Benchmarking workflow discovery: A case study from bioinformatics

Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience

Volumn 21, Issue 16, 2009, Pages 2052-2069

  Goderis, Antoon ^a   Fisher, Paul ^a   Gibson, Andrew ^a,c   Tanoh, Franck ^a   Wolstencroft, Katy ^a   De Roure, David ^b   Goble, Carole ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Benchmark; Bioinformatics; Discovery; Myexperiment; Scientific workflow; Taverna

Indexed keywords

BENCHMARKING; SURVEYS; WORK SIMPLIFICATION;

COMPUTATIONAL EXPERIMENT; CURRENT PRACTICES; DISCOVERY; MYEXPERIMENT; SCIENTIFIC WORKFLOWS; TAVERNA; WORKFLOW MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS; WORKFLOW TECHNOLOGY;

BIOINFORMATICS;

EID: 70349914374     PISSN: 15320626     EISSN: 15320634     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cpe.1447     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. Gil Y, Deelman E, Ellisman M, Fahringer T, Fox G, Gannon D, Goble C, Livny M, Moreau L, Myers J. Examining the challenges of scientific workflows. Computer 2007; 40(12):24-32.
2. Oinn T, Greenwood M, Addis M, Alpdemir N, Ferris J, Glover K, Goble C, Goderis A, Hull D, Marvin D, Li P, Lord P, Pocock M, Senger M, Stevens R, Wipat A, Wroe C. Taverna: Lessons in creating a workflow environment for the life sciences. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 2005; 18(10):1067-1100. Special Issue on Scientific Workflows.
3. De Roure D, Goble C, Stevens R. Designing the myExperiment virtual research environment for the social sharing of workflows. Third IEEE International Conference on e-Science and Grid Computing, Bangalore, India, 10-13 December 2007; 603-610.
4. Wroe C, Goble C, Goderis A, Lord P, Miles S, Papay J, Alper P, Moreau L. Recycling workflows and services through discovery and reuse. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 2007; 19(2):181-194.
5. Miers D, Harmon P, Hall C. The 2007 BPM suites report. Available at: http://www.bptrends.com [1 April 2009].
6. Goderis A, Brooks C, Altintas I, Lee EA, Goble C. Heterogeneous composition of models of computation. Future Generation Computer Systems (FGCS) 2009; 25(5):552-560.
7. Goderis A, Li P, Goble C. Workflow discovery: requirements from e-science and a graph-based solution. International Journal of Web Services Research (JWSR) 2008; 5(4):32-58.
8. Goderis A. Workflow re-use and discovery in bioinformatics. PhD Thesis, School of Computer Science, The University of Manchester, 2008.
9. Scheidegger CE, Vo HT, Koop D, Freire J, Silva CT. Querying and creating visualizations by analogy. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 2007; 13(6):1560-1567.
10. Zhao Y, Wilde M, Foster I. Applying the virtual data provenance model. International Provenance and Annotation Workshop (IPAW), Chicago, U.S.A., 3-5 May 2006.
11. Corrales JC, Grigori D, Bouzeghoub M. BPEL processes matchmaking for service discovery. Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (COOPIS) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.4275), Montpellier, France. Springer: Berlin, 2006; 237-254.
12. Bernstein A, Klein M. Towards high-precision service retrieval. Proceedings of the First International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Sardinia, Italy. Springer: Berlin, 2002.
13. Kiefer C, Bernstein A, Lee HJ, Klein M, Stocker M. Semantic process retrieval with iSPARQL. European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC), Innsbruck, Austria, 2007; 609-623.
14. Wroe C, Stevens R, Goble C, Roberts A, Greenwood M. A suite of DAML+OIL ontologies to describe bioinformatics web services and data. International Journal ofCooperative Information Systems 2003; 12(2):197-224.
15. Mahleko B, Wombacher A. Indexing business processes based on annotated finite state automata. ICWS, Chicago, U.S.A., 2006; 303-311.
16. Toma I, Iqbal K, Roman D, Strang T, Fensel D, Sapkota B, Moran M, Gomez JM. Discovery in grid and web services environments: A survey and evaluation. Multiagent and Grid Systems Special Issue on Advances in Grid services Engineering and Management 2007; 3(3):341-352.
17. Dustdar S, Schreiner W. A survey on web services composition. International Journal ofWeb and Grid Services 2005; 1(1):1-30.
18. Kim J, Gil Y, Ratnakar V. Semantic metadata generation for large scientific workflows. International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Athens, U.S.A., 5-9 November 2006.
19. Berardi D, De Giacomo G, Lenzerini M, Mecella M, Calvanese D. Synthesis of underspecified composite e-services based on automated reasoning. Second International Conference on Service Oriented Computing ICSOC. ACM Press: New York, 2004; 105-114.
20. Medjahed B, Bouguettaya A, Elmagarmid AK. Composing web services on the semantic web. VLDB Journal 2003; 12(4):333-351.
21. Reiter E, Sripada S. Should corpora texts be gold standards for NLG? INLG, New York, U.S.A. Harriman: New York, 2002; 97-104.
22. Karamanis N. Entity coherence for descriptive text structuring. PhD Thesis, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 2003.
23. Goldstone RL. Similarity. MIT Encyclopedia ofthe Cognitive Sciences. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2001; 757-759.
24. Siegel S, Castellan JN. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1988.
25. Dong X, Halevy A, Madhavan J, Nemes E, Zhang J. Similarity search for web services. Proceedings of the 30th VLDB Conference, Toronto, Canada, 2004.
26. Zhao J, Goble C, Stevens R, Turi D. Mining Tavernas semantic web of provenance. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 2008; 20(5):463-472.
27. Krueger CW. Software reuse. ACM Computing Surveys 1992; 24(2):131-183.
28. Bernstein A, Kaufmann E, Brki C, Klein M. How similar is it? Towards personalized similarity measures in ontologies. Seventh Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik, February 2005.
29. Wombacher A. Evaluation of technical measures for workflow similarity based on a pilot study. CoopIS, Montpellier, France, 1-3 November 2006.