Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology
Open-knowledge reference entry
The Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology – or short, the FBS ontology – is an ontology of design objects, i.e. things that have been or can be designed. The Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology conceptualizes design objects in three ontological categories: function (F), behaviour (B), and structure (S). The FBS ontology has been used in design science as a basis for modelling the process of designing as a set of distinct activities. This article relates to the concepts and models proposed by John S. Gero and his collaborators. Similar ideas have been developed independently by other researchers.
Overview
The ontological categories composing the Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology are defined as follows:
Function (F): the teleology (purpose) of the design object, i.e.“what the object is for". For example, the functions of a turbocharger include increasing the power output of an engine, providing reliability, and providing affordability.
Behaviour (B): the attributes that can be derived from the design object’s structure, i.e.“what the object does".For example, the behaviour of a turbocharger includes attributes such as air mass flow, efficiency ratio, thermal strength, and weight.
Structure (S): the components of the design object and their relationships., i.e.“what the object consists of”.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology” as open-knowledge reference entry. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as open-knowledge reference entry. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 25, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q17014966. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology primary sources, Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology archive and Function-Behaviour-Structure research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.