A service ranker based on logic rules evaluation and constraint programming

CEUR Workshop Proceedings

Volumn 411, Issue , 2008, Pages

  García, Jose María ^a   Toma, Ioan ^b   Ruiz, David ^a   Ruiz Cortes, Antonio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SEVILLE   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK   (Austria)

Author keywords

Constraint programming; Non functional properties; Ranking; Rules evaluation; Semantic Web Services

Indexed keywords

CONSTRAINT PROGRAMMING; HYBRID SOLUTION; LOGICAL FORMALISM; NON FUNCTIONAL PROPERTIES; RANKING; RULES EVALUATION; UTILITY FUNCTIONS; WEB SERVICE MODELING ONTOLOGIES;

CONSTRAINT THEORY; LOGIC PROGRAMMING; QUALITY OF SERVICE; SEMANTIC WEB; WEB SERVICES;

FUNCTION EVALUATION;

EID: 77954391677     PISSN: 16130073     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. J. M. García, D. Ruiz, A. Ruiz-Cortes, O. Martín- Díaz, and M. Resinas. An hybrid, QoSaware discovery of semantic web services using constraint programming. In B. Kramer, K.-J. Lin, and P. Narasimhan, editors, ICSOC 2007, Volume 4749 of LNCS, pages 69-80. Springer, 2007.
2. J. M. García, I. Toma, D. Ruiz, A. Ruiz-Cortes, Y. Ding, and J. M. Gomez. Ranking semantic web services using rules evaluation and constraint programming. In JSWEB 2008, pages 111-119, 2008. To appear.
3. J. González-Castillo, D. Trastour, and C. Bartolini. Description logics for matchmaking of services. Technical Report HPL-2001-265, Hewlett Packard Labs, 2001.
4. K. Kritikos and D. Plexousakis. Semantic QoS metric matching. In ECOWS 2006, pages 265-274. IEEE Computer Society, 2006.
5. L. Li and I. Horrocks. A software framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology. In Int. World Wide Web Conference, pages 331-339, 2003.
6. C. Lutz and U. Sattler. A proposal for describing services with DLs. In Int. Workshop on Description Logics, 2002.
7. J. Pathak, N. Koul, D. Caragea, and V. G. Honavar. A framework for semantic web services discovery. In WIDM '05: Proceedings of the 7th annual ACM international workshop on Web information and data management, pages 45-50, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM Press.
8. D. Roman, H. Lausen, and U. Keller (Ed.). Web service modeling ontology (WSMO). Working Draft D2v1.4, WSMO, 2007. Available from http://www.wsmo.org/TR/ d2/v1.4/.
9. A. Ruiz-Cortés, O. Martín-Díaz, A. Durán-Toro, and M. Toro. Improving the automatic procurement of web services using constraint programming. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst, 14(4):439-468, 2005.
10. H. Lausen S. Grimm, U. Keller and G. Nagypal. A reasoning framework for rule-based WSML. In In Proceedings of 4th European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC) 2007. IEEE Computer Society, 2007.
11. N. Steinmetz and I. Toma (Ed.). The Web Service Modeling Language WSML. Technical report, WSML, 2008. WSML Working Draft D16.1v0.3. http://www.wsmo.org/ TR/d16/d16.1/v0.3/.
12. K. Sycara, M. Paolucci, A. Ankolekar, and N. Srinivasan. Automated discovery, interaction and composition of semantic web services. J. Web Sem., 1(1):27-46, 2003.
13. I. Toma and D. Foxvog. Non-functional properties in web services. Working Draft D28.4v0.1, Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI), August 2006. Available from http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d28/d28.4/v0.1/.
14. I. Toma, D. Roman, D. Fensel, B. Sapkota, and J. M. Gomez. A multi-criteria service ranking approach based on non-functional properties rules evaluation. In B. Krämer, K.-J. Lin, and P. Narasimhan, editors, ICSOC 2007, Volume 4749 of LNCS, pages 435-441. Springer, 2007.
15. X. Wang, T. Vitvar, M. Kerrigan, and I. Toma. A QoS-aware selection model for semantic web services. In A. Dan and W. Lamersdorf, editors, ICSOC 2006, Volume 4294 of LNCS, pages 390-401. Springer, 2006.
16. L. Zeng, B. Benatallah, A. H. H. Ngu, M. Dumas, J. Kalagnanam, and H. Chang. QoS-aware middleware for web services composition. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 30(5):311-327, 2004.
17. C. Zhou, L. Chia, and B. Lee. DAML-QoS ontology for web services. In IEEE International Conference on Web Services, pages 472-479, 2004.