Case-based classification alternatives to ontologies for automated web service discovery and integration

Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering

Volumn 6201, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Ladner, Roy ^a   Warner, Elizabeth ^a   Petry, Fred ^a   Gupta, Kalyan Moy ^b   Moore, Philip ^c   Aha, David W ^a   Shaw, Kevin ^a  

^a NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^b KNEXUS RESEARCH CORPORATION   (United States)

^c ITT INDUSTRIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Automated Web; Case based Classification; MetOc; Ontology; Semantic Web; Service Oriented Architecture; Web Services

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATED WEB; CASE BASED CLASSIFICATION; METOC; ONTOLOGY; SEMANTIC WEB; SERVICE ORIENTED ARCHITECTURE; WEB SERVICES;

AUTONOMOUS AGENTS; COMPUTABILITY AND DECIDABILITY; DISTRIBUTED COMPUTER SYSTEMS; INFORMATION SERVICES; KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION; SEMANTICS; WORLD WIDE WEB;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

EID: 33747727636     PISSN: 0277786X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1117/12.663327     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Director, Force Transformation, Office of the Secretary of Defense, "Network-Centric Warfare Creating a Decisive Warfighting Advantage", Washington, DC, Winter 2003. Cleared for Public Release by Department of Defense directorate for Freedom of Information and Security Review 04-S-0272.
2. Paolucci, M., Soudry, J., Srinivasan, N., & Sycara, K., (2004), A Broker for OWL-S Web services, Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Semantic Web Services.
3. Andreas Heß and Nicholas Kushmerick, (2003) Automatically attaching semantic metadata to Web services, Proceedings of IJCAI.
4. Andreas Heß and Nicholas Kushmerick, (2004) Machine Learning for Annotating Semantic Web Services, Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium Semantic Web Services.
5. XML Schema Tutorial, 2004, http://www.w3schools.com/schema/schema_intro. asp.
6. Web Services Definition Language, 2004, http://www.perfectxml.com/ WebSvc3.asp.
7. Cerami, E., 2002, Web Services Essentials, O'Reilly and Associates, 2002.
8. http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/
9. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/
10. http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/cte/ontologyengineering/
11. http://protege.stanford.edu/overview/
12. http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/overview/
13. Michie, D., Spiegelhater, D.J., & Taylor, C. (Eds.) (1994). Machine Learning, Neural and Statistical Classification, New York: Ellis Horwood.
14. Gupta, K.M, Moore, P.G., Aha, D.W, & Pal, S.K. (2005). Rough-Set Feature Selection Methods for Case-Based Categorization of Text Documents, in S. K. Pal, S. Bandyopadhyay, & S. Biswas (Eds.) Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS 3776), (pp. 792-798): Heidelberg,Germany: Springer.
15. Cain, T., Pazzani, M.J., & Silverstein, G. (1991). Using domain knowledge to influence similarity judgment. Proceedings of the Case-Based Reasoning Workshop (pp. 191-202). Washington, DC: Morgan Kaufmann.
16. Aha, D.W. (1992). Generalizing from Case Studies: A Case Study, in D. Sleeman & P. Edwards (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Machine Learning (ML92) (pp. 1-10) San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
17. WSDL (2005), Web Service Description Language, Version 1.1, http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl.
18. Gupta, K.M., & Aha, D.W. (2004). RuMoP: A Morphotactic Parser, in R. Sangal & S.M. Bendre (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Natural Language Processing (ICON-2004), (pp. 280-284). Mumbai, India: Allied Publishers.
19. Yang, Y., & Pederson, J. (1997). A comparative study of feature selection in text categorization. Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Machine Learning (pp. 412-420). Nashville, TN: Morgan Kaufmann.