A Logical Framework for Web Service Discovery The Third International Semantic Web Conference Hiroshima, Japan, 08-11-2004 Michael Kifer 1, Rubén Lara.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Web Service Modelling Ontology (WSMO)
Advertisements

July 1, 2004SWSL Rules SWSL Rules Sketch of the proposed language BG & MK.
ISWC Doctoral Symposium Monday, 7 November 2005
CH-4 Ontologies, Querying and Data Integration. Introduction to RDF(S) RDF stands for Resource Description Framework. RDF is a standard for describing.
16/11/ IRS-II: A Framework and Infrastructure for Semantic Web Services Motta, Domingue, Cabral, Gaspari Presenter: Emilia Cimpian.
1 st COCOON review – March 8 th -9 th, SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME PRIORITY e-Health COCOON (FP ) Building knowledge driven & dynamically.
Formal Modelling of Reactive Agents as an aggregation of Simple Behaviours P.Kefalas Dept. of Computer Science 13 Tsimiski Str Thessaloniki Greece.
Web Service Modeling Ontology - Lite (WSMO-Lite) 1st F2F meeting SDK cluster working group on Semantic Web Services Wiesbaden, Germany, Christoph.
1 Semantic Description of Programming languages. 2 Static versus Dynamic Semantics n Static Semantics represents legal forms of programs that cannot be.
Formal Methods in Software Engineering Credit Hours: 3+0 By: Qaisar Javaid Assistant Professor Formal Methods in Software Engineering1.
OASIS Reference Model for Service Oriented Architecture 1.0
1 The Fourth Summer School on Ontological Engineering and the Semantic Web (SSSW'06) Semantic Web Services Hands-On Session with IRS-III and WSMO Studio.
The WSMO / L / X Approach Michael Stollberg DERI – Digital Enterprise Research Institute Alternative Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services: Possibilities.
SEQUOIAS YR-SOC'07 - Leicester June A NOVEL APPROACH TO WEB SERVICES DISCOVERY Marco Comerio Università di Milano-Bicocca
Kmi.open.ac.uk Semantic Execution Environments Service Engineering and Execution Barry Norton and Mick Kerrigan.
Describing Syntax and Semantics
1 Adapting BPEL4WS for the Semantic Web The Bottom-Up Approach to Web Service Interoperation Daniel J. Mandell and Sheila McIlraith Presented by Axel Polleres.
Mapping Fundamental Business Process Modelling Language to the Web Services Ontology Gayathri Nadarajan and Yun-Heh Chen-Burger Centre for Intelligent.
ANSWERING CONTROLLED NATURAL LANGUAGE QUERIES USING ANSWER SET PROGRAMMING Syeed Ibn Faiz.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. TransIT-funded Project: Digital Enterprise Research Institute.
Demonstrating WSMX: Least Cost Supply Management.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Towards Translating between XML and WSML based on mappings between.
Copyright © 2004 DERI® 1 Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO) Christoph Bussler and Dieter Fensel DERI International 16th of February 2004.
Agent Model for Interaction with Semantic Web Services Ivo Mihailovic.
25./ Final DIP Review, Innsbruck, Austria1 D11.22 DIP Project Presentation V5 Oct 2006 Presented at Final Review Innsbruck, Oct, 2006.
1 MFI-5: Metamodel for Process models registration HE Keqing, WANG Chong State Key Lab. Of Software Engineering, Wuhan University
Semantic Web Fred: Project Objectives & SWF Framework Michael Stollberg Reinhold Herzog Peter Zugmann - 07 April
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Semantic Web services Interoperability for Geospatial decision.
RELATIONAL FAULT TOLERANT INTERFACE TO HETEROGENEOUS DISTRIBUTED DATABASES Prof. Osama Abulnaja Afraa Khalifah
WSMO D3.2: Use Case and Testing Part 2: Syntax and Running Example 2nd F2F meeting SDK cluster working group on Semantic Web Services Lausanne, Switzerland,
June 14, 2004DIP Meeting, Lausanne Service Discovery Using Transaction Logic Reasoning Michael Kifer.
MTA SZTAKI Department of Distributed Systems Two-phase Semantic Web Service Discovery Method for Finding Intersection Matches using Logic Programming László.
10/18/20151 Business Process Management and Semantic Technologies B. Ramamurthy.
Triple-space computing* The Third International Semantic Web Conference Hiroshima, Japan, Dieter Fensel Digital Enterprise.
WSMX Execution Semantics Executable Software Specification Eyal Oren DERI
FP WIKT '081 Marek Skokan, Ján Hreňo Semantic integration of governmental services in the Access-eGov project Faculty of Economics.
Using WSMX to Bind Requester & Provider at Runtime when Executing Semantic Web Services Matthew Moran, Michal Zaremba, Adrian Mocan, Christoph Bussler.
The Dynamic Discovery of Web Services Using WSMX Presented by Robert Zaremba.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Semantic Web Services Future Plans Laurentiu Vasiliu,Tomas Vitvar,
An Ontological Framework for Web Service Processes By Claus Pahl and Ronan Barrett.
March 2005EC Presentation1 Data, Information and Process Integration with Semantic Web Services Technical Presentation IST Project Number : FP6 –
WSMO Discovery Realization in Semantic Web Fred Michael Stollberg - 03 November
Christoph Bussler, Laurentiu Vasiliu Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI) National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland SDK meeting.
Universität Innsbruck Leopold Franzens  Copyright 2007 DERI Innsbruck Technical Task Fair December 2007 SWS Composition The SUPER Approach.
Programming Languages and Design Lecture 3 Semantic Specifications of Programming Languages Instructor: Li Ma Department of Computer Science Texas Southern.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Christoph Bussler Semantic Interfaces.
16/11/ Semantic Web Services Language Requirements Presenter: Emilia Cimpian
WSDL – Web Service Definition Language  WSDL is used to describe, locate and define Web services.  A web service is described by: message format simple.
A Mediated Approach towards Web Service Choreography Michael Stollberg, Dumitru Roman, Juan Miguel Gomez DERI – Digital Enterprise Research Institute
Service Brokering Yu-sik Park. Index Introduction Brokering system Ontology Services retrieval using ontology Example.
WSMO in Knowledge Web 2nd SDK cluster f2f meeting Rubén Lara Digital Enterprise.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. KW WP2.4 Meeting JPA, Collaboration, KW Review, Meeting Agenda.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Dynamic RosettaNet Integration on Semantic Web Services Tomas.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Tomas Vitvar SemanticGov 4 rd Planetary.
WSMO - new structure, main intermediate deliverables - 2nd F2F meeting SDK cluster working group on Semantic Web Services Lausanne, Switzerland,
Concepts and Realization of a Diagram Editor Generator Based on Hypergraph Transformation Author: Mark Minas Presenter: Song Gu.
WSMO Implementation Workshop 2004 Woogle meets Semantic Web Fred U. Keller, M. Stollberg, D. Fensel.
WSMO 1st F2F meeting SDK cluster working group on Semantic Web Services Wiesbaden, Germany, Christoph Bussler and Dieter Fensel Digital Enterprise.
© The ATHENA Consortium. CI3 - Practices of Interoperability in SMEs Proposed Solutions.
OWL Web Ontology Language Summary IHan HSIAO (Sharon)
 Copyright 2008 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. Digital Enterprise Research Institute Semi-automatic Composition.
 Copyright 2005 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. SOA-RM Overview and relation with SEE Adrian Mocan
Conceptual Comparison WSMO/OWL-S 1st F2F meeting SDK cluster working group on Semantic Web Services Wiesbaden, Germany, Rubén Lara, (Dumitru.
WWW: WSMO, WSML, and WSMX in a Nutshell Dumitru Roman 1, Jos de Bruijn 1, Adrian Mocan 1, Holger Lausen 1,2, John Domingue 3, Christoph Bussler 2, and.
Tomas Vitvar, Maciej Zaremba, Mathew Moran
Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO)
Web Ontology Language for Service (OWL-S)
George Baryannis and Dimitris Plexousakis
Business Process Management and Semantic Technologies
Presentation transcript:

A Logical Framework for Web Service Discovery The Third International Semantic Web Conference Hiroshima, Japan, Michael Kifer 1, Rubén Lara 2, Axel Polleres 2, Chang Zhao 1, Uwe Keller 2, Holger Lausen 2, and Dieter Fensel 2 Department of Computer Science University at Stony Brook, New York, USA 1 Department of Computer Science University at Stony Brook, New York, USA Digital Enterprise Research Institute, Innsbruck, Austria, and Galway, Ireland 2 Digital Enterprise Research Institute, Innsbruck, Austria, and Galway, Ireland

Rubén Lara 2 Overview 1.Introduction 2.Proof obligations and formalization 3.Realization 4.Semantics of rule reification 5.Conclusions & future work

Rubén Lara 3 Automatic discovery Current Web Services have to be selected and hard-wired at design time –No dynamic reconfiguration of services Semantics can enable the automatic location of Web Services providing particular functionality

Rubén Lara 4 WSMO & WSML Objectives that a client may have when consulting a Web Service Provide the formally specified terminology used by all other components Semantic description of Web Services: - Capability - Interfaces Connectors between components to bypass heterogeneity F-Logic + Transaction Logic

Rubén Lara 5 The problem Matching capabilities of existing Web Services against the goal described by the requester –Consideration of the functionality of the Web Service –Distinction between discovery and contracting –Example implementation using

Rubén Lara 6 Overview 1.Introduction 2.Proof obligations and formalization 3.Realization 4.Semantics of rule reification 5.Conclusions & future work

Rubén Lara 7 Goals, capabilities & mediators Goal describes (in terms of domain ontologies) the desired state of: –Information space –State of the world Web Service capabilities describe (in terms of domain ontologies): –What the service expects to provide its functionality –What is guaranteed to hold after execution wgMediators link Web Services and goals, resolving heterogeneity –Resolve possible terminology differences

Rubén Lara 8 Logics and scalability issues Logic can be used to formalize goals, capabilities and proof obligations –Scalable framework must rely on a relatively small number of logicians Customer: - no training in KR -pre-defined discovery queries -goal ontology Service Provider: - modest requirements -Capabilities written to relatively simple ontologies -Relatively simple types of rules Mediation Provider: - Bulk of logical expertise -Link ontologies, not customers and providers

Rubén Lara 9 Proof obligations (I) Set of imported ontologies O Goal G Service capability C (C eff and C pre ) wgMediator wg –takes a goal G and constructs input In wg (G) suitable for services mediated –Converts the goal into a postcondition Post wg (G) expressed in terms of the service ontology –Mediation can be complex: Goals can be expressed in a very high level syntax Service capabilities can be rather simple

Rubén Lara 10 Proof obligations (II) Service discovery –Given a goal G, can the service execute in a way such that G can be achieved? Service contracting –Given an actual input to a specific service, does this input lead to the results expected by the requester?

Rubén Lara 11 Proof obligations (III) Proof obligations before –Deal with a particular service –Different services have different effects Use of transaction logic is the sequence operator is the hypothetical operator

Rubén Lara 12 Overview 1.Introduction 2.Proof obligations and formalization 3.Realization 4.Semantics of rule reification 5.Conclusions & future work

Rubén Lara 13 Realization Use of : –Support for F-Logic, HiLog, Transaction Logic and rule reification Geographic ontology

Rubén Lara 14 Realization (II) Goal ontology: Service1: Conditions over the input Input is a search -> provide itinerary wgMediator used

Rubén Lara 15 Realization (III) Service 3: Goals: Uses goal ontology Region!

Rubén Lara 16 Realization (IV) Mediator: Takes the goal and constructs input to the service Takes the result and checks it according to the format specified in the goal

Rubén Lara 17 Realization Discovery Construct input Generate effects Assume effects Check goal Remove effects

Rubén Lara 18 Overview 1.Introduction 2.Proof obligations and formalization 3.Realization 4.Semantics of rule reification 5.Conclusions & future work

Rubén Lara 19 Semantics of rule reification Model theory for F-Logic extended with rule reification defined Reified F-Logic avoids paradoxes through two restrictions: –No negation is allowed in the rule head, and –Reification of negation of any fact or any rule is not permitted

Rubén Lara 20 Overview 1.Introduction 2.Proof obligations and formalization 3.Realization 4.Semantics of rule reification 5.Conclusions & future work

Rubén Lara 21 Conclusions Logical framework and realization for: –dynamic discovery of Web Services –verification of contractual statements Scalable framework in terms of human resources by exploiting mediators The framework captures the relation between inputs and effects, thus providing more accurate descriptions and discovery Easily extendable to include invocation

Rubén Lara 22 Future work In progress –Alignment with WSML –Integration with other types of web service discovery –Further investigation on border between ggMediation and wgMediation –Complete knowledge goals in the absence of sufficient domain knowledge –Implementation of WSMO discovery engine Planned –Integration with composition

Rubén Lara 23 Conclusions