Quality Metrics for LLM-Generated Asset Administration Shells: A Perturbation-Based Evaluation Approach

The Asset Administration Shell (AAS) is a cornerstone of Industry 4.0 and the Digital Product Passport, providing standardized digital representations of industrial assets. While manufacturers already maintain extensive technical product documentation, generating AAS instances from existing product datasheets remains a labor-intensive task because technical information is extracted from heterogeneous document structures and often involves company-specific terminology and conventions. In this work, we present AAS-RAIL, a retrieval-augmented information extraction (IE) approach that automatically generates Asset Administration Shells from PDF product datasheets using large language models (LLMs). Instead of relying on a fixed set of few-shot examples, the proposed retrieval-augmented in-context learning (RAIL) approach retrieves LLM-generated extraction helpers from similar Asset Administration Shells to provide instance-specific in-context learning (ICL). This enables the model to adapt its extraction behavior to company-specific naming conventions and formatting styles without fine-tuning. Our core contribution is the dynamic selection of company-specific AAS examples for each datasheet, replacing static prompting with an extraction pipeline that adapts to instances and combines semantic retrieval and structured information extraction. The proposed approach is evaluated on a collection of industrial product datasheets using a selection of open- and closed-weight LLMs. Experimental results show that RAIL consistently improves extraction quality over conventional few-shot prompting, yielding relative improvements of 30.4-52.4%. These results demonstrate that our approach provides an effective improvement for company-specific AAS generation.

In industrial procurement, an LLM answer is useful only if it survives a standards check: recommended material must match operating condition, every parameter must respect a regulated threshold, and no procedure may contradict a safety clause. Partial correctness can mask safety-critical contradictions that aggregate LLM benchmarks rarely capture. We introduce IndustryBench, a 2,049-item benchmark for industrial procurement QA in Chinese, grounded in Chinese national standards (GB/T) and structured industrial product records, organized by seven capability dimensions, ten industry categories, and panel-derived difficulty tiers, with item-aligned English, Russian, and Vietnamese renderings. Our construction pipeline rejects 70.3% of LLM-generated candidates at a search-based external-verification stage, calibrating how unreliable industrial QA remains after LLM-only filtering. Our evaluation decouples raw correctness, scored by a Qwen3-Max judge validated at $κ_w = 0.798$ against a domain expert, from a separate safety-violation (SV) check against source texts. Across 17 models in Chinese and an 8-model intersection over four languages, we find: (i) the best system reaches only 2.083 on the 0--3 rubric, leaving substantial headroom; (ii) Standards & Terminology is the most persistent capability weakness and survives item-aligned translation; (iii) extended reasoning lowers safety-adjusted scores for 12 of 13 models, primarily by introducing unsupported safety-critical details into longer final answers; and (iv) safety-violation rates reshuffle the leaderboard -- GPT-5.4 climbs from rank 6 to rank 3 after SV adjustment, while Kimi-k2.5-1T-A32B drops seven positions. Industrial LLM evaluation therefore requires source-grounded, safety-aware diagnosis rather than aggregate accuracy. We release IndustryBench with all prompts, scoring scripts, and dataset documentation.

Industrial maintenance environments increasingly rely on AI systems to assist operators in understanding asset behavior, diagnosing failures, and evaluating interventions. Although large language models (LLMs) enable fluent natural-language interaction, deployed maintenance assistants routinely produce generic explanations that are weakly grounded in telemetry, omit verifiable provenance, and offer no testable support for counterfactual or action-oriented reasoning that undermine trust in safety-critical settings. We present IndustryAssetEQA, a neurosymbolic operational intelligence system that combines episodic telemetry representations with a Failure Mode Effects Analysis Knowledge Graph (FMEA-KG) to enable Embodied Question Answering (EQA) over industrial assets. We evaluate on four datasets covering four industrial asset types, including rotating machinery, turbofan engines, hydraulic systems, and cyber-physical production systems. Compared to LLM-only baselines, IndustryAssetEQA improves structural validity by up to 0.51, counterfactual accuracy by up to 0.47, and explanation entailment by 0.64, while reducing severe expert-rated overclaims from 28% to 2% (approximately 93% reduction). Code, datasets, and the FMEA-KG are available at https://github.com/IBM/AssetOpsBench/tree/IndustryAssetEQA/IndustryAssetEQA.