Journal of Computer Science and Technology

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 574–581 | Cite as

A Semantic Matchmaker for Ranking Web Services

  • Bin XuEmail author
  • Po Zhang
  • Juan-Zi Li
  • Wen-Jun Yang
Semantic & Contents Computing


This paper is concerned with the matchmaker for ranking web services by using semantics. So far several methods of semantic matchmaker have been proposed. Most of them, however, focus on classifying the services into predefined categories rather than providing a ranking result. In this paper, a new method of semantic matchmaker is proposed for ranking web services. It is proposed to use the semantic distance for estimating the matching degree between a service and a user request. Four types of semantic distances are defined and four algorithms are implemented respectively to calculate them. Experimental results show that the proposed semantic matchmaker significantly outperforms the keyword-based baseline method.


semantic web services semantic distance services ranking 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Haas H. Web services activity statement. W3C,, 2001.
  2. [2]
    Clement L, Hately A, Riegen C V et al. UDDI version 3.0.2. UDDI Spec. Technical Committee Draft, October 19 2004.
  3. [3]
    Christensen E, Curbera F, Meredith G et al. Web services description language (WSDL). NOTE-wsdl-20010315, 2001.
  4. [4]
    Gudgin M, Hadley M, Mendelsohn N et al. SOAP version 1.2 part 1: Messaging framework, W3C recommendation., June 24, 2003.
  5. [5]
    Qiu D, Srikant R. Modeling and performance analysis of bitTorrent-like peer-to-peer networks. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Portland, Dregon, USA, 2004, pp.367–378.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Liu Y, Xiao L, Liu X et al. Location awareness in unstructured peer-to-peer systems. IEEE Trans. Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2005, 16(2): 163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Liu Y, Zhang Z, Xiao L, Ni L. A distributed approach to solving overlay mismatching problem. In Proc. 24th Int. Conf. Distributed Computing Systems, Tokyo, Japan, March 2004, pp.132–139.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Paolucci M, Kawamura T, Payne T R et al. Semantic matching of web services capabilities. In Proc. 1st Int. Semantic Web Conf. (ISWC2002), Sardinia, Italy, June 2002, pp.333–347.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Martin D, Burstein M, Hobbs J et al. OWL-S: Semantic markup for web services., 2004.
  10. [10]
    Sivashanmugan K, Verma K, Sheth A et al. Adding semantics to web services standards. In Proc. Int. Conf. Web Services, Las Vegas, USA, June 23–26, 2003, pp.395–401.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Ogbuji U. Supercharging WSDL with RDF—Managing structured web service metadata. IBM developerWorks article, 2000.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Peer J. Bringing together semantic web and web services. In Proc. 1st Int. Semantic Web Conf. (ISWC2002), Sardinia, Italy, June 2002, pp.279–291.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Worden R. A meaning definition language. White paper., 2001.
  14. [14]
    Sriharee N, Senivongse T. Discovering web services using behavioral constraints and ontology. In Proc. 4th IFIP Int. Conf. Distributed Applications and Interoperable Systems, Paris, France, November 19–21, 2003, pp.248–259.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Sirin E, Bijan P, Hendler J. Composition-driven filtering and selection of semantic web services. In Proc. 19th Conf. Artificial Intelligence (AAAI04), San Jose, USA, July 25–29, 2004, pp.129–136.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Patil A, Oundhakar S, Sheth A et al. METEOR-S web service annotation framework. In Proc. 13th Int. WWW Conf., New York, USA: ACM Press, 2004, pp.553–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Bansal S, Vidal J M. Matchmaking of web services based on the DAML-S service model. In Proc. 2nd Int. Joint Conf. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS'03), Melbourne, Australia, July 14–18, 2003, pp.926–927.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Klein M, Bernstein A. Searching services on the semantic web using process ontologies. In Proc. Int. Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS), Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2001, pp.159–172.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Jaeger M C, Rojec-Goldmann G, Liebetruth C et al. Ranked matching for service descriptions using OWL-S. In Proc. Communication in Distributed System (KiVS05), Kaiserslautern, Germany, 2005, pp.91–102.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Verma K, Sivashanmugam K, Sheth A et al. METEOR-S WSDI: A scalable infrastructure of registries for semantic publication and discovery of web services. Journal of Information Technology and Management, 2005, 6(1): 17–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Bentallah B, Hacid M, Alain L et al. On automating web services discovery. VLDB Journal, 2005, 14(1): 84–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Gonzalez-Castillo J, Trastour D, Bartolini C. Description logics for matchmaking of services. In Proc. The Workshop on Applications of Description Logics (KI'01), Vienna, Austria, 2001, pp.12–24.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Caragea D, Syeda-Mahmood T. Semantic API matching for automatic service composition. In Proc. 13th Int. WWW Conf., New York, USA, 2004, pp.436–437.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Syeda-Mahmood T, Shah G, Akkiraju R et al. Searching service repositories by combining semantic and ontological matching. In Proc. Int. Conf. Web Services (ICWS'05), Orlando, Florida, USA, 2005, pp.13–20.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
  26. [26]
    Sycara K, Widoff S, Klusch M et al. Larks: Dynamic matchmaking among heterogeneous software agents in cyberspace. In Proc. Conf. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS'02), Bologna, Italy, July 2002, pp.173–203.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
  28. [28]
    Ganesan P, Garcia-Molina H, Widom J. Exploiting hierarchical domain structure to compute similarity. ACM Trans. Information Systems, 2003, 21(1): 64–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Zhang D, Li J, Xu B. Web service annotation using ontology mapping. In Proc. 1st Int. Workshop on Service Oriented System Engineering, Beijing, China, 2005, pp.235–242.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and TechnologyTsinghua UniversityBeijingP.R. China

Personalised recommendations