Agent-Based Semantic Composition of Web Services Using Distributed Description Logics
An important research challenge consists in composing web services in an automatic and distributed manner on a large scale. Indeed, most queries can not be satisfiable by one service and must be processed by composing several services. Each web service is often written by different designers and is described using the terms of their own ontology. Therefore, the composition process needs to deal with a variety of heterogeneous ontologies. In order to tackle this challenge, we propose an approach using Distributed Description Logics (DDL) to achieve the semantic composition of web services. DDL allows one to make semantic connections between ontologies and thus web services, as well as to reason to get a semantic composition of web services.
KeywordsService Composition Description Logic Service Description Semantic Description Semantic Composition
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 6.Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G.D., Lenzerini, M., Mecella, M.: e-service composition by description logics based reasoning. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics, pp. 75–84 (2003)Google Scholar
- 10.Ghidini, C., Serafini, L.: Distributed first order logics. In: Frontiers of Combining Systems 2. Studies in Logic and Computation, pp. 121–140 (1998)Google Scholar
- 14.Nau, D., Cao, Y., Lotem, A., Muoz-Avila, H., Muoz-Avila, H.: Shop: Simple hierarchical ordered planner. In: IJCAI 1999, pp. 968–973 (1999)Google Scholar
- 15.Peer, J.: A pop-based replanning agent for automatic web service composition. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Semantic Web, pp. 47–61 (2005)Google Scholar
- 16.Peltz, C.: Web services orchestration - a review of emerging technologies, tools, and standards. Tech. rep., Hewlett Packard (2003)Google Scholar
- 17.Serafini, L., Tamilin, A.: Local tableaux for reasoning in distributed description logics. In: Description Logics (2004)Google Scholar
- 19.Yolanda, G.: Description logics and planning. AI Magazine 26(2), 73–84 (2005)Google Scholar