in the production environment and so
the associated knowledge evolution. It may have a strong
impact on maintenance actions effectiveness and human
factors like the relationship between people and technolo-
gies, tools, environments and systems (Rasmussen 2000).
2.3 Maintenance actions effectiveness and human
factors
Besides correct formulation of maintenance procedures
from experts’ static knowledge, their proper execution is
also crucial to achieve maintenance strategy optimization.
Parida and Kumar (2006) present a brief review of existing
maintenance performance measurement (MPM) indicators
to evaluate the maintenance actions execution level. The
authors have also introduced the concept of total mainte-
nance effectiveness, integrating both internal and external
effectiveness. They further propose the integration of
hierarchical levels and multi-criteria MPM indicators. On
the other hand, Crocker (1999) considers maintenance
effectiveness along three dimensions as inspection effec-
tiveness, repair effectiveness and maintenance-induced
failures. These studies present a set of industrial mainte-
nance performance-related indicators without taking into
account direct impact of fulfillment effectiveness of
maintenance functions during action executions. Muchiri
et al. (2011) demonstrated that MPM indicators should not
be defined without taking into account the interaction
between maintenance and other functions like production.
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
Moreover, these studies do not take into account the impact
of human factor and evolution of product mix as cause of
variability in a dynamic industrial context.
The human factor is a key contributor in the effective-
ness of maintenance actions. Bruseberg (2008) clarifies that
human factor integration (HFI) can create value by ensur-
ing safe, effective and efficient system performance. The
human factor topic is particularly studied in the aviation
maintenance domain. Masson and Koning (2001) focus
their work on the impact of human error and present an
overview of human error management concept to fulfill
joint aviation requirements (JAR-66) standard. This study
demonstrates the huge impact of maintenance performance
on reliability and safety through real examples; however,
they do not address the issue associated with the control of
human behavior during maintenance actions execution. An
integrated methodology is proposed by Rashid et al. (2014)
to proactively monitor the human factors using fuzzy the-
ory which consists of detecting and eliminating negative
causal factors. Similarly, Chang and Wang (2010), Cac-
ciabue et al. (2003) studied the interaction of human factors
with the environment and their link with actions execution
effectiveness. These studies propose a cognitive model
known as SHELL (software, hardware, environment, live-
ware) for aircraft maintenance technician (AMT) to eval-
uate the impact of human risk during maintenance opera-
tions. The aim is to help airlines to identify their major
operational and managerial weaknesses to improve risk
management for maintenance operations under limited
resource. In this model, the software represents mainte-
nance procedures for a given task, hardware represents
tools and materials (lubricants, anti-corrosion agents, etc.),
environment represents organizational structure and envi-
ronmental context, whereas live-ware represents charac-
teristics of AMT. All of these approaches consider static
structures and highly rely on experts’ knowledge. In
dynamic environments, structure of the model should be
updated regularly to ensure monitoring of maintenance
functions performance, but the management of the evolu-
tion of adverse events in a dynamic context requires con-
tinuous update of experts’ knowledge with subsequent
modifications in maintenance procedures.
2.4 Literature review synthesis
The above discussion highlights three gaps toward the
effectiveness of maintenance actions execution in a
dynamic manufacturing context. First improvement is in
experts’ existing knowledge with an objective to design
appropriate maintenance procedures and associated
checklists. It is also concluded that when knowledge update
is not performed at an appropriate frequency to deal with
the evolving nature of equipment and process behaviors, in
197
high-mix low-volume production context, the MPM indi-
cators drift may be explained by an inappropriate usage
and/or insufficient level of existing knowledge. To over-
come these gaps, we present an extended FMECA with the
BN approach. This allows continuous update of mainte-
nance function and fulfillment criteria, linked with main-
tenance procedures and checklists. In the proposed
extended FMECA approach, concept of OFC (objective
fulfillment criteria) is introduced that allows the evaluation
of maintenance actions effectiveness. The MPM indicators
drifts highlight inappropriate usage and/or insufficient level
of existing knowledge; therefore, related issues concerning
inappropriate usage of the existing knowledge must be
removed. To address poor maintenance execution, we
propose to use an operational BN to store and capitalize
existing knowledge from extended FMECA. To address
second aspect, actual measurements of control parameters
are converted into OFC levels and are fed in O-BN which
then provides feedback concerning maintenance actions
execution effects to improve technicians’ cognition about
maintenance actions execution, instead of local subjective
judgment. Finally, the literature also highlights the fact that
in many cases, it is unknown whether capitalized knowl-
edge is up to date or missing. Therefore, it is important to
define a process to control the relevance/accuracy of the
existing knowledge and update it dynamically with
experts’ intervention. For this purpose, an unsupervised BN
(U-BN) is proposed to enhance the ability to discover new
causal structures, learned from updated historical data, and
to support dynamic knowledge update. This is accom-
plished through structural comparison of O-BN and U-BN
where new causalities highlight potential knowledge.
These are further validated by an expert prior to modifying
the FMECA and maintenance procedures.
3 Proposed methodology to improve maintenance
actions effectiveness in high-mix low-volume
context
In view of the gaps identified in above section, we present a
three-step methodology (Fig. 2) based on extended
FMECA method and BN approach. The first step focuses
on capitalizing, unifying, and sharing experts’ knowledge
on best maintenance practices. Experts use FMECA files
for a given maintenance procedure (MP) and equipment to
define functions and set of associated OFC that must be
respected by technicians during maintenance execution.
These criteria serve as basis to prevent known or forecasted
failure modes (FM) and evaluate the effectiveness of exe-
cuted actions. This step also includes the description and
feedback of potential effects (consequences) for poorly
executed maintenance actions. The experts’ knowledge,
123
198 Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213

Fig. 2 Extended FMECA and Technicians Experts

BN-based methodology to
improve maintenance actions Step1: Knowledge Start
effectiveness capitalization & usage

FMECA

Checklist Execution
by equipment and maintenance type

Criteria fulfillment
MPM control

associated to MP Function
Fulfillment Criteria level
MPM
Maintenance Performance Measurement
Industrial Indicators strategy

No
MPM
out of control ?

Yes
Maintenance
Checklist(s)
OFC
Generator Operational BN
(Bayes. Network) Knowledge
Maintenance actions capitalization (FMECA based)
feedback (FM, Effects)
CMMS
Step2: Existing Knowledge
(FM and Effects) accuracy control
For each
Existing BN prediction
maintenance
accuracy evaluation
actions in the
checklist
Data collection
Actual and Operational BN feed backs
from all maintenance events.

Operational BN Model accuracy

Versus actual events

Prediction accuracy No
out of control ?

Yes

Step 3: Knowledge update

Maintenance
Database

Unsupervised BN
New causal structure learned from
historical data (till date)
Other database:

No New potential
MES

knowledge (Causal
structure) ?

Yes
New detection and/or
effects Yes

No

End

capitalized in the FMECA files, leads the modification in maintenance actions to fulfill overall maintenance proce-
maintenance procedures that comprise maintenance func- dure’s function). Mili et al. (2009) have showed the
tions and associated checklists (i.e., sequence of effectiveness of dynamically capitalizing experts’

123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
knowledge and linking adverse events with their causes
and effects. However, static nature of FMECA put limits
on its ability to cope up with drifting equipment and pro-
cess behavior, because FMECA is exclusively based on
experts’ knowledge and needs human intervention to be
updated (Denson et al. 2014; Mili et al. 2008). So, in case
of rapid change of process and equipment behaviors, how
experts can be informed that FMECA contents need to be
updated? We propose to use MPM indicators to highlight
the equipment behavior drifts associated with knowledge
capitalization stored in FMECA and/or procedure usage
issues.
Any drift in MPM indicators from target is an evidence
of inappropriate usage or ineffective capitalization of
experts’ knowledge. Hence, these can be used to dynami-
cally trigger knowledge capitalization and/or usage con-
cerns, related to the evolving nature of human factors or
equipment and process behaviors. Therefore, we first
address the issue associated with inappropriate usage of
capitalized knowledge stored in FMECA and described in
procedures by building an O-BN that links the causal
dependency between PM functions (objectives), associated
fulfillment criteria, failure modes and effects. The OFC is
implemented by quantifying it into classes. This O-BN
provides feedback to technicians related to the poor exe-
cution of maintenance actions, thanks to failure mode (FM)
effects, through Bayesian inference. The O-BN is linked
with computerized maintenance management system
(CMMS) to exchange information filled by actors during
maintenance actions execution and to give the necessary
feedback to improve the effectiveness of existing proce-
dures usage. This step advocates that experts’ knowledge is
properly used and described inside the maintenance pro-
cedures; however, it does not offer to dynamically renew
the knowledge and adapt maintenance procedures when
MPM indicators drift and/or maintenance procedures exe-
cution remains ineffective. This may be due to the evolving
nature of equipment and process behavior and associated
with missing or inaccurate existing knowledge stored
inside FMECA and maintenance procedures. In the second
step of proposed methodology, we control the relevance of
existing experts’ knowledge by evaluating O-BN model
accuracy, using historical data. The O-BN is modified only
when prediction accuracy is not within user-defined limits,
unless Step 1 is performed to improve maintenance effec-
tiveness as explained above. The Step 3 of the proposed
methodology is executed to support knowledge update
when model accuracy drifts beyond user-defined limits.
The MPM indicator drift and O-BN inaccuracy are the
triggering events to highlight the need of experts’ knowl-
edge update by finding new cause–effects links. This is
done by structurally comparing U-BN which is built using
up-to-date historical maintenance data and O-BN which is
199
developed using experts’ knowledge from FMECA. The
new causal links highlight potential new knowledge which
is then validated by an expert prior to subsequent modifi-
cations in FMECA and maintenance procedures. The
absence of structural difference shows ineffectiveness of
the existing knowledge that requires inclusion of new data
dimensions to explain variability in out-of-control MPM
indicators. This step is not yet treated and included in this
paper; however, if multivariate statistical analysis supports
the inclusion of new data, the O-BN has to be learned again
followed by modification in FMECA.
3.1 Industrial context of the case study
The methodology is evaluated in the SI industry which is
highly competitive production environment constrained by
rapid product and technology changes. This requires
equipment to operate irrespective of the product mix on the
production line. The SI is known for its high-mix low-
volume production environment where it is necessary to
deal with dynamic equipment behavior drifts. The value
chain for the SI is presented in Fig. 3 which highlights the
complex and competitive business environment (Shahzad
et al. 2011). This starts with customer demand for new
product functionalities followed by design phase where
computer-aided design (CAD) simulations are used to
assess electrical description of requested functionalities
and transform in physical layouts and mask generation for
production. The front-end phase in manufacturing is used
to manufacture devices (transistors, resistors, etc.) on sili-
con wafers. Finally, the wafers are tested, before been cut
in individual dies for packaging, also known as backend
manufacturing.
The front-end manufacturing comprises production
operations performed in different workshops such as sur-
face cleaning, silicon oxidation, dielectric and metal
deposition, photolithography, etching and polishing
(Mönch et al. 2012). This consists of more than 200 pro-
duction operations, 1100 individual steps and 8 weeks of
cycle time (Brown et al. 2010). The case study is carried
out in dielectric (DIEL) workshop where wafers pass 8
times for processing at different stages of the production
flow to deposit thin film electrical insulator on the wafer
surface. The deposition is performed by plasma-enhanced
chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) equipment that has
multiple maintenance procedures and associated checklists,
designed by experts to sustain OEE in DIEL workshop.
The causes of PECVD equipment failure drifts may be
related not only to maintenance procedures and ineffec-
tiveness of existing diagnosis protocols but also to other
causes like process types, equipment recipes designs,
associated with products and technologies mix fluctuation.
In a field study at a world-reputed semiconductor
123
200
Fig. 3 SI value chain from
customer to product delivery
manufacturer, we noted that order of maintenance actions
execution for a given maintenance procedure varies
between technicians. Uzsoy et al. (1994), Abu-Samah et al.
(2014) demonstrated that equipment availability and pre-
ventive maintenance plan are disturbed by unscheduled
equipment breakdown due to the drifting equipment
behavior.
3.2 Step 1: Knowledge capitalization and usage
in maintenance context
The existing knowledge capitalization, unification, and
sharing are the crucial steps toward effective maintenance
in a dynamic production environment. The FMECA is a
widely accepted methodology to address functional risks
with RCM approach. This allows analysis, evaluation and
ranking to highlight and prioritize actions to recover from
poor MPM indicators performances. The FMEA was ini-
tially developed by US military (MIL-P-1629 1949) for
failure mode and effect analysis on system components.
This was updated with criticality or severity assessment by
NASA to ensure expected reliability of the space systems
(Jordan 1972). The FMEA, also known as FMECA, is
applied in multiple fields, e.g., software failure mode and
effects analysis (SWFMEA), design FMEA, process
FMEA, system or concept FMEA, etc. The scope of using
FMECA in these fields is to identify, prioritize and elimi-
nate potential failures from system, design or process
functions before they occur (Omdahl 1988; Villacourt
1992) or at least with reduced effect through an earlier
detection. In the proposed methodology, FMECA is
employed with RCM approach to collect, capitalize and
organize experts’ existing knowledge for effective main-
tenance practices, dynamically. The objective is to identify
and prevent the risks linked with poor maintenance actions
execution. The FMECA document serves as the basis to
123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
design maintenance procedures and O-BN structure when
MPM control limits are not reached. The FMECA unifies
maintenance actions and controls associated risks by cap-
italizing experts’ knowledge to design maintenance pro-
cedures as presented in Fig. 4.
In functional scope analysis, the maintenance actions
objectives for equipment and maintenance types are
defined as functions. These are further linked to FMs based
on experts’ knowledge, because if actions are added to a
procedure to fulfill objectives, it is due to the fact that
experts have already seen the FM and know how to detect
or prevent it by checking criteria (setup or control limits).
These criteria must be respected by technicians during
maintenance execution to fulfill the PM objectives. The
OFC is quantified into classes and subclasses and is used to
evaluate the drifts through O-BN. The FM analysis phase
allows defining value criteria, effects, causes, detection and
prevention for each failure mode. The value criteria are
defined as the negation of associated FM, because if a
value criterion is not fulfilled, the FM can potentially occur
(see example in Figs. 5, 6). The risks analysis phase
involves computation of risk priority number (RPN) based
on severity (SEV), occurrence (OCC) and detection (DET)
as RPN = SEV 9 OCC 9 DET. If RPN passes threshold,
the expert has to define operational fixes to reduce the risk
by introducing new functions or new value criteria asso-
ciated with existing functions. This step is repeated till
RPN falls below the defined threshold, whereas upon
evaluation and approval of value criteria, operating pro-
cedures can be updated. This improved RCM-based pro-
cess aims to help maintenance actors to prioritize the
maintenance activities for cost-efficient solution. It allows
to define more robust maintenance operating procedures
with O-BN that also provide feedback to improve the
effectiveness of maintenance procedure usage as explained
in Sect. 3.2.3.
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213 201

Start

Yes Define Functions

Functional Scope
as maintenance action objectives
by equipment & maintenance type

Analysis
Failure mode (FM) identified
Based on expert Knowledge
Operational Fixes

Define Value criteria

New Function No To fill the Function objectives

(Causes, Effects, Detections & Preventions )

needed ? (Prevent from FM) with set-up &
control limits

Define Effect
By FM

FM Analysis
Potential Causes
identified by FM

Define Prevention
Define Detection by Detection on functional
by Function Value criteria value criteria linked to
causes

Severity Quotation Detectability Quotation Occurrences Quotation

(SEV) (DET) (OCC)

Risk Analysis
Risk evaluation and ranking OFC Generator
(RPN) Objective Fulfillment Criteria
RPN= SEV x OCC x DET linked to criteria level used by BN
to evaluate maintenance
execution efficiency
No Is risk
acceptable

Yes

Function and criteria approved Operating Procedure

Update

Maintenance procedure
(Checklist) updating

End

Fig. 4 FMECA process toward unified maintenance actions and associated risk control

3.2.1 Step 1: Existing knowledge capitalization
The design of maintenance procedures uses FMECA;
therefore, we selected preventive maintenance (PM) pro-
cedure for process chamber cleaning. The key functions
identified by experts in FMECA for the selected PM and
equipment type are the (1) equipment and human factor
security, (2) PM anticipation, (3) pumping out the buffer
and load lock, (4) dismantling foreline and (5) leak test
with helium, etc. An example of the functional analysis
and risk evaluation using standard FMECA is presented in
Fig. 5. The values of severity, occurrence, detectability
and RPN have been normalized for confidentiality rea-
sons. The results of extended FMECA including OFC
levels for each fulfillment criterion are presented in Fig. 6.
It can be seen that each of the fulfillment criteria is dis-
cretized in multiple levels, using Likert scale, in column
orange) with an experts’ intervention. The OFC column

123
202 Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213

Title : PM procedure for cleaning Process chamber --> Actual Risk (FMECA Analyses)
Objective
Function

Current
Value Criteria Potential Failure Potential Effects of Potential Cause/ Current Controls Current Controls (S) (O)
Criteria Levels (D) DET OFC RPN =
Definition Mode Failure Mechanism of Failure Prevention Detection SEV OCC
(S*O*D)
Ckecklist paper lid closing:
No =1 item buffer by 2 persons 10 1 1 1 10
Risk of crushing, the lid is
Lid buffer closed by 2 Closing lid buffer not checked. Work Accident
Affects people safety heavy even if witheheld by a
persons realized by 2 people Pictogram of crushing risk Declaration
bailer
Yes =2 in presented in this 10 1 1 2 10
procedure.

No =1 Alarm equipment 2 1 2 1 4
Reset the buffer and Load-Lock (LL) under vaccum

Waste of time during the PM, Ckecklist paper: buffer

Buffer vacuum buffer ventilated Downtime during LCF
impossible LCF calibration pumping checked
Pumping out the buffer and Load-Lock (LL)

Yes =2 calibration 2 1 2 2 4

No =1, Alarm equipment 2 1 2 1 4

Ckecklist paper: buffer
LL vacuum LL ventilated Downtime Waste of time during PM, during LCF
purge checked
Yes =2 impossible LCF calibration calibration 2 1 2 2 4
Equipment Level

No =1 4 2 3 1 24
Defectivity, backstreaming Ckecklist paper: buffer
Buffer purging not reset Downtime D0 mecax25 buffer
Buffer purge reset chamber to buffer during LCF purge checked
Yes =2 calibration 4 2 3 2 24

> 7,5 mT/min =1 4 1 3 1 12

Defectivity as leak buffer
Leak rate buffer < Leak rate buffer > (attached) or outgassing, to Ckecklist paper: item buffer
= 7mT/min =2 Downtime D0 mecax25 buffer 4 1 3 2 12
7mT/min 7mT/min do before the LCF calibration leak rate <7mt checked
because the necessity of
< 7 mT/min =3 reopening buffer 4 1 3 3 12

> 7,5 mT/min =1 4 1 3 1 12

Defectivity as leak LL or
outgassing, to do before the Ckecklist paper: item LL
Leak rate LL < = 7mT/min =2 Leak rate LL > 7mT/min Downtime D0 mecax25 buffer 4 1 3 2 12
LCF calibration because the leak rate < 7mt checked
7mT/min
necessity of reopening LL or
< 7 mT/min =3 buffer 4 1 3 3 12

No =1 Waste of time during the PM, Detection when going 5 2 3 1 30

the output of wafers manual Ckecklist paper: item LL outside the
LL heater not reset LL heater reset Downtime
LCF that need to be LL <80 ° heater not reset checked calibration wafers
Yes = 2 C manual 5 2 3 2 30

Fig. 5 Knowledge capitalization and RPN for pumping out the buffer and load lock function: FMECA

Title : PM procedure for cleaning Process chamber --> Actual Risk (FMECA Analyses)
Objective
Function

Potential Failure Potential Effects Potential Cause/ Current Controls Current Controls (S) (O) (D) Current RPN
Value Criteria Definition Criteria Levels
Mode of Failure Mechanism of Failure Prevention Detection SEV OCC DET OFC
OFI
= (S*O*D)

Reflected power
Defines the ramp-up and ramp-down rates of the HF
HF RF and LF RF Ramp Up Rate (W/s) and Ramp

>10% of set point 7 3 5 1 105

=1
and LF RF generators in W per second

5% <Reflected Reflected power >

Reflected power < RF reflected power
power< 10% of set 10% of set point (or FDC control of reflected equipment/estar
10% of set point (or Parts failure reduces generator & 7 3 5 2 105
point coeff reflected > @ recipe creation. alarm
coeff reflected <0.3) chamber parts lifetime
=2 0.3)
Down Rate (W/s)

Equipment Level

Reflected power<
10% of set point 7 3 5 3 105
=3

RF reflected
stabilisation time >
7 4 6 1 168
2s
=1
RF reflected 1s<RF reflected RF reflected RF reflected power
stabilisation time < FDC control of reflected equipment/estar
powerstabilisation powerstabilisation Parts failure reduces generator & 7 4 6 2 168
2s @ recipe creation. alarm
time < 2s time > 2s chamber parts lifetime.
=2
RF reflected
stabilisation time <
7 4 6 3 168
1s
=3

Fig. 6 Knowledge capitalization and RPN for RF ramp up rate function: Extended FMECA

(green) is also added to FMECA that measures responses cost), which are highlighted by MPM indicator drift. The
and judgments of technicians during PM execution. The failure is associated with detection (column 9) and also
effectiveness of performed actions is measured by O-BN the associated known causes and preventions (columns 7
as presented in Sect. 3.2.3. The FMECA (Figs. 5, 6) and 8). Then, severity (SEV), occurrence (OCC), detec-
presents existing knowledge as functional blocks, objec- tion (DET) and RPN (columns 10, 11, 12 and 14) are
tives associated with actions to guarantee quality that may computed as per standard. The OFC (column 13) has been
affect cost (first two columns in Figs. 5, 6). For each added taking into account the registered value in the
function, value criteria are defined (columns 3 and 4) to CMMS by the operator if the action is performed manu-
check an associated detection if the functions objectives ally in checklist or through detection, to assess RPN
are fulfilled. If not, the expert describes the associated values based on actual registered data or to support BN
failure and linked effects (column 6; yield, cycle time or conditional probabilities table.

123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
3.2.2 Step 1: Maintenance performance measurement
(MPM) control
The first step of the proposed methodology allows experts’
knowledge capitalization based on FMECA approach to
adjust the maintenance procedures (checklist). However,
the effectiveness of capitalized knowledge usage is neither
evaluated nor controlled. Therefore, any drift in MPM
indicators from operational target can be explained by a set
of FMs which are not under control. This is an evidence of
ineffective capitalization or inappropriate usage of capi-
talized knowledge in terms of FM detection, prevention,
effects or causes. Hence, MPM indicators may be used to
dynamically trigger knowledge capitalization and ineffec-
tive usage concerns related to the evolving nature of human
factors or equipment and process behaviors. Consequently,
MPM indicators trigger the need to implement O-BN as
well as U-BN, respectively.
In manufacturing facilities, MPM indicators and their
control limits are set by maintenance experts according to
the industrial context and requirements. In the literature,
several studies focus their research on MPM indicators as
(Simões et al. 2011) who present a literature review on this
subject. They present the evolution in MPM usage as an
important maintenance function, resource, activity and
practice. Muchiri et al. (2010) completed an industrial sur-
vey to find how MPM can be used in industrial maintenance
management. They conclude that MPM indicators used in a
given manufacturing environment are directly influenced by
the fulfillment of the maintenance objectives. Similarly,
Weber and Thomas (2006) developed a framework to define
key performance indicator (KPI) for managing the mainte-
nance function based on physical asset management
requirements and asset reliability process. Moreover,
Muchiri et al. (2011) demonstrate that MPM indicators
cannot be defined in isolation, but should be the result of a
careful analysis of the interaction between maintenance and
organizational functions. These indicators are classified into
three categories: equipment and process related (e.g.,
capacity utilization, OEE, and availability), cost related
(e.g., maintenance cost per unit production cost) and main-
tenance task related (e.g., ratio of scheduled and total
maintenance tasks) (Muchiri et al. 2010). Following these
recommendations about MPM indicator definition, we have
extracted from the literature a set of MPM indicators, widely
accepted in the industry and also used in the SI (Fig. 7), and
we use them in our proposed methodology.
In DIEL workshop case study, the experts have defined a
set of the most representative MPM indicators and their
operational control limits extracted from MPM category
list presented in Fig. 7. An example of these MPM indi-
cators is presented below with their definition and the way
to compute it (Table 1).
203
The sampling frequency to control these indicators and
their limits are defined according to operational manage-
ment rules. Indeed, daily, weekly, monthly (Fig. 8a) or
quarterly (Fig. 8b) reports are generated to monitor the
maintenance effectiveness and production line behavior.
One or several indicators, below the target, highlight an
equipment drift and a potential knowhow capitalization
and/or procedure usage issues.
3.2.3 Step 1: Existing knowledge capitalization as O-BN
and feedback on maintenance execution effectiveness
When MPM indicators, described in Sect. 3.2.2, drift and
reach operational control limits, inefficient capitalization or
inappropriate usage of capitalized knowledge needs to be
verified. To support these tasks, we propose learning O-BN
based on extended FMECA as presented in Sect. 3.1. The
O-BN links the causal dependency between PM functions,
associated fulfillment criteria, failure modes and effects.
The BN is directed acyclic graph (DAG) and is composed
of nodes (random variables) and directed edges (links, arcs)
between nodes as shown in Fig. 9. The directed edges
represent the causal dependency among nodes in the net-
work. The effect of parent nodes on child node is assessed
with conditional probability table (CPT) that is computed
from input data using inference algorithm based on ‘‘Bayes
theorem’’ (Peter 2012) in Eq. 1.
The information provided by BN are probabilistic values
which are computed using Bayes theorem and represent
risk evaluation under uncertainty (Kjærulff and Madsen
2006; Jensen and Nielsen 2007; Pourret et al. 2008). At
each level of the BN structure, formalism can be read in the
following way, also called ‘‘Bayes condition.’’ The prob-
ability of A (failure mode) given that the event D has
occurred is given by Eq. 1. This can be applied at different
levels of the O-BN to compute the CPT for all the nodes.
The BN approach is chosen because of its capabilities to
represent experts’ knowledge capitalized in FMECA files
(Garcia and Gilabert 2011). The affinity between FMECA
structure and causal nets like Bayesian network is also
demonstrated by Lee (2001), Weber et al. (2001). Bayesian
networks fit to FMECA as they allow the same way of
describing causality chains (Fig. 10). The BN is able to
manage the uncertainty regarding causes and failure
modes. This is due to the fact that information samples
(detection, failure, effect and context) are hard to be
sampled and synchronized in time. Moreover, information
takes time to be available; therefore, during this elapsed
time, the equipment and process behavior may evolve. A
key characteristic of Bayesian techniques (Liu 2008) is the
capability to treat both continuous and discrete variables.
The O-BN is to be linked with CMMS to exchange
information, filled by actors or MES, during maintenance
123
204 Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213

Fig. 7 Industry-standard MPM indicators from literature also used in SI (Weber and Thomas 2006, SEMI E79 2000)

Table 1 MPM indicators definition for DIEL case study (Semi-E79 Standard)
MPM indicator Definition and computing formula Loss productivity elements

MTTR: mean time to To calculate the average maintenance hours required for Inefficient operating maintenance protocol
repair scheduled and unscheduled downtime
Availability 100 % 9 (Equipment uptime/total time) Unscheduled downtime: failures, process drifts and
efficiency % scheduled: PM, qualification, setup, etc.
Operational 100 % 9 (Processing time/equipment uptime) Minor stop, offline training, install, engineering, no
efficiency % product, no operator, etc.
Rate efficiency % 100 % 9 (Theoretical production time for actual units/
processing time)
Quality efficiency % 100 % 9 (Theoretical production time for effective units/ Scrap, rework
theoretical production time for actual units)
OEE: overall Availability efficiency 9 operational efficiency 9 rate
equipment efficiency 9 quality efficiency
efficiency
PM success rate Number of succeeded maintenance work order (WO)/total Inefficient or inappropriate operating maintenance
executed WO protocol

actions execution and to give the necessary feedback to
improve the effectiveness of existing procedures usage.
PðA; DÞ PðDjAÞPðAÞ
PðAjDÞ ¼ ¼ ð1Þ
PðDÞ PðDÞ
3.2.4 Step 1: O-BN and OFC
In this section, we present the structure of O-BN developed
based on existing experts’ knowledge. The columns from
the extended FMECA are mapped based on color as nodes
in the BN as presented in Fig. 10. The target node in this
network to be predicted is ‘‘effect’’ as the consequences of
executed maintenance actions. The structure of the network
is defined by experts using FMECA file as presented in
Fig. 11. The CPT associated with the O-BN nodes can be
defined by experts according to their knowledge and/or by
using inference algorithm and historical dataset. Then,
accuracy of resulting BN is validated through tenfold
cross-validation approach (McLachlan et al. 2004). The
BN is able to predict the consequences of executed actions
through fulfillment criteria monitoring for each PM func-
tion (objective). These fulfillment criteria are discretized
into multiple levels (OFC) as defined in the extended

123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
Fig. 8 a Monthly indicator
OEE % trend. b Quarterly
indicator PM Success rate trend
Fig. 9 Example of BN and associated conditional probabilities
table (CPT)
FMECA to measure the effectiveness of executed mainte-
nance actions, accurately. Indeed, this O-BN is connected
to CMMS where technicians enter the OFC levels based on
measurements or their judgment of fulfillment criteria.
These values are input to O-BN which predicts effects on
equipment and product quality using Bayesian inference.
This step ensures that experts’ knowledge is properly used
and described inside the operating procedures.
205
An example of inference from BN model is highlighted
as a proof of concept in Fig. 12. Indeed, the BN enables
predicting potential failure mode (FM) and its effects on
product and equipment for given PM objective and asso-
ciated fulfillment criteria. We observe from the fig-
ure above that, in the presence of ‘‘pressure
chamber [ 7.5 Torrs,’’ and non-presence of ‘‘flush with
helium (He),’’ the likely failure mode is cold chamber that
impacts the deposition rate and by consequence the product
quality. This example demonstrates the O-BN ability to
highlight the likely failure and consequence of executed
action based on the criteria level (OFC) filled by technician
in CMMS during maintenance executions. This predictions
result is dynamically fed back to the technician as textual
message.
The above O-BN demonstrated that it can capture
effectiveness and provide feedback to technicians on con-
sequences of their preformed actions, during maintenance
intervention. However, O-BN has static structure which is
defined based on experts’ judgment. Moreover, this static
model cannot take into account the impact of evolving
equipment behaviors because of high-mix low-volume
123
206 Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213

Fig. 10 BN structure definition from experts’ knowledge in FMECA

Fig. 11 BN based on experts’ judgment to monitor performed maintenance efficiency

123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
Fig. 12 Proof of concept for knowledge-based BN model
production. Hence, in next section, we propose a dynamic
loop to learn BN structure from historical data to discover
new knowledge and update FMECA and maintenance
procedures, accordingly.
3.3 Step 2: Existing knowledge accuracy control
In step 1 of the proposed methodology, a static capital-
ization and usage of experts’ knowledge are proposed in
order to enhance the maintenance actions effectiveness by
supporting cognitive process of human actors, during the
execution of maintenance actions. In addition, we used
experts’ knowledge that defines only cause–to-effect rela-
tionships which are under control. However, in dynamic
production environment like high mix low volume, these
links change continuously. Therefore, experts’ knowledge
should be updated accordingly. As discussed in previous
section, the MPM indicators generate triggers to control the
accuracy of knowledge capitalized in FMECA as well as
maintenance procedures. We propose to control the accu-
racy using O-BN which is developed using experts’
knowledge and update it as per potential new knowledge.
This allows the evaluation of the reliability of existing
experts’ knowledge through the evaluation of perdition
accuracy. The input data are collected from the CMMS
over previously executed maintenance actions. The pre-
diction accuracy is computed and compared with the user-
defined threshold that leads to search for potential new
knowledge. The relevance of existing knowledge is eval-
uated through O-BN accuracy using historical interventions
maintenance data collected from CMMS system. This
dataset is used to evaluate the accuracy of O-BN by
207
comparing the predicted information with the actual values
in the dataset. The accuracy is defined as the ratio of the
number of correct predictions to number of total predic-
tions. The total precision of the model is 68 % at the last
evaluation.
3.4 Step 3: New causal links discovery and existing
knowledge update
The BN as a causal network has the ability to deal with
probabilistic inferences under uncertainty. In practice, BN
structure is defined, exclusively, according to experts’
judgment and FMECA documents. Besides, the BN
structure can also be learned from data using unsupervised
or semi-supervised learning algorithms which is helpful in
discovering new causalities from historical data (Hecker-
man 1997). The third step in proposed approach is about
learning the BN structure using unsupervised algorithms
EQ, Taboo and Taboo Order (Abu-Samah et al. 2014)
based on minimum description length (MDL) as an
objective function. This function measures the correlation
and complexity of causal network and provides ‘‘automatic
significance thresholds’’ (Rissanen 1978; Bouckaert 1993)
that serves as criteria to select the lowest score (best
structure) BN. The equivalence class (EQ) algorithm is
efficient to learn causal structure from historical data
(Friedman and Koller 2000). It serves to reduce the search
space. This algorithm considers that two BN structures are
equivalent if the set of distributions presented by one
structure can be presented identically by the other one
(Chickering 2002; Munteanu and Bendou 2001). The
Taboo search algorithm aims to optimize and refine an
123
208
existing structure of causal model. Therefore, it is helpful
to readjust an initial structure defined by experts or
developed using EQ algorithm; thus, it can improve MDL
score as well. The Taboo order (Teyssier and Koller 2005)
is presented as an extension of Taboo algorithm that offers
more accurate results, but is more expensive in terms of
computing time than simple taboo search.
In this paper, we used EQ search followed by Taboo
refining algorithm to learn the BN structure. The historical
data are extracted from CMMS as executed maintenance
actions, equipment and product metrology data. In the
proposed third step, new potential knowledge is high-
lighted by comparing initial BN structure defined by
experts and learned BN from data. The structural change
between variables is considered as potential new knowl-
edge. These are fed to the experts to validate new causal-
ities between variables from the invalid beliefs before their
inclusion in the FMECA knowledge base. Then, the
maintenance procedure is updated accordingly in order to
improve the effectiveness of maintenance actions as well.
The dynamic characteristic of the SI leads to evolving
nature of equipment performance drifts which destabilize the
production capacities. Thus, industrial performance requires
dynamic updating of maintenance procedures to adapt with
high-mix low-volume production. Therefore, new BN model
has been learned from historical data collected across DIEL
production line, using unsupervised algorithms. The dataset
used for this case study is composed of preceding execution of
revised maintenance procedure from FMECA (Figs. 5, 6). It is
also composed of equipment parameters like RF, chamber
pressure, and product metrology after maintenance such as
defectivity and deposition rate. This dataset is divided into two
parts, 75 % rows for learning and 25 % for testing. The BN is
learned using EQ and Taboo unsupervised learning in Baye-
sialab 5.0, respectively. The BN model is presented below in
Fig. 13a. The learned network is then validated with the
testing part of dataset. Thus, for this case study as presented in
Fig. 13b, the contingency fit is observed to be 77 and 72 %,
which represent the log-likelihood of joint probability distri-
bution of the U-BN with the used dataset, respectively
(threshold of 75 % is used as criteria to accept model).
Moreover, the color of each node in this new U-BN model
corresponds to its respective class (objectives, criteria, failure
modes, and effects).
The learned model from historical data can contain new
knowledge. Hence, we compare the structures of experts’
knowledge-based model (O-BN) presented in Fig. 11 and
the learned model presented in Fig. 13a (ByesiaLab 5.0).
Figure 14 shows an example of found structural changes in
terms of causal links. It is worth mentioning that the both
O-BN and U-BN have the same set of nodes.
The new knowledge can be extracted from new causal
links in the learned network. For example, the plasma and
123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
backstream error are found to be correlated with product
defectivity. For example, we can observe from Fig. 14 that
the nodes in red rectangle gas line purge, PTV failure are
no more linked to residue in gas line. The found structural
changes are presented to the experts for their validation as a
new knowledge. The FMECA is modified according to new
knowledge; otherwise these changes are discarded. Even-
tually, it serves to modify maintenance procedures enabling
adaptations of maintenance practices influenced by high-
mix low-volume production.
3.5 Feedback of maintenance actors on proposed
BN-based approach
In order to evaluate the usefulness and the impact of O-BN
and U-BN models based methodology on the cognition of
technicians and experts, face-to-face meetings were held
with the maintenance actors. The question was what is your
opinion about O-BN and U-BN models to support experts’
knowledge and to help technicians during maintenance
execution with feedback on the consequence of their
actions? The experts in these meetings were the equipment
engineers from DIEL workshop. The majority believed that
proposed BN-based methodology is helpful to discover
new knowledge because some correlations cannot be
identified without historical data investigation; for exam-
ple, the unsupervised learning found that 15 min of lid
thermalization is associated with downtime. The experts
explain that sensor signal changes during thermalization;
therefore, if the sensors are set at target rate without ther-
malization, its value will not be at the target at the end of
CFL (parts inside the equipment) calibration. That impacts
the plates positioning and consequently the downtime.
There was not even a single comment against the proposed
BN-based methodology because of the fact that this helps
them to achieve their operational targets by quickly
understanding the unscheduled equipment breakdown
scenarios. The proposed methodology acts as experts’
cognition provoking tool which is based on data collected
across the production line. The data analysis with evidence
could trigger paralysis; however, the final authority to
reject newly generated knowledge by the experts if they are
not convinced overrule this consequence. Nevertheless,
they recommended extending dataset used to learn the
U-BN. This also requires the development of advanced
algorithm to compare two BN structures with different
dimensionalities. The maintenance actors also consider that
feedback to technicians on the consequences of their
actions is useful to improve their auto-training cognition
process. For example, the fact to clean the process module
of the equipment with alcohol and then with water (H2O)
may lead to the problem of vacuum pressure on equipment
during production or qualification; in this case, the
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213 209

Fig. 13 a Unsupervised Bayesian Network (U-BN) example. b BN contingency fit diagram for U-BN learned from historical data using
unsupervised algorithm

123
210
Fig. 14 Structural difference between O-BN and U-BN models allowing knowledge discovery
technician knows that it is necessary to clean the process
module with water and then alcohol (and not the reverse
order) to avoid equipment contamination. But the predic-
tion results provided by O-BN should be presented in the
most effective way to be accepted by the technicians.
Hence, improvement request is taken into account in our
present developments.
4 Conclusion and perspectives
The sustainable production capacities in high-mix low-
volume production environment play an important role in
the competitiveness of SI. For this reason, the proposed
methodology deals with the maintenance actions effec-
tiveness to optimize production capacities which are
destabilized by variability in production environment. The
contributions of this study can be classified into two parts
toward optimized equipment availability and consequently
reduced OEE variability by efficient maintenance policies.
First, this supports the improved cognition of maintenance
actors by providing dynamic feedback of potential conse-
quences of executed actions on the product quality and
equipment performance. In such a way, the failure occur-
rences may be improved because of the impact of the
maintenance actions effectiveness on equipment reliability,
and this also ensures good product quality. The gain in
terms of failure occurrences can be observed from Fig. 15.
The normalized values are plotted for 17 failures in red
color (before 4 months) and in green color (after 4 months)
of the deployment of proposed methodology in the pro-
duction line.
123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
Second, this study proposed a dynamic approach to
update and renew maintenance experts’ knowledge to
design maintenance procedure in order to adapt it with the
evolving nature of the industrial context. Indeed, an
extended FMECA technique with objective fulfillment
criteria (OFC) collects and unifies existing experts’
knowledge. This dynamic loop of maintenance procedures
and knowledge update is triggered by defined MPM
indicators and existing knowledge accuracy control. The
loop of new knowledge discovering proposed in this study
is based on finding new causal links (new arcs direction)
in BN structure to support experts to update existing
knowledge using unsupervised learning from historical
dataset. However, this methodology does not offer the
possibility to learn new BN structure with new nodes and
comparison of different BN structures with different data
dimensionality.
Hence in the future, it is of interest to extend this
methodology to learn and to compare BN structure with
different set of nodes using an extended dataset. It is also
interesting to develop an agile information system that
illustrates the industrial implementation of dynamic
knowledge management protocols and to develop a human
machine interface and advanced algorithm able to interpret
the BN prediction results and show the feedback to tech-
nicians in a more effective way (graphical results with
reasoning). Moreover, it is also interesting to find answer to
the question of developing BN at the equipment level or
whole workshop level. Moreover, generic methodology
based on statistical analysis is also required to identify and
compute automatically the MPM limits. These limits could
be adjusted as the function of variability observed in the
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213 211

Fig. 15 Impact of BN feedback

to technicians on failure
occurrences

production line through standard statistical process control O-BN Operational Bayesian network
(SPC). PdM Predictive maintenance
PM Preventive maintenance
Acknowledgments The authors acknowledge STMicroelectronics
PRM Probabilistic relational model
for providing an opportunity to carry out field study in their main-
tenance department. The authors also acknowledge the European RCM Reliability-centered maintenance
project ENIAC INTEGRATE, ANRT (National French Agency for RMS Recipe management systems
Research and Technology), and Rhone Alpes region for their support. RPN Risk priority number
Glossary RPN* Normalized risk priority number
SHELL Software, hardware, environment, live-ware
ADCS Advanced documentation control systems model
APC Advanced process control SI Semiconductor industry
AMT Aircraft maintenance technicians SPC Statistical process control
BEOL Backend of line TPM Total productive maintenance
BN Bayesian network U-BN Unsupervised Bayesian network
CAD Computer-aided design WO Work order
CBM Condition-based maintenance
CM Corrective maintenance
CMMS Computerized maintenance management
system References
CPT Conditional probability table
CVD Chemical vapor deposition Abu-Samah A, Shahzad MK, Zamaı̈ E, Hubac S (2014) Methodology
DIEL Dielectric deposition workshop for integrated failure-cause diagnosis with bayesian approach:
application to semiconductor manufacturing equipment. In:
EQE Quivalence class algorithm Proceedings of second European conference of the prognostics
FDC Fault detection and classification and health management society, Nantes, France
FEOL Frontend of line Abu-Samah A, Shahzad MK, Zamaı̈ E, Ben Said A (2015) Failure
FM Failure mode prognosis methodology for improved proactive maintenance
using bayesian approach. In: 9th IFAC symposium on fault
FMEA Failure mode and effects analysis detection, supervision and safety for technical processes, Sept
FMECA Failure mode effects and criticality analysis 2015, Paris, France
He Helium Baly R, Hajj H (2012) Wafer classification using support vector
HFI Human factor integration machines. IEEE Trans Semicond Manuf 25(3):373–383
Bertling L, Allan R, Eriksson R (2005) A reliability-centered asset
IC Integrated circuit maintenance method for assessing the impact of maintenance in
KM Knowledge management power distribution systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 20(1):75–82
KNN K-nearest neighbor Bouaziz MF, Zamaı̈ E, Duvivier F (2013) Towards Bayesian network
KPI Key performance indicator methodology for predicting the equipment health factor of
complex semiconductor systems. Int J Prod Res
MDL Minimum description length 51(15):4597–4617
MPM Maintenance performance measurement Bouckaert RR, (1993) Probabilistic network construction using the
MP Maintenance procedure minimum description length principle. In: Lecture Notes in
OEE Overall equipment efficiency Computer Science, vol 747, pp 41–48
Brown SM, Hanschke T, Meents I, Wheeler BR, Zisgen H (2010)
OFC Objective fulfillment criteria Queueing model improves IBM’s semiconductor capacity and
OOC Out of control lead-time management. Interfaces 40(5):397–407

123
212
Bruseberg A (2008) Presenting the value of human factors integra-
tion: guidance, arguments and evidence. Cogn Technol Work
10(3):181–189
Cacciabue PC, Mauri C, Owen D (2003) The development of a model
and simulation of an aviation maintenance technician task
performance. Cogn Technol Work 5(4):229–247
Chang YH, Wang YC (2010) Significant human risk factors in aircraft
maintenance technicians. Saf Sci 48(1):54–62
Chickering DM (2002) Learning equivalence classes of Bayesian-
network structures. J Mach Learn Res 2:445–498
Crocker J (1999) Effectiveness of maintenance. J Qual Maint Eng
5(4):307–314
Dai W, Maropoulos PG, Zhao Y (2015) Reliability modelling and
verification of manufacturing processes based on process
knowledge management. Int J Comput Integr Manuf
28(1):98–111
Denson B, Tang SY, Gerber K, Blaignan V (2014) An effective and
systematic design FMEA approach. In: Proceeding of reliability
and maintainability symposium (RAMS), annual IEEE confer-
ence, pp 1–6
Friedman N, Koller D (2000). Being Bayesian about network
structure. In: Proceedings of the sixteenth conference on
uncertainty in artificial intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann,
pp 201–210
Garcia A, Gilabert E (2011) Mapping FMEA into Bayesian networks.
Int J Perform Eng 7(6):525–537
He QP, Wang J (2010) Large-scale semiconductor process fault
detection using a fast pattern recognition-based method. IEEE
Trans Semicond Manuf 23(2):194–200
Heckerman D (1997) Bayesian networks for data mining. Data Min
Knowl Disc 1(1):79–119
Hsieh YS, Cheng FT, Huang HC, Wang CR, Wang SC, Yang HC
(2013) Vm-based Baseline predictive maintenance scheme.
IEEE Trans Semicond Manuf 26:132–144
Hubac S, Zamai E (2013) Politiques de maintenance equipment en
flux de production stressant—equipment maintenance policy in
stressed manufacturing flow (technology or product). Edition TI
(Technique de l’ingenieur) [AG 3535]
Ison A, Spanos CJ (1996) Robust fault detection and fault classifi-
cation of semiconductor manufacturing equipment. In: Proceed-
ings of the 5th international symposium on semiconductor
manufacturing, pp 1–4
Jensen FV, Nielsen TD (2007) Bayesian networks and decision
graphs, 2nd edn. Springer, New York
Jordan WE (1972) Failure modes, effects and criticality analyses. In:
Proceedings of the annual reliability maintainability symposium,
pp 30–37
Kjærulff UB, Madsen AL (2006) Probabilistic networks for practi-
tioners—a guide to construction and analysis of Bayesian
networks and influence diagrams. Department of Computer
Science, Aalborg University, HUGIN Expert A/S
Krishnamurthy L, Adler R, Buonadonna P, Chhabra J, Flanigan M,
Kushalnagar N, Nachman L, Yarvis M (2005) Design and
deployment of industrial sensor networks: experiences from a
semiconductor plant and the North Sea. In: Proceedings of the
3rd international conference on embedded networked sensor
systems, San Diego, California, USA, November 2005, pp 02–04
Lee B (2001) Using Bayes belief networks in industrial FMEA
modelling and analysis. Proc Annu Reliab Maintainab Symp
15(4):281–293
Lin XJ, Lin Q, Zhang GN (2015) Effectivity of total productive
maintenance (TPM) in large size organizations—a case study in
Shandong Lingong. Appl Mech Mater 701:1249–1252
Liu Y (2008) Predictive modeling for intelligent maintenance in
complex semiconductor manufacturing processes. ProQuest,
Doctorate thesis, University of Michigan
123
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
Luo SH, Lee GG (2015) Applying failure mode and effects analysis
for successful knowledge management. Total Qual Manag Bus
Excell 26(1–2):62–75
Masson M, Koning Y (2001) How to manage human error in aviation
maintenance? The example of a Jar 66-HF education and
training programme. Cogn Technol Work 3(4):189–204
McKone KE, Schroeder RG, Cua KO (1999) Total productive
maintenance: a contextual view. J Oper Manag 17(2):123–144
McLachlan GJ, Do KA, Ambroise C (2004) Analyzing microarray
gene expression data. Wiley, New York
Medina-Oliva G, Weber P, Iung B (2015) Industrial system knowl-
edge formalization to aid decision making in maintenance
strategies assessment. Eng Appl Artif Intell 37:343–360
Meihami B, Meihami H (2014) Knowledge management a way to
gain a competitive advantage in firms (evidence of manufactur-
ing companies). Int Lett Soc Human Sci 03:80–91
Mili A, Siadat A, Hubac S, Bassetto S (2008) Dynamic management
of detected factory events and estimated risks using FMECA. In:
Proceeding of management of innovation and technology,
ICMIT 2008 4th IEEE international conference on,
pp 1204–1209
Mili A, Bassetto S, Siadat A, Tollenaere M (2009) Dynamic risk
management unveil productivity improvements. J Loss Prev
Process Ind 22:25–34
Military US (1949) Procedure for performing a failure mode effect
and criticality analysis. United States military procedure MIL-P-
1629
Mönch L, Fowler JW, Mason SJ (2012) Production planning and
control for semiconductor wafer fabrication facilities: modeling,
analysis, and systems. Springer, New York
Moore T, Harner B, Kestner G, Baab C, Stanchfield J (2006) Intel’s
FDC proliferation in 300 mm HVM: progress and lessons
learned. In: Proceeding of AEC/APC Symp. XVIII, Westmin-
ster, CO
Muchiri P, Pintelon L, Martin H, De Meyer AM (2010) Empirical
analysis of maintenance performance measurement in Belgian
industries. Int J Prod Res 48(20):5905–5924
Muchiri P, Pintelon L, Gelders L, Martin H (2011) Development of
maintenance function performance measurement framework and
indicators. Int J Prod Econ 131(1):295–302
Munteanu P, Bendou M (2001) The EQ framework for learning
equivalence classes of Bayesian networks. In: First IEEE
international conference on data mining (IEEE ICDM), San José
Mustapha I, Jusoh A, Nor KM (2015) A review on quality
management systems maintenance framework based on process
based management, knowledge quality and knowledge self-
efficacy. J Teknol 72(4):7–12
Omdahl TP (1988) Reliability, availability, and maintainability
(RAM) dictionary. ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee
Parida A, Kumar U (2006) Maintenance performance measurement
(MPM): issues and challenges. J Qual Maint Eng 12(3):239–251
Peter ML (2012) Bayesian statistics: an introduction. Wiley, New York
Pourret O, Naı̈m P, Marcot B (2008) Bayesian networks: a practical
guide to applications. Wiley, Chichester
Rashid HSJ, Place CS, Braithwaite GR (2014) Eradicating root causes
of aviation maintenance errors: introducing the AMMP. Cogn
Technol Work 16(1):71–90
Rasmussen J (2000) Human factors in a dynamic information society:
where are we heading? Ergonomics 43(7):869–879
Redmill F (2002) Risk analysis—a subjective process. Eng Manag J
12(2):91–96
Rissanen J (1978) Modeling by shortest data description. Automatica
14(5):465–658. doi:10.1016/0005-1098(78)90005-5
Schirru A, Pampuri S, DeNicolao G (2010) Particle filtering of hidden
gamma processes for robust predictive maintenance in semicon-
ductor manufacturing. In: Proceedings of 6th IEEE CASE
Cogn Tech Work (2016) 18:193–213
SEMI E79-0200 (2000) Standard for definition and measurement of
equipment productivity. Semiconductor Equipment and Material
International (Mountain View, CA)
Shahzad MK, Hubac S, Siadat A, Tollenaere M (2011) An extended
business model to ensure time-to-quality in semiconductor
manufacturing industry. In: International conference on enter-
prise information systems, Portugal, 2011
Simões JM, Gomes CF, Yasin MM (2011) A literature review of
maintenance performance measurement: a conceptual frame-
work and directions for future research. J Qual Maint Eng
17(2):116–137
Susto G, Beghi A, DeLuca C (2011) A predictive maintenance system
for silicon epitaxial deposition. In: Proceedings of IEEE
conference on automation science and engineering (CASE),
pp 262–267
Susto G, Pampuri S, Schirru A, Beghi A (2012) Optimal tuning of
epitaxy pyrometers. In: Proceedings of 23rd IEEE/SEMI
advanced semiconductor manufacturing conference, pp 294–299
Teece DJ (2000) Strategies for managing knowledge assets: the role
of firm structure and industrial context. Long Range Plan
33(1):35–54
Teyssier M, Koller D (2005) Ordering-based search: a simple and
effective algorithm for learning Bayesian networks. In: Proceed-
ings of 21st conference on uncertainty in AI (UAI), pp 584–590
213
Uzsoy R, Lee CY, Martin-Vega LA (1994) A review of production
planning and scheduling models in the semiconductor industry
part II: shop-floor control. IIE Trans 26(5):44–55
Verdier G, Ferreira A (2011) Adaptive mahalanobis distance and-
nearest neighbor rule for fault detection in semiconductor
manufacturing. IEEE Trans Semicond Manuf 24(1):59–68
Villacourt M (1992) Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA): a
guide for continuous/line improvement for the semiconductor
equipment industry SEMATECH. Transfer 92020963B-ENG
Weber P, Jouffe L (2006) Complex system reliability modeling with
dynamic object oriented Bayesian networks (DOOBN). Reliab
Eng Syst Saf 91:149–162
Weber A, Thomas R (2006) Key performance indicators: measuring
and managing the maintenance function. Ivara Corporation,
Burlington
Weber P, Suhner MC, Iung B (2001) System approach-based
Bayesian network to aid maintenance of manufacturing process.
In: Proceedings of 6th IFAC symposium on cost oriented
automation, low cost automation, Berlin, Germany, October
2001, pp 8–9
Yssaad B, Khiat M, Chaker A (2014) Reliability centered mainte-
nance optimization for power distribution systems. Int J Electr
Power Energy Syst 55:108–115
123