a view based approach for semantic service descriptions n.
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
A view-based approach for semantic service descriptions

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 23

A view-based approach for semantic service descriptions - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

A view-based approach for semantic service descriptions. Carsten Jacob , Heiko Pfeffer, Stephan Steglich, Li Yan, and Ma Qifeng. Motivation. Semantic service descriptions can be applied to enhance automatic service selection, composition, and invocation processes

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'A view-based approach for semantic service descriptions' - eryk

Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
a view based approach for semantic service descriptions

A view-based approach for semantic service descriptions

Carsten Jacob, Heiko Pfeffer, Stephan Steglich, Li Yan, and Ma Qifeng

  • Semantic service descriptions can be applied to enhance automatic service selection, composition, and invocation processes
  • Service providers and consumers consider service descriptions from a different perspective
    • Publish and advertise a service
      • Service category, grounding, …
    • Search for a particular kind of functionality
      • Service effect, costs, find similar services, …
  • Potential for abstracted views for both parties
    • Move complexity inside the automatic service matching process
three views for service description representation
Three views for service description representation
  • Abstracted semantic view for service provider and consumer based on an internal representation
lightswitch example
LightSwitch example

1 <Service name="LightSwitch1">

2 <hasCategory resource="#LightSwitch"/>

3 <hasInput resource="#OnOffValue"/>

4 <hasOutput resource="#OnOffValue"/>

5 <hasEffectRule ID="Rule1">

6 [(#lightSwitch1 #hasInput #OnValue) --> (#lightSwitch1 #hasEffect #Bright1)]

7 </hasEffectRule>

8 <Bright ID="Bright1"/>

9 <hasContextParameter>

10 <ServiceContext ID="EffectContext1">

11 <hasLocation resource="#Room15"/>

12 </ServiceContext>

13 </hasContextParameter>

14 </Service>

example definition of concepts
Example: definition of concepts

<Input ID=”#OnOffValue”>


<Thing about=”#OnValue”>

<Thing about=”#OffValue”>



<Input ID=”#OnValue”>



<Input ID=”#OffValue”>



service provider view
Service provider view
  • Categories are defined by their features
    • Input or output parameter
    • Precondition
    • Effect rule
  • Service provider
    • Browses the category tree and adds service (and category if necessary)
    • Lists the features of the service to enable an automatic classification
service requester view
Service requester view
  • Three phases
    • User specifies goal by selecting a general effect
    • User selects possible sub-effects, which are presented to specify the effect in more detail
    • User selects additional effects from proposals


(E) call-setup

(E‘) to nearby restaurant

(E‘+H) send SMS to friends in buddylist

service requester view transformation
Service requester view - transformation
  • Parse service effect rules to create effect tree if a new service is published
  • Semantic relationships among effects enable the definition of sub effects
  • According to the user‘s choice proper service categories are marked
    • Final selection is based on
      • Available input parameters (manually provided or derived)
      • QoS parameters, user ratings, …

int step=0;

node root = null;

WHILE (step < maxEffectsPerRule) {

r = getNextRule();

IF (r.numberOfEffects() = step) {

IF (r.factsFulfilled() = true) {

FOR (all Leaves){

IF (Leafl.getEffects().











  • Semantic Web Services description
    • Based on OWL-S
    • Object references defined in ontologies (OWL/RDF) to enable inference (SWRL, Jena rules, …) and classification using reasoner programs
  • Workflow descriptions for consideration of compositions
    • Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WS-BPEL), Web Service Choreography Interface (WSCI), Business Process Modeling Language (BPML)
thank you for your attention

Thank you for your attention!

Carsten Jacob (carsten.jacob@fokus.fraunhofer.de)

excursion ontology
Excursion: Ontology
  • Explicit formal specification of objects or concepts and their relationships
    • Gruber (1993): “an explicit specification of a conceptualization”
  • Describes:
    • Classes
    • Individuals
    • Attributes/ Properties
    • Relationships
  • More expressiveness: classrelationships (disjointness, ...), cardinalities, propertycharacteristics (symmetry, ...), restrictions, ...

Gruber, T. R.. (1993). Toward principles of the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. Presented at the Padua workshop on Formal Ontology, March 1993, later published in International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 43, Issues 4-5, November 1995, pp. 907-928.

excursion web ontology language owl
Excursion: Web Ontology Language (OWL)
  • Layering:
    • OWL Lite: basicfunctionality
    • OWL DL: all conclusions are computable, ensuresdecidability
    • OWL Full: norestrictionsconcerningthe OWL vocabulary
  • Characteristics:
    • XML, human readabletext
    • Distributable, supportforclassificationandinconsistencychecks, extensible, ...
    • Standardized, widely-used, toolsupport
    • Web-oriented: e.g., resourceidentification, Open World Assumption (OWA), but no Unique Name Assumption (UNA)


excursion owl example



Excursion: OWL Example

<?xml version="1.0"?>




<owl:Ontology rdf:about="">


<owl:imports rdf:resource="http://protege.stanford.edu/plugins/owl/protege"/>



<owl:Class rdf:ID="Pizza"/>



<owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="hasTopping"/>




<owl:unionOf rdf:parseType="Collection"><owl:Class rdf:ID="FruitTopping"/>


<owl:Class rdf:ID="CheeseTopping"/></owl:unionOf>