Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
The Irs Project Overview
Related Work
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Information Systems

IRS-III: A broker-based approach to semantic Web services

Profile image of Carlos PedrinaciCarlos Pedrinaci

2008, Web Semantics: Science …

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WEBSEM.2008.01.001
visibility

…

description

59 pages

link

1 file

Abstract
sparkles

AI

IRS-III presents a broker-based approach to enhance the efficiency of semantic Web services. By solving the limitations that software developers face in finding, composing, and resolving mismatches between Web services, IRS-III integrates semantic Web and Web service technologies. The framework emphasizes the interoperability and reusability of services through a combination of established Web services standards and innovative choreography and orchestration mechanisms, all while applying this approach in various domains such as eGovernment and business process modeling.

Related papers

Semantic Web Enabled Web Services
Alexander Maedche

2002

Web Services will transform the web from a collection of information into a distributed device of computation. In order to employ their full potential, appropriate description means for web services need to be developed. For this purpose we define a full-fledged Web Service Modeling Framework (WSMF) that provides the appropriate conceptual model for developing and describing web services and their composition. Its philosophy is based on the following principle: maximal de-coupling complemented by scalable mediation service.

View PDFchevron_right
Applying Semantic Web Services
Carlos Pedrinaci

… WEB APPLICATIONS AND …

The use of Semantic Web Services (SWS) for increasing agility and adaptability in process execution is currently investigated in many settings. The common underlying idea is the dynamic selection, composition and mediationon the basis of available SWS descriptions -of the most adequate Web resource (services and data) to accomplish a specific process activity. In this paper we describe IRS-III, a framework for creating and executing semantic Web services, which takes a semantic broker based approach to mediating between service requesters and service providers. We describe the overall approach of IRS-III from an ontological perspective. We then illustrate our approach through three different applications to domains of Business Process Management, e-Learning and e-Science.

View PDFchevron_right
Approaches to developing semantic web services
Jorge Cardoso

2006

Abstract—It has been recognized that due to the autonomy and heterogeneity, of Web services and the Web itself, new approaches should be developed to describe and advertise Web services. The most notable approaches rely on the description of Web services using semantics.

View PDFchevron_right
Web Services Roadmap: The Semantic Web Perspective
Peep Küngas

Advanced Int'l Conference on Telecommunications and Int'l Conference on Internet and Web Applications and Services (AICT-ICIW'06), 2006

Recently the field of Web services has gained focus both in industry and academia. While industry has been mostly interested in standardisation and promotion of the technology, academia has been looking for ways to fit the technology into other frameworks, such as the Semantic Web. Anyway, despite of the increased academic and commercial interest to Web services, there are currently only few case studies available about Web services in the Semantic Web context. Moreover, according to authors' knowledge, there is no publicly available study analysing which data is currently mostly provided/required by Web services.

View PDFchevron_right
Delivering Semantic Web Services
Massimo Paolucci

2003

The growing infrastructure for Web Services assumes a "programmer in the loop" that hardcodes the connections between Web Services and directly programs Web Service composition. Emerging technology based on DAML-S and the Semantic Web allows Web Services to connect and transact automatically with minimal or no intervention from programmers. In this paper we discuss the problems related with autonomous Web Services, and how DAML-S provides the information to solve them. Furthermore, we describe the implementation of two demonstration systems that use such technology: the first system is a B2B application in which a business that assembles computers automatically finds partners providing parts and automatically transacts with them; the second describes an e-commerce application that helps a user to organize a trip to a meeting automatically interacting with different Web Services and the calendar of the user stored in MS Outlook. The results of these experiments show how Web Services can be deployed on the Web to interact and provide information dynamically; second, how the transaction can be carried on automatically with no programmer intervention.

View PDFchevron_right
Semantic web service architecture–evolving web service standards toward the semantic web
Siegfried Handschuh

Proceedings of the …, 2002

View PDFchevron_right
Development of Semantic Web Services at the Knowledge Level
Manuel Lama

Web Services, 2004

Web Services are interfaces to a collection of operations that are network-accessible through standardized XML messaging, and whose features are described using standard XML-based languages. Semantic Web Services (SWS) describe semantically the internal structure and the functional/nonfunctional capabilities of the services, facilitating the design and evaluation of SWSs based on that semantic description of the features of the services. To enable users to design and compose SWSs at the knowledge level, the ODE SWS framework has been proposed. That framework uses problem-solving methods to describe the functional and structural features of the SWSs. In this work, we present a description of the ODE SWS environment as an implementation of the ODE SWS framework. Specially, we focus on the description of the capabilities of the SWSDesigner, the tool of the ODE SWS environment that enables users to design graphically SWSs through different but complementary views of the services.

View PDFchevron_right
Semantic Web Services-Concepts and Technology
Dieter Fensel

… Technology, Ontologies, and …, 2006

Abstract. Although the Internet provides a world wide infrastructure for information provision and communication, the initial web technology stack has substantial draw-backs with regard to automated web content processing. Consequently, the Semantic Web is envisioned as the next ...

View PDFchevron_right
An Environment for Development of Semantic Web Services
Manuel Lama

Proc. IJCAI 2003 …, 2003

Semantic Web Services (SWSs) are specified in a semantic markup language to enable other services (and agents) to reason about their capabilities, in order to decide whether a SWS should be invoked or not. In this paper an environment for development and description of SWSs is presented. This environment, called ODE SWSDesigner, consists of a graphical interface, which allows users to carry out the design and characterization of SWSs at a conceptual level, and a set of software modules, which verify the design correctness and perform the translations from the graphical descriptions to the languages used to specify SWSs. ODE SWSDesigner provides support for a layer-based framework that we have proposed with the aim of enabling a language-independent development of SWSs. This framework is based on the use of problemsolving methods that are considered as highlevel specifications from which SWS descriptions can be generated and verified.

View PDFchevron_right
Approaches to semantic web services: an overview and comparisons
Farshad Hakimpour

Lecture notes in computer science, 2004

View PDFchevron_right

References (95)

  1. AMAZON. 2006. Available from http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html/104-6906496- 9857523?%5Fencoding=UTF8&node=3435361/.
  2. BEA SYSTEMS, IBM CORPORATION, MICROSOFT CORPORATION., SAP AG, SIEBEL SYSTEMS. 2002. Business Process Execution Language for Web Services. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws- bpel BENJAMINS, V.R., PLAZA, E., MOTTA, E., FENSEL, D., STUDER, R., WIELINGA, B., SCHREIBER, G., AND ZDRAHAL, Z. 1998. IBROW3 -An Intelligent Brokering Service for Knowledge-Component Reuse on the World Wide Web. In Proceedings of the 11th Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based System Workshop (KAW98), Banff, Canada, April 1998.
  3. BERNERS-LEE, T., HENDLER, J. AND LASSILA, O. 2001. The Semantic Web. Scientific American, 284 (4), 34-43.
  4. BÖRGER, E. 1998. High Level System Design and Analysis Using Abstract State Machines. In proceedings of the International Workshop on Current Trends in Applied Formal Method: Applied Formal Methods, 1-43.
  5. BURSTEIN, M. BUSSLER, C., ZAREMBA, M., FININ, T., HUHNS, M.N., PAOLUCCI, M., SHETH, A.P., WILLIAMS, S. 2005. A Semantic Web Services Architecture. IEEE Internet Computing, Vol. 9 , 5, 72 -81.
  6. CABRAL, L. AND DOMINGUE, J. 2005. Mediation of Semantic Web Services in IRS-III. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC 2005), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  7. CABRAL, L., DOMINGUE, J., GALIZIA, S., GUGLIOTTA, A., NORTON, B., TANASESCU, V., PEDRINACI, C. 2006. IRS-III: A Broker for Semantic Web Services based Applications. In Proceedings of the 5th International Semantic Web Conference, Athens, USA, November, 2006.
  8. CLOCKSIN, W.F. AND MELLISH, C.S. 1984. -Programming in Prolog. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. New York, NY, USA.
  9. CRUBEZY, M., MOTTA, E., LU, W. AND MUSEN, M. 2002. Configuring Online Problem-Solving Resources with the Internet Reasoning Service. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2, 34-42.
  10. DE GREEF, P. AND BREUKER, J. 1992. Analysing system-user cooperation in KADS. Knowledge Acquisition, Special issue: The KADS approach to knowledge engineering 4(1), 89-108.
  11. DIJKMAN, R. AND DUMAS, M. 2004. Service-Oriented Design: A Multi-Viewpoint Approach. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 13(4): 337-368, 2004.
  12. DIP. 2004. Data, Information, and Process Integration with Semantic Web Services, http://dip.semanticweb.org/.
  13. DOMINGUE, J., CABRAL, L., GALIZIA, S., AND MOTTA, E. 2005a. A Comprehensive Approach to Creating and Using Semantic Web Services, In Proceedings of the W3C Workshop on Frameworks for Semantics in Web Service, Innsbruck, Austria, June 9-10, 2005.
  14. DOMINGUE, J., CABRAL, L., HAKIMPOUR, F., SELL D., AND MOTTA, E. 2004. IRS-III: A Platform and Infrastructure for Creating WSMO-based Semantic Web Services. In Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMO Implementations (WIW 2004), Frankfurt, Germany, September 29-30, 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073. http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS//Vol-113/paper3.pdf.
  15. DOMINGUE, J., GALIZIA, S., AND CABRAL, L. 2005b. Choreography in IRS-III-Coping with Heterogeneous Interaction Patterns in Web Services, In Proceedings of the 4th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2005), November 6-10, 2005, Galway, Ireland.
  16. DOMINGUE, J. AND MOTTA, E. 2000. Planet-Onto: From News Publishing to Integrated Knowledge Management Support. IEEE Intelligent Systems Special Issue on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Distribution over the Internet, (26-32).
  17. DOMINGUE, J., ROMAN, D., AND STOLLBERG, M. 2005c. Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO) -An Ontology for Semantic Web Services, Position paper at the W3C Workshop on Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services, June 9-10, 2005, Innsbruck, Austria.
  18. DOMINGUE, J., STUTT, A., C MARTINS, M., TAN, J., PERTUSSON, H., MOTTA, E. 2003. Supporting Online Shopping through a Combination of Ontologies and Interface Metaphors. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, Vol.59, 5, (699 723).
  19. DZBOR, M., MOTTA, E., DOMINGUE, J. 2007. Magpie: Experiences with supporting Semantic Web browsing. Journal of Web Semantics, 2007.
  20. DUPPLAW, D., DASMAHAPATRA, S., HU, B., LEWIS, P. AND SHADBOLT., N. 2004. Multimedia Distributed Knowledge Management in MIAKT. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Knowledge Markup and Semantic Annotation. , in conjunction with ISWC 2004, November 2004, Hiroshima, Japan.
  21. FENSEL, D. AND BUSSLER, C. 2002. The web service modeling framework WSMF. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 1(2):113-137, 2002.
  22. FENSEL, D., LAUSEN, H., POLLERES, A., DE BRUIJN, J., STOLLBERG, M., ROMAN, D., DOMINGUE, J. 2006. Enabling Semantic Web Services: Web Service Modeling Ontology. Springer, 2006.
  23. FENSEL, D. AND MOTTA, E. 2001. Structured Development of Problem Solving Methods, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 13(6), 9131-932.
  24. FORGY, C.L. 1981. OPS5 User's Manual, Technical Report CMU-CS-81-135, Carnegie Mellon University, 1981.
  25. EISENSTADT, M., KOMZAK, J. AND DZBOR, M. 2003. Instant messaging + maps = powerful collaboration tools for distance learning. In Proceedings of TelEdu '03, Havana, Cuba, 17-22 May 2003.
  26. GALIZIA, S., AND DOMINGUE, J. 2004. Towards a Choreography for IRS-III. In Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMO Implementations (WIW 2004), Frankfurt, Germany, September 29-30, 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073. http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS//Vol- 113/paper7.pdf.
  27. GANGEMI, A., GUARINO, N., MASOLO, C., OLTRAMARI, A., SCHNEIDER, L. 2002. Sweetening ontologies with DOLCE. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW02), Siguenza, Spain, October, 2002.
  28. GOOGLE . 2005. Google Web APIs http://www.google.com/apis/index.html/.
  29. GRUBER, T. R. 1993. A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 5(2).
  30. GRUBER, T. R., AND OLSEN, G. R. 1994. An ontology for engineering mathematics. In Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Gustav Stresemann Institut, Bonn, Germany, May 24-27, 1994.
  31. HAGEL, J., DURCHSLAG, S. AND SEELY BROWN, J. 2002. Orchestrationg Loosely Coupled Business Processes: The Secret to Successful Collaboration. http://www.johnhagel.com/paper_orchestratingcollaboration.pdf HAKIMPOUR, F., DOMINGUE, J., MOTTA, E., CABRAL, L. AND LEI, Y. 2004. Integration of OWL-S into IRS-III, In Proceedings of the first AKT Workshop on Semantic Web Services.
  32. HAVANTZAS, G., BURDETT, D., RITZINGER, G., FLETCHER, T. AND LAFON, Y., BARRETO, C. 2005. Web Service Choreography Description Language Version 1.0. W3C Working Draft 17 December 2004. (Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-cdl-10/).
  33. KELLER, G., NÜTTGENS, M., AND SCHEER, A. W. 1992. Semantische Prozessmodellierung auf der Grundlage Ereignisgesteuerter Prozessketten (EPK). Technical Report Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik (IWi), Heft 89. Universität des Saarlandes, January 1992.
  34. LASSILA, O. 2001. Enabling Semantic Web Programming by Integrating RDF and Common Lisp. In Proceedings of the First Semantic Web Working Symposium. Stanford University, 2001.
  35. LHDL. 2006. Living Human Digital Library, http://www.livinghuman.org/.
  36. LUISA. 2006. Learning Content Management System Using Innovative Semantic Web Services Architecture, http://luisa.atosorigin.es/.
  37. JABBER. 2006. Jabber SoftwareFoundation. http://www.jabber.org/.
  38. MARK., D. 1989. Cognitive Image-Schemata for Geographic Information: Relations to User Views and GIS Interfaces. In Proceedings of GIS/LIS '89 (pp. 551-560), Orlando, Florida, 1989.
  39. MEDJAHED, B. 2005. A Multilevel Composability Model for Semantic Web Services. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 17(7), 954 -968, July 2005.
  40. MEDJAHED, B. AND BOUGUETTAYA, A. 2005. Customized Delivery of E-Government Web Services. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 20(6), December 2005. METEOR-S. 2006. METEOR-S: Semantic Web Services and Processes. http://lsdis.cs.uga.edu/projects/meteor-s/.
  41. MIAKT. 2002. Medical Imaging and Advanced Knowledge Technologies, http://www.aktors.org/miakt/.
  42. MOTTA, E. 1998. An Overview of the OCML Modelling Language, In Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Knowledge Engineering Methods and Languages (KEML '98).
  43. MOTTA, E., DOMINGUE, J., CABRAL, L., AND GASPARI, M. 2003. IRS-II: A Framework and Infrastructure for Semantic Web Services. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2003,) 20- 23 October 2003, Sundial Resort, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA.
  44. NORTON, B. 2007. Reasoning About Behaviour on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings on Programming Paradigms for the Web: Web Programming and Web Services, Dagstuhl, Germany (to appear).
  45. NORTON, B. PEDRINACI, C., HENOCQUE, L. AND KLEINER M. 2007. 3-Level Behavioural Models for Semantic Web Services. Special issue of Multi-Agent and Grid Systems. (to appear).
  46. OASIS, SEE TC. 2006. http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=semantic-ex/.
  47. OMG. 2002. The Object Management Group: Meta-Object Facility, version 1.4, 2002. Available at http://www.omg.org/technology/documents/formal/mof.htm.
  48. OWL. 2004. OWL Web Ontology Language Overview. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/.
  49. OWL-S. 2006. OWL-S 1.2 Pre-Release, (http://www.ai.sri.com/daml/services/owl-s/1.2/).
  50. OWL-S TOOLS. 2006. http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/tools.html.
  51. PAOLUCCI, M., ANKOLEKAR, A., SRINIVASAN, N. AND SYCARA, K. 2003. The DAML-S Virtual Machine, In Proceedings of the Second International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), 2003, Sandial Island, Fl, USA, October 2003, 290-305.
  52. PATIL, A., OUNDHAKAR, S., SHETH, A. AND VERMA, K. 2004. METEOR-S Web service Annotation Framework, Proceedings of the Thirteenth International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2004), May, 2004, 553-562.
  53. RDF. 2004. RDF Primer. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/.
  54. RDF SCHEMA. 2004. RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf- schema/.
  55. RIVA, A. AND RAMONI, M. 1996. LispWeb: A Specialised HTTP Server for Distributed AI Applications. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 28, 7-11, 953-961.
  56. SAWSDL. 2006. Semantic Annotations for Web Services Description Language Working Group. http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/.
  57. SHI, X. AND JAGANNATHAN, V. 2005. Rebuilding the Semantic Web Service Architecture, Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on semantic and dymanic Web processes (SDWP 2005), in conjunction with the International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2005), Orlando, Florida, USA, July 11-15 2005.
  58. SIVASHANMUGAM, K., MILLER, J.A., SHETH AND VERMA, K. 2005. Framework for Semantic Web Process Composition. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 9(2), 71-106.
  59. SRINIVASAN, N., PAOLUCCI, M. AND SYCARA, K. 2006. Semantic Web Service Discovery in the OWL-S IDE. In proceedings of Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2006), Hyatt Regency Kauai, Hawaii, January 4-6, 2006.
  60. SOAP. 2003. SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer, (http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part0/).
  61. STOLLBERG, M. AND NORTON, B. 2007. A Refined Goal Model for Semantic Web Services. In Proc. of the 2nd International Conference on Internet and Web Applications and Services (ICIW 2007), Mauritius, 2007.
  62. SUPER. 2006. Semantics Utilised for Process management within and between EnteRprises, http://www.ip- super.org/.
  63. SWSF. 2005. Semantic Web Services Framework, http://www.daml.org/services/swsf/.
  64. SWSI. 2006. The Semantic Web Services Initiative (SWSI), http://www.swsi.org/.
  65. TANASESCU, V., GUGLIOTTA, A., DOMINGUE, J., VILLARÍAS, L., DAVIES, R., ROWLATT, M., RICHARDSON, M., AND STINCIC, S. 2007. Geospatial Data Integration with Semantic Web Services: the eMerges Approach, The Geospatial Web, eds. Arno Scharl, Klaus Tochtermann, Springer.
  66. UDDI. 2003. UDDI Spec Technical Committee Specification v. 3.0, http://uddi.org/pubs/uddi-v3.0.1- 20031014.htm.
  67. 2004b. Web Services Glossary. W3C Working Group Note. 11 February 2004 (Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-gloss/).
  68. WSDL. 2001. Web Services Description Language (WSDL) 1.1, http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-wsdl- 20010315.
  69. WSML. 2005. The Web Service Modeling Language WSML, http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d16/d16.1/v0.3/.
  70. WSMO. 2007. Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO), http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d2/v1.4/.
  71. WSMO STUDIO. 2006. http://www.wsmostudio.org/.
  72. WSMX. 2005. Overview and Scope of WSMX, http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d13/d13.0/v0.2/. (has-interface :type meta-interface) (used-mediator :type meta-oo-mediator)))
  73. def-class meta-interface () ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x interface) (subclass-of ?x interface)))
  74. def-class interface (wsmo-entity) ((has-choreography :type meta-choreography) (has-orchestration :type meta-orchestration) (used-mediator :type meta-oo-mediator)))
  75. def-class meta-mediator () ? :iff-def (or ( x = ?x mediator) (subclass-of ?x
  76. def-class mediator (wsmo-entity) ((has-source-component :type meta-wsmo-entity) (has-target-component :type meta-wsmo-entity) (has-mapping-rules :type mapping-rules) (has-mediation-service :type meta-mediation-service
  77. def-class meta-wg-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x wg-mediator) (subclass-of ?x wg-mediator
  78. def-class wg-mediator (mediator) ((has-source-component :type meta-web-service-or-wg-mediator) (has-target-component :type meta-goal ( -or-wg-mediator) used-mediator :type meta-oo-mediator
  79. def-class meta-gw-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x gw-mediator) (subclass-of ?x gw-mediator
  80. def-class gw-mediator (mediator) ((has-source-component :type meta-goal-or-gw-mediator) (has-target-component :type meta-web-service-or-gw-mediator) (used-mediator :type meta-oo-mediator)))
  81. def-class meta-ww-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x ww-mediator) (subclass-of ?x ww-mediator
  82. def-class ww-mediator (mediator) ((has-source-component :type meta-web-service-or-ww-mediator) (has-target-component :type meta-web-service-or-ww-mediator) (used-mediator :type meta-oo-mediator)))
  83. def-class meta-gg-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x gg-mediator) (subclass-of ?x gg-mediator
  84. def-class gg-mediator (mediator) ((used-mediator :type meta-oo-mediator) (has-source-component :type meta-goal-or-gg-mediator) (has-target-component :type meta-goal-or-gg-mediator
  85. def-class meta-oo-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x oo-mediator) (subclass-of ?x oo-mediator
  86. def-class oo-mediator (mediator) ((has-source-component :type meta-oo-mediator
  87. def-class meta-wg-or-oo-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x wg-or-oo-mediator) (subclass-of ?x wg-or-oo-mediator)))
  88. def-class wg-or-oo-mediator (mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (oo-mediator ?x) (wg-mediator ?
  89. def-class meta-goal-or-gg-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x goal-or-gg-mediator) (subclass-of ?x goal-or-gg-mediator)))
  90. def-class goal-or-gg-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (goal-mediator ?x) (gg-mediator ?
  91. def-class meta-web-service-or-ww-mediator (meta-mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (= ?x web-service-or-ww-mediator) (subclass-of ?x web-service-or-ww-mediator
  92. def-class web-service-or-ww-mediator (mediator) ?x :iff-def (or (web-service ?x) (ww-mediator ?
  93. def-class meta-mediation-service () ?x :iff-def (or (meta-goal ?x) (meta-web-service ?
  94. def-class mediation-service () ?x :iff-def (or (goal ?x) (web-service ?
  95. def-procedure instantiate-web-service (?goal-inst ?web-service-type) :body (in-environment ((?name . (new-symbol ?web-service-type))) (tell (append (list-of ?web-service-type ?name) nil)) (tell (suitable-web-service ?goal-inst ?name)) ?name)) (def-relation can-solve-goal (?goal ?thing) :sufficient." (or (and (instance ?goal ( ) can-solve-goal (the-parent ?goal) ?thing)) (and (meta-web-service ?thing) (= ?capability (the-class-slot-value ?thing has-capability)) (meta-capability ?capability) (= ?mediator (the-class-slot-value ?capability used-mediator)) (meta-mediator ?mediator) (= ?goal (the-class-slot-value ?mediator has-source-component

Related papers

A Conceptual Model and Technical Architecture for Semantic web services
Sfi Ezel

semantic web, web services, architecture, conceptual model

View PDFchevron_right
Semantic Web Services, Part 1
Michael L Brodie

IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2007

View PDFchevron_right
A Semantic Web Services Architecture
Massimo Paolucci

IEEE Internet Computing, 2005

View PDFchevron_right
Semantic web services
Carlos Pedrinaci

Handbook of Semantic …, 2010

In recent years service-orientation has increasingly been adopted as one of the main approaches for developing complex distributed systems out of reusable components called services. Realizing the potential benefits of this software engineering approach requires semi-automated and automated techniques and tools for searching or locating services, selecting the suitable ones, composing them into complex processes, resolving heterogeneity issues through process and data mediation, and reduce other tedious yet recurrent tasks with minimal manual effort. Just as semantics has brought significant benefits to search, integration and analysis of data, semantics is also seen as a key to achieving a greater level of automation to service orientation. This has lead to research and development, as well as standardization efforts on semantic Web services. Activities related to semantic Web services have involved developing conceptual models or ontologies, algorithms and engines that could support machines in semi-automatically or automatically discovering, selecting, composing, orchestrating, mediating and executing services. This chapter provides an overview of the area after nearly a decade of research. The main principles and conceptual models proposed thus far including OWL-S, WSMO, and SAWSDL/METEOR-S. The main approaches developed by the research community that are able to use these semantic descriptions of services to support some of the typical activities related to services and service-based applications are described. Next, the ideas and techniques described through two applications that integrate semantic Web services technologies within real-world application are illustrated. Finally, a set of key resources is provided that would allow the reader to reach a greater understanding of the field, and are the main issues that will drive the future of semantic Web services.

View PDFchevron_right
Hewlett-Packard Laboratories A Semantic Web Services Architecture The Semantic Web Services Initiative Architecture (SWSA) committee has
Mark Burstein

2016

created a set of architectural and protocol abstractions as a foundation for Semantic Web service technologies.This article summarizes the committee’s findings, emphasizing its review of requirements gathered from several different environments.The authors also identify the scope and potential requirements for a Semantic Web services architecture. Formed in February 2003, the Seman-tic Web Services Initiative Architec-ture (SWSA) committee’s mission is to develop the necessary abstractions for an architecture that supports Semantic Web services. The resultant framework builds on the W3C Web Services Archi-tecture working group report (and is motivated in part by Tim Berners-Lee’s vision for the Semantic Web1). Other groups developing Semantic Web services frameworks contributed to our discus-sions, including the OWL-S //au: please spell out/ / consortium, the WSMO //au: please spell out/ / group at the Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI), and the METEOR-S //au: please spell...

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Information Systems
  • Web Semantics
  • Semantic Web Service Composition

    • Cited by

    Semantic Web Service matchmakers: state of the art and challenges
    Elizabeth Chang

    Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 2013

    Web services provide a standard means for the interoperable operations between electronic devices in a network. The mission of Web service discovery is to seek an appropriate Web service for a service requester on the basis of the service descriptions in Web service advertisements and the service requester's requirements. Nevertheless, the standard language used for encoding service descriptions does not have the capacity to specify the capabilities of a Web service, leading to the problem of ambiguity in the service discovery process. This brings up the vision of Semantic Web Services and Semantic Web Service discovery, which make use of the Semantic Web technologies to enrich the semantics of service descriptions for service discovery. Semantic Web Service matchmakers are the programs or frameworks designed to implement the task of Semantic Web Service discovery and have drawn a significant amount of attention from both academia and industry from the start of this century. In this paper, we conduct a survey of the contemporary Semantic Web Service matchmakers in order to obtain an overview of the state of the art in this research area. We summarize six technical dimensions from the past literature and analyze the typical Semantic Web Service matchmakers mostly developed during the past 4 or 5 years in terms of the six dimensions. By means of this analysis, we gain an understanding of the current research and summarize a series of potential issues to that would provide the foundation for future research in this area.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Ontology-Driven Pervasive Service Composition for Everyday Life
    Jiehan Zhou

    Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2010

    Incorporating service composition and pervasive computing into managing user's everyday activities gives rise to the paradigm of Pervasive Service Composition for everyday life. This paper presents a novel generic model for services supporting everyday activities. The resulting service composition consists of local services within service peers and services are executed as specified in peer coordination and service collaboration. We suggest a taskbased, pervasive, semantic, and P2P-based approach for service composition for everyday life. We first address these fundamental characteristics. We give terminologies related to service composition, pervasive computing, ontology, and Pervasive Service Composition. Secondly, we analyze requirements for describing everyday activities. To meet the requirements we design an initial ontology model for capturing user's everyday activity and accommodating peer coordination and service collaboration in Pervasive Service Composition. Finally, we classify existing approaches to Web service composition.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Semantic issues in model-driven management of information system interoperability
    jean-pierre LORRE

    International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 2013

    The MISE Project (Mediation Information System Engineering) aims at providing collaborating organizations with a Mediation Information System (MIS) in charge of supporting interoperability of a collaborative network. MISE proposes an overall MIS design method according to a model-driven approach, based on model transformations. This MIS is in charge of managing (i) information, (ii) functions and (iii) processes among the information systems (IS) of partner organizations involved in the network. Semantic issues are accompanying this triple objective: How to deal with information reconciliation? How to ensure the matching between business functions and technical services? How to identify workflows among business processes? This article aims first, at presenting the MISE approach, second at defining the semantic gaps along the MISE approach and third at describing some past, current and future research works that deal with these issues. Finally and as a conclusion, the very "design-oriented" previous considerations are confronted with "run-time" requirements.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Semantic Web Services for University Course Registration
    Zeki Bayram

    Springer eBooks, 2014

    Semantic web services, with proper security procedures, have the potential to open up the computing infrastructure of an organization for smooth integration with external applications in a very controlled way, and at a very fine level of granularity. Furthermore, the process of using the provided functionality, consisting of discovery, invocation and execution of web services may be automated to a large extent. In this paper, we show how semantic web services and service-oriented computing can facilitate this integration in the education domain. Specifically, we use the Rule variant of Web Services Modeling Language (WSML) to semantically specify the functionality of web services for on-line course registration, a goal for consuming the provided functionality, as well as the ontologies needed for a shared terminology between the service and goal.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Semantic Web Service Search: A Brief Survey
    Matthias Klusch

    KI - Künstliche Intelligenz, 2015

    Scalable means for the search of relevant web services are essential for the development of intelligent service-based applications in the future Internet. Key idea of semantic web services is to enable such applications to perform a high-precision search and automated composition of services based on formal ontology-based representations of service semantics. In this paper, we briefly survey the state of the art of semantic web service search.

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved