a software framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
A Software Framework for Matchmaking based on Semantic Web Technology PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
A Software Framework for Matchmaking based on Semantic Web Technology

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 9

A Software Framework for Matchmaking based on Semantic Web Technology - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 89 Views
  • Uploaded on

A Software Framework for Matchmaking based on Semantic Web Technology. on the paper by Li and Horrocks http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~lil/papers/p815-li.pdf. Eyal Oren DERI 2004/04/14. Overview. Service advertisement and discovery DAML-S based service ontology working prototype

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

A Software Framework for Matchmaking based on Semantic Web Technology


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 software framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology

A Software Framework for Matchmaking based on Semantic Web Technology

on the paper by Li and Horrockshttp://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~lil/papers/p815-li.pdf

Eyal Oren

DERI

2004/04/14

overview
Overview
  • Service advertisement and discovery
  • DAML-S based service ontology
  • working prototype
    • agent based (JADE)
    • DL Reasoner (Racer)
  • quite comparable with D5.1
current standards
Current standards
  • WSDL
    • XML grammar for describing network services
    • structured way of describing communication
    • no support for semantic description
  • UDDI
    • registry describing businesses and offered services
    • no description of service capabilities, only string matching
    • you could use DAML-S (or WSMO) tModels
  • DAML-S
    • describing properties and capabilities of web services
    • “can adequately represent functionalities of web services”
slide4
extension/application of DAML-S
  • describe specific profiles
    • service advertisement
    • service request
  • perform a matching of requests and advertisements
  • question is whether DAML-S (or DAML+OIL) is suitable/sufficient for describing web services
  • in wsmo we don’t (yet) limit the language expressiveness
  • therefore, everything is possible and nothing is (known to be) computable
  • we will define a decidable subset: WSML-DL, WSML-HL, WSML-DLP (?)
example advertisement and request
Example – advertisement and request

profile does not include providedBy and requestedBy(as DAML-S prescribes)

note, that for efficiency reasons, these (individual) offers and requests are expressed as special concepts (Tbox reasoning is more efficient than ABox reasoning)

matching levels
Matching levels

Advertisment A and Request R

  • Exact: A ≡ R
  • PlugIn: (offering PC, looking for second-hand PC)
  • Subsume: (offering second-hand, looking for PC)
  • Intersection:
  • Disjoint
prototype agents
Prototype - agents
  • Advertiser: publishes, withdraws, modifies advertisements
  • Seeker: publishes requests (volatile/persistent)
  • Host:
    • manages repository of advertisements
    • manages persistent queries
    • uses Racer to compute request-advertisement subsumption
    • could compute advertisements hierarchy off-line
      • requests subsumptions easy
      • inserting new advertisements easy
      • removing advertisements harder (re-classifying TBox)
useful for wsmo
Useful for WSMO
  • this works, so we need to explain: why is DAML-S not sufficient (not expressive) ?
  • look at levels of matching (exact, plugin, subsume, etc.)
  • agents infrastructure (FIPA), for WSMX (??)