Advertisement

Optimizing Web Service Composition While Enforcing Regulations

  • Shirin Sohrabi
  • Sheila A. McIlraith
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5823)

Abstract

To direct automated Web service composition, it is compelling to provide a template, workflow or scaffolding that dictates the ways in which services can be composed. In this paper we present an approach to Web service composition that builds on work using AI planning, and more specifically Hierarchical Task Networks (HTNs), for Web service composition. A significant advantage of our approach is that it provides much of the how-to knowledge of a choreography while enabling customization and optimization of integrated Web service selection and composition based upon the needs of the specific problem, the preferences of the customer, and the available services. Many customers must also be concerned with enforcement of regulations, perhaps in the form of corporate policies and/or government regulations. Regulations are traditionally enforced at design time by verifying that a workflow or composition adheres to regulations. Our approach supports customization, optimization and regulation enforcement all at composition construction time. To maximize efficiency, we have developed novel search heuristics together with a branch and bound search algorithm that enable the generation of high quality compositions with the performance of state-of-the-art planning systems.

Keywords

Service Selection Linear Temporal Logic Linear Temporal Logic Formula Enforce Regulation Task Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Cheung, W.K.W., Gil, Y.: Privacy enforcement through workflow systems in e-science and beyond. In: Proceedings of the ISWC 2007 Workshop on Privacy Enforcement and Accountability with Semantics (PEAS) (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chun, S.A., Atluri, V., Adam, N.R.: Policy-based Web service composition. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Research Issues on Data Engineering: Web Services for E-Commerce and E-Government ApplicationsRIDE, pp. 85–92. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gil, Y., Deelman, E., Blythe, J., Kesselman, C., Tangmunarunkit, H.: Artificial intelligence and grids: Workflow planning and beyond. IEEE Intelligent Systems 19(1), 26–33 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McIlraith, S., Son, T., Zeng, H.: Semantic Web services. IEEE Intelligent Systems. Special Issue on the Semantic Web 16(2), 46–53 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McIlraith, S., Son, T.: Adapting Golog for composition of semantic Web services. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), pp. 482–493 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sohrabi, S., Prokoshyna, N., McIlraith, S.A.: Web service composition via generic procedures and customizing user preferences. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 597–611. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghallab, M., Nau, D., Traverso, P.: Hierarchical Task Network Planning. In: Automated Planning: Theory and Practice. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Wu, D., Hendler, J., Nau, D.: HTN planning for Web service composition using SHOP2. Journal of Web Semantics 1(4), 377–396 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Hendler, J.: Template-based composition of semantic Web services. In: AAAI 2005 Fall Symposium on Agents and the Semantic Web (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lin, N., Kuter, U., Sirin, E.: Web service composition with user preferences. In: Bechhofer, S., Hauswirth, M., Hoffmann, J., Koubarakis, M. (eds.) ESWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5021, pp. 629–643. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gerevini, A., Long, D.: Plan constraints and preferences for PDDL3. Technical Report 2005-08-07, Department of Electronics for Automation, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sohrabi, S., Baier, J.A., McIlraith, S.A.: HTN planning with preferences. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence(IJCAI), pp. 1790–1797 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martin, D., Burstein, M., McDermott, D., McIlraith, S., Paolucci, M., Sycara, K., McGuinness, D., Sirin, E., Srinivasan, N.: Bringing semantics to Web services with OWL-S. World Wide Web Journal 10(3), 243–277 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P., van Harmelen, F.: From \(\mathcal{SHIQ}\) and RDF to OWL: The making of a Web ontology language. Journal of Web Semantics 1(1), 7–26 (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tonti, G., Bradshaw, J.M., Jeffers, R., Montanari, R., Suri, N., Uszok, A.: Semantic Web languages for policy representation and reasoning: A comparison of KAoS, Rei, and Ponder. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 419–437. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kolovski, V., Parsia, B., Katz, Y., Hendler, J.A.: Representing Web service policies in OWL-DL. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 461–475. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    WS-Policy: Web service policy framework (WS-policy), http://www.w3.org/Submission/WS-Policy/
  19. 19.
    Chun, S.A., Atluri, V., Adam, N.R.: Using semantics for policy-based Web service composition. Distrib. Parallel Databases 18(1), 37–64 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    RuleML: Rule markup language (RuleML), http://ruleml.org/
  21. 21.
    Emerson, E.A.: Temporal and modal logic. In: Handbook of theoretical computer science: formal models and semantics B, pp. 995–1072 (1990)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gerth, R., Peled, D., Vardi, M.Y., Wolper, P.: Simple on-the-fly automatic verification of linear temporal logic. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification (PSTV), pp. 3–18 (1995)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bacchus, F., Kabanza, F.: Using temporal logics to express search control knowledge for planning. AI Magazine 16, 123–191 (2000)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Petrie, C.J.: The Redux Server. In: Proc. Intl. Conf. on Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems (ICICIS), pp. 134–143 (1993)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nau, D.S., Au, T.C., Ilghami, O., Kuter, U., Murdock, J.W., Wu, D., Yaman, F.: SHOP2: An HTN planning system. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 20, 379–404 (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Traverso, P., Pistore, M.: Automatic composition of semantic Web services into executable processes. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 380–394. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    McDermott, D.V.: Estimated-regression planning for interactions with Web services. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning and Scheduling (AIPS), pp. 204–211 (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G.D., Lenzerini, M., Mecella, M., Patrizi, F.: Automatic service composition and synthesis: the Roman Model. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 31(3), 18–22 (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hoffmann, J., Weber, I., Governatori, G.: On compliance checking for clausal constraints in annotated process models. In: Journal Information Systems Frontiers (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hoffmann, J., Bertoli, P., Helmert, M., Pistore, M.: Message-based Web service composition, integrity constraints, and planning under uncertainty: A new connection. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 35, 49–117 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shirin Sohrabi
    • 1
  • Sheila A. McIlraith
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations