Abstract
Turning Web services into Semantic Web Services (SWS) can be prohibitively expensive for large repositories. In such cases collecting community descriptions in forms of structured tags can be a more affordable approach to describe Web services. However, little is understood about how tagging impacts performance of retrieval. There are neither real structured tagging systems for Web services, nor real corpora of structured tags. To start addressing these issues, in our approach, we motivated taggers to tag services in a partially controlled environment. Specifically, taggers were given application requirements and asked to find and tag services that match the requirements. Tags collected in this way were used for Web service matchmaking and evaluated within the framework of the Cross-Evaluation Track of the Third Semantic Service Selection 2009 contest. As part of the lessons learned, we explain relations between description schema (SWS, tags, flat document) and matchmaking heuristics, and performance of retrieval in different search scenarios. We also analyze reliability of tagging system performance as related to taggers/searchers autonomy. Finally, we identify threats to results credibility stemming from partial control of the tags collection process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
See also online registries, e.g., http://www.SeekDa.com, http://www.ProgrammableWeb.com
- 2.
- 3.
It does not need to have interface compatible to the requested one. This corresponds to the binary relevance setting number seven in the contest [19].
- 4.
This motivated us to exclude adaptive approaches, which learn from relation between such feature and relevance judgments, from this analysis.
- 5.
However, this phenomenon might be characteristic for data-centric services, for which behavior is often identified with the data it consumes and returns.
References
J. Bar-Ilan, S. Shoham, A. Idan, Y. Miller, A. Shachak, Structured versus unstructured tagging: a case study. Online Inf. Rev. 32(5), 635–647 (2008)
E. Bouillet, M. Feblowitz, H. Feng, Z. Liu, A. Ranganathan, A. Riabov, A folksonomy-based model of web services for discovery and automatic composition, in IEE SCC, Honolulu, 2008, pp. 389–396
R. Cuel, O. Morozova, M. Rohde, E. Simperl, K. Siorpaes, O. Tokarchuk, T. Wiedenhöfer, F. Yetim, M. Zamarian, Motivation mechanisms for participation in human-driven semantic content creation. Int. J. Knowl. Eng. Data Min. 1(4) 331–349 (2011)
A. Fernández, C. Hayes, N. Loutas, V. Peristeras, A. Polleres, K.A. Tarabanis, Closing the service discovery gap by collaborative tagging and clustering techniques, in SMRR, Karlsruhe, 2008
M. Gawinecki, G. Cabri, M. Paprzycki, M. Ganzha, Structured collaborative tagging: is it practical for web service discovery? in WEBIST, Valencia, 2010
S.A. Golder, B.A. Huberman, Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. J. Inf. Sci. 32(2), 198–208 (2006)
A. Heß, N. Kushmerick, Learning to attach semantic metadata to web services, in ISWC, Sanibel, 2003, pp. 258–273
K. Järvelin, J. Kekäläinen, Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 20(4), 422–446 (2002)
G. Koutrika, E. Frans, Z. Gyongyi, P. Heymann, H. Garcia-Molina, Combating spam in tagging systems: an evaluation. ACM Trans. Web (TWEB) 2(4), 1–34 (2007)
U. Küster, Jena Geography Dataset (2009), http://fusion.cs.uni-jena.de/professur/jgd, last accessed May 2012
U. Küster, B. König-Ries, Relevance judgments for web services retrieval – a methodology and test collection for SWS discovery evaluation, in ECOWS, Eindhoven, 2009
C. Marlow, M. Naaman, D. Boyd, M. Davis, HT06, tagging paper, taxonomy, Flickr, academic article, to read, in HYPERTEXT, Odense, Denmark, 2006, pp. 31–40
H. Meyer, M. Weske, Light-weight semantic service annotations through tagging, in ICSOC. LNCS, vol. 4294, Chicago, 2006, pp. 465–470
H. Mili, F. Mili, A. Mili, Reusing software: issues and research directions. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 21(6), 528–562 (1995)
A. Mili, R. Mili, R.T. Mittermeir, A survey of software reuse libraries. Ann. Softw. Eng. 5, 349–414 (1998)
M. Montaner, B. López, J. De La Rosa, A taxonomy of recommender agents on the internet. Artif. Intell. Rev. 19(4), 285–330 (2003)
I. Peters, K. Weller, Tag gardening for folksonomy enrichment and maintenance. Webology 5(3), 1–18 (2008)
V. Robu, H. Halpin, H. Shepherd, Emergence of consensus and shared vocabularies in collaborative tagging systems. ACM Trans. Web 3(4), 1–34 (2009)
Semantic Service Selection Contest (2009), http://www-ags.dfki.uni-sb.de/~klusch/s3/index.html, last accessed May 2012
M. Sabou, C. Wroe, C.A. Goble, G. Mishne, Learning domain ontologies for web service descriptions: an experiment in bioinformatics, in WWW, Chiba, Japan, 2005, pp. 190–198
S. Sen, S.K. Lam, Al.M. Rashid, D. Cosley, D. Frankowski, J. Osterhouse, F.M. Harper, J. Riedl, Tagging, communities, vocabulary, evolution, in CSCW, Banff, 2006, pp. 181–190
C. Shirky, Ontology is overrated: categories, links, and tags (2005), http://www.shirky.com/writings/ontology_overrated.html, last accessed May 2012
I. Silva-Lepe, R. Subramanian, I. Rouvellou, T. Mikalsen, J. Diament, A. Iyengar, SOAlive service catalog: a simplified approach to describing, discovering and composing situational enterprise services, in ICSOC, Sydney, 2008
K. Siorpaes, M. Hepp, Games with a purpose for the semantic web. IEEE Intell. Syst. 23, 50–60 (2008)
K. Siorpaes, E. Simperl, Human intelligence in the process of semantic content creation. World Wide Web 13(1–2), 33–59 (2010)
I. Sommerville, Software Engineering. International Computer Science Series, 8th edn. (Addison–Wesley, Harlow, 2007)
T.A. Vanderlei, F.A. Durão, A.C. Martins, V.C. Garcia, E.S. Almeida, S.R. de L. Meira, A cooperative classification mechanism for search and retrieval software components, in ACM SAC, Seoul, 2007, pp. 866–871
L. von Ahn, L. Dabbish, Designing games with a purpose. Commun. ACM 51, 58–67 (2008)
J. Zobel, A. Moffat, Inverted files for text search engines. ACM Comput. Surv. 38(2), 6 (2006)
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank to: Ulrich Küster (for the organization of the Cross-Evaluation track and discussion), Patrick Kapahnke and Matthias Klusch (for their general support and organization of the S3 contest), and to Elton Domnori and anonymous reviewers for valuable comments. Finally, we would like to thank voluntary taggers and searchers for their time.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gawinecki, M., Cabri, G., Paprzycki, M., Ganzha, M. (2012). Evaluation of Structured Collaborative Tagging for Web Service Matchmaking. In: Blake, B., Cabral, L., König-Ries, B., Küster, U., Martin, D. (eds) Semantic Web Services. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28735-0_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28735-0_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-28734-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-28735-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)