Advertisement

A Probabilistic Approach to Service Selection with Conditional Contracts and Usage Patterns

  • Adrian Klein
  • Fuyuki Ishikawa
  • Bernhard Bauer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5900)

Abstract

Service selection is a central challenge in the context of a Service Oriented Architecture. Once functionally sufficient services have been selected, a further selection based on non-functional properties (NFPs) becomes essential in meeting the user’s requirements and preferences. However, current descriptions of NFPs and approaches to NFP-aware selection lack the ability to handle the variability of NFPs, that stems from the complex nature of real-world business scenarios. Therefore, we propose a probabilistic approach to service selection as follows: First, to address the inherent variability in the actual values of NFPs at runtime, we treat them as probability distributions. Then, on top of that, we tackle the variability needed in describing NFPs, by providing conditional contracts. Finally, from usage patterns, we compute user-specific expectations for such NFPs. Further, we depict a typical scenario, which serves both as a motivation for our approach, and as a basis for its evaluation.

Keywords

Stock Market Probabilistic Approach Usage Pattern Service Orient Architecture Service Selection 
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.
    Papazoglou, M.P., Traverso, P., Dustdar, S., Leymann, F.: Service-oriented computing. Communications of the ACM 46, 25–28 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    O’Sullivan, J., Edmond, D., Ter Hofstede, A.: What’s in a Service? Distributed and Parallel Databases 12(2-3), 117–133 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Paolucci, M., Kawamura, T., Payne, T.R., Sycara, K.P.: Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 333–347. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    de Bruijn, J., Lausen, H., Krummenacher, R., Polleres, A., Predoiu, L., Kifer, M., Fensel, D., Toma, I., Steinmetz, N., Kerrigan, M.: The Web Service Modeling Language WSML. Technical report, WSML, WSML Final Draft D16.1v0.3 (2007), http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d16/d16.1/v0.3/
  5. 5.
    Ludwig, H., Keller, A., Dan, A., King, R., Franck, R.: Web Service Level Agreement (WSLA) Language Specification, Version 1.0, IBM Corporation (2003), http://www.research.ibm.com/wsla/WSLASpecV1-20030128.pdf
  6. 6.
    Hwang, S., Want, H., Tang, J., Srivastava, J.: A probabilistic approach to modeling and estimating the QoS of web-services-based workflows. Information Sciences: an International Journal 177(23), 5484–5503 (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rosario, S., Benveniste, A., Haar, S., Jard, C.: Probabilistic QoS and Soft Contracts for Transaction-Based Web Services Orchestrations. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing 1(4), 187–200 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Toma, I., Roman, D., Fensel, D., Sapkota, B., Gomez, J.M.: A Multi-criteria Service Ranking Approach Based on Non-Functional Properties Rules Evaluation. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 435–441. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Balke, W., Wagner, M.: Towards Personalized Selection of Web Services. In: WWW 2003 (May 2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Menasce, D.A., Dubey, V.: Utility-based QoS Brokering in Service Oriented Architectures. In: ICWS 2007, July 2007, pp. 422–430 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haddad, J.E., Manouvrier, M., Ramirez, G., Rukoz, M.: QoS-Driven Selection of Web Services for Transactional Composition. In: ICWS 2008, September 2008, pp. 653–660 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adrian Klein
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Fuyuki Ishikawa
    • 4
  • Bernhard Bauer
    • 1
  1. 1.University of AugsburgGermany
  2. 2.Technical University MunichGermany
  3. 3.Ludwig-Maximilians-University MunichGermany
  4. 4.National Institute of InformaticsTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations