Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

QoS Requirement Generation and Algorithm Selection for Composite Service Based on Reference Vector

Abstract

Under SOA (Service-Oriented Architecture), composite service is formed by aggregating multiple component services together in a given workflow. One key criterion of this research topic is QoS composition. Most work on service composition mainly focuses on the algorithms about how to compose services according to assumed QoS, without considering where the required QoS comes from and the selection of user preferred composition algorithm among those with different computational cost and different selection results. In this paper, we propose to strengthen current service composition mechanism by generation of QoS requirement and its algorithm selection based on the QoS reference vectors which are calculated optimally from the existing individual services’ QoS by registry to represent QoS overview about the best QoS, the worst (or most economical) QoS, or the average QoS of all composite services. To implement QoS requirement, which is determined according to QoS overview, this paper introduces two selection algorithms as two kinds of experiment examples, one aiming at the most accurate service selection and the other chasing for trade-off between selection cost and result. Experimental results show our mechanism can help the requester achieve his expected composite service with appropriate QoS requirement and customized selection algorithm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. [1]

    Curbera F et al. Unraveling the web services: An introduction to SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI. IEEE Internet Computing, 2002, 6(2): 86–93.

  2. [2]

    Curbera F, Goland Y, Klein J, Leymann F, Roller D, Thatte S, Weerawarana S. Business process execution language for web services. Version 1.1, 2002, http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/specification/ws-bpel.

  3. [3]

    Patil S, Newcomer E. ebXML and Web services. IEEE Internet Computing, May/June 2003, 7(3): 74–82.

  4. [4]

    Gorbenko A, Kharchenko V, Romanovsky A. On composing dependable web services using undependable web components. International Journal of Simulation and Process Modelling, 2007, 3(1/2): 45–54.

  5. [5]

    Claro D B, Macêdo R J A. Dependable web service compositions using a semantic replication scheme. In Proc. Anais of the VI Brazilian Symposium of Networks and Distributed Systems, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, May 2008.

  6. [6]

    Cardoso J, Sheth A P, Miller J A, Arnold J, Kochut K J. Modeling quality of service for workflows and web service processes. Web Semantics Journal: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web Journal, 2004, 1(3): 281–308.

  7. [7]

    Yu J, Han Y B, Han J et al. Synthesizing service composition models on the basis of temporal business rules. Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 2008, 23(6): 885–894.

  8. [8]

    Xu D, Nahrstedt K. Finding service paths in a media service proxy network. In Proc. the SPIE/ACM Multimedia Computing and Networking Conference (MMCN), San Jose, USA, 2002, pp.171–185.

  9. [9]

    Patel C, Supekar K, Lee Y. A QoS oriented framework for adaptive management. In Proc. the Conference of Web Service Based Workflows Database and Expert Systems (DEXA-2003), Prague, Czech Republic, 2003, pp.826–835.

  10. [10]

    Zeng L, Benatallah B, Ngu A H H, Dumas M, Kalagnanam J, Chang H. QoS-aware middleware for web services composition. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, May 2004, 30(5): 311–327.

  11. [11]

    Ardagna D, Pernici B. Adaptive service composition in flexible processes. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 2007, 33(6): 369–384.

  12. [12]

    Bonatti P A, Festa P. On optimal service selection. In Proc. the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web, Chiba, Japan, 2005, pp.530–538.

  13. [13]

    Jaeger M C, Muhl G, Golze S. QoS-aware composition of web services: An evaluation of selection algorithms. In Proc. International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, Agia Napa, Cyprus, 2005, pp.646–661.

  14. [14]

    Canfora G, Penta M, Esposito R, Villani M L. QoS-aware replanning of composite web services. In Proc. International Conference on Web Services (ICWS’05), Orlando, USA, 2005, pp.121–129.

  15. [15]

    Wohlstadter E, Tai S, Mikalsen T A, Rouvellou I, Devanbu P T. GlueQoS: Middleware to sweeten quality-of-service policy interactions. In Proc. the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’04), Edinburgh, England, 2004, pp.189–199.

  16. [16]

    Chhetri M B, Lin J, Goh S K, Yan J, Zhang J Y, Kowalczyk R. A coordinated architecture for the agent-based service level agreement negotiation of web service composition. In Proc. the Australian Software Engineering, Sydney, Australia, 2006, pp.90–99.

  17. [17]

    Jing-Fan Tang, Xiao-Liang Xu. An adaptive model of service composition based on policy driven and multi-agent negotiation. In Proc. International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Dalian, China, 2006, pp.113–118.

  18. [18]

    Cao J, Wang J, Zhang S, Li M. A multi-agent negotiation based service composition method for on-demand service. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, Orlando, USA, 2005, pp.329–332.

  19. [19]

    http://rubis.objectweb.org/.

  20. [20]

    Menasce D A. QoS issues in web services. IEEE Internet Computing, 2002, 6(6): 72–75.

  21. [21]

    Liu Y, Ngu A H, Zeng L Z. QoS computation and policing in dynamic web service selection. In Proc. the World Wide Web Conference, New York, USA, 2004, pp.66–73.

  22. [22]

    European Commission. IT security evaluation criteria. V. 1.2, Office for Official Publications of the EC, 1991, http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/site_documents/ITSEC/ITSEC-uk.pdf.

  23. [23]

    Common criteria for IT security evaluation. V. 3.1, Common Criteria Implementation Board. 2006, http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/files/ccfiles/CCPART1V3.1R1.pdf.

  24. [24]

    Aggarwal R, Kunal Verma, Miller J, Milnor W. Constraint driven web service composition in METEOR-S. In Proc. 2004 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC 2004), Shanghai, China, 2004, pp.23–30.

  25. [25]

    Yu T, Lin K J. Service selection algorithms for Web services with end-to-end QoS constraints. Journal of Information Systems and E-Business Management, 2005, 3(2): 103–126.

  26. [26]

    Yu T, Lin K J. Service selection algorithms for composing complex services with multiple QoS constraints. In Proc. Service-Oriented Computing (ICSOC 2005), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp.130–143.

  27. [27]

    Ardagna D, Pernici B. Global and local QoS guarantee in web service selection. In Proc. the Business Process Management Workshop (BPM’05), Nancy, France, 2005, pp.32–46.

  28. [28]

    Claro D B, Albers P, Hao J K. Selecting web services for optimal composition. In Proc. International Workshop on Semantic and Dynamic Web Processes (ICWS), Orlando, USA, Jan. 10–15, 2005.

  29. [29]

    Cormen T H, Leiserson C E, Rivest R L, Stein C. Introduction to Algorithms. Second Edition, MIT Press, 2001.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Bang-Yu Wu.

Additional information

Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 90604028, the National Basic Research 973 Program of China under Grant No. 2004CB719406, and the National High-Tech Research and Development 863 Program of China under Grant Nos. 2008AA01Z12 and 2007AA01-Z122.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wu, B., Chi, C., Xu, S. et al. QoS Requirement Generation and Algorithm Selection for Composite Service Based on Reference Vector. J. Comput. Sci. Technol. 24, 357–372 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11390-009-9230-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • service-oriented architecture
  • service composition
  • quality of services
  • service selection