Trace EQ-005's asset context

Connect EQ-005 to its subsystems, sensors, inspection, and planned maintenance while interpreting missing relationships.

Question for this chapter

What field context should accompany EQ-005's scores when a crew receives the work?

Why this matters now

An HI or RUL row alone forces the next person to rediscover the attached sensors and recent inspection. The ontology connects identifiers from separate datasets around the same equipment.

Try it

Run the ontology_materialization pipeline. Then expand EQ-005's context in this order.

In Graph Explorer, select this scenario's collection.
Select hs_equipment under Entities.
Select EQ-005 and confirm equipment_id in Node properties.
Inspect the subsystem, inspection, and planned-maintenance connections returned with the equipment.
Select a connected subsystem and use Expand neighbours to add its sensor connections.

Successful result

Connected item	Current result	Context it adds
Subsystems	`WINDING`, `BUSHING`, `TAP_CHANGER`, `COOLING`, `OIL_TANK`	Five inspection areas on the transformer
Sensors	Temperature, partial discharge, vibration	Sources of thermal and electrical evidence
Inspection	One `partial_discharge_check`, result `normal`	The inspection evidence currently on record
Defects	No connected rows	No evidence that a defect has been confirmed
Past maintenance	No connected rows	EQ-005's estimated cost uses the scenario median
Planned maintenance	`MAJOR_OVERHAUL`, scheduled day 0	Next action proposed by the analysis

Missing defect and historical-maintenance nodes do not indicate a pipeline failure. They show that the current inputs contain no such records for EQ-005.

Read the result

The graph does not recalculate why EQ-005 ranks second. It gives the crew the context behind the score and schedule.

One normal inspection exists, while DGA and operating-load scores are relatively weaker.
The thermal-anomaly flag is false, but RUL is below two years and its lower interval bound is zero.
With no confirmed defect, MAJOR_OVERHAUL is a proposed planning action rather than a declaration of failure.
With no past maintenance record for EQ-005, the estimated cost falls back to the median across all maintenance history. Confirm the scope and quote before issuing real work.

Deep dive — complete ontology output

Group	Row counts
Entities	Equipment 10, subsystems 14, sensors 28, inspections 33, defects 25, maintenance 20
Relations	Subsystems 48, sensors 28, inspections 33, defects 25, detections 15, repairs 10

The sensor path is equipment → subsystem → sensor, not equipment → sensor. Following the current relation direction keeps the graph result aligned with the source contract.

Next decision

You now have EQ-005's current condition, remaining-time estimate, and relationship context. Next, apply the same calculation to all ten assets and create a schedule under budget and crew limits.