Analyzing Coopetition Strategies of Services within Communities

  • Babak Khosravifar
  • Mahsa Alishahi
  • Ehsan Khosrowshahi Asl
  • Jamal Bentahar
  • Rabeb Mizouni
  • Hadi Otrok
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7636)


Recently, a number of frameworks have been proposed to aggregate web services within communities for the purpose of enhancing their capabilities with respect to providing the required services. Most of the proposed frameworks suggest that web services within these communities are competing but also exhibit cooperative behavior, so web services are said to be coopetitive. However, deciding which strategy to adopt, which means competing or cooperating is still an open question. The purpose of this paper is to answer this question by discussing a mechanism web services can use to effectively choose interacting strategies which bring maximum utility. In this direction, we investigate web services’ characteristics and their expected utilities over different strategies. We enable web services that are hosted in communities with reasoning capabilities to enhance their quality of strategic interacting mechanisms as decision making procedures. The ultimate objective is to analyze factors that helps web services decide about different interacting strategies. Moreover, we develop a simulated environment where we analyze different scenarios and verify the obtained theoretical results using parameters from a real web services dataset.


Web services Reputation Strategies 


  1. 1.
    Alchieri, E.A.P., Bessani, A.N., Fraga, J.S.: A dependable infrastructure for cooperative web services coordination. In: Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Web Services, ICWS, pp. 21–28 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Masri, E., Mahmoud, Q.H.: Discovering the best web service. In: Proc. of the 16th Int. Conf. on World Wide Web, WWW, pp. 1257–1258 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lim, E., Thiran, P., Maamar, Z., Bentahar, J.: On the analysis of satisfaction for web services selection. In: Proc. of the 9th Int. Conf. on Services Computing, SCC (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jurca, R., Faltings, B.: Reputation-Based Service Level Agreements for Web Services. In: Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Traverso, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3826, pp. 396–409. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kalepu, S., Krishnaswamy, S., Loke, S.W.: A QoS metric for selecting Web services and providers. In: Proc. of the 4th Int. Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering Workshops, pp. 131–139 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khosravifar, B., Bentahar, J., Moazin, A., Thiran, P.: On the reputation of agent-based web services. In: Proc. of the 24th Int. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 1352–1357 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khosravifar, B., Bentahar, J., Clacens, K., Goffart, C., Thiran, P.: Game-Theoretic Analysis of a Web Services Collaborative Mechanism. In: Kappel, G., Maamar, Z., Motahari-Nezhad, H.R. (eds.) ICSOC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7084, pp. 549–556. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khosravifar, B., Bentahar, J., Moazin, A., Thiran, P.: Analyzing communities of web services using incentives. Journal of Web Services Research 7(3), 30–51 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Malik, Z., Bouguettaya, A.: Evaluating Rater Credibility for Reputation Assessment of Web Services. In: Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Georgakopoulos, D., Bartolini, C., Sadiq, W., Godart, C. (eds.) WISE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4831, pp. 38–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maximilien, E.M., Singh, M.P.: Reputation and endorsement for web services. ACM SIGEcom Exchanges 3(1), 24–31 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rosario, S., Benveniste, A., Haar, S., Jard, C.: Probabilistic QoS and soft contracts for transaction based Web services. In: Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Web Services, ICWS, pp. 126–133 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yassine, A., Shirehjini, A.A., Shirmohammadi, S., Tran, T.: Knowledge-empowered agent information system for privecy payoff in ecommerce. Knowledge and Information Systems (2011) doi: 10.1007/s10115-011-0415-3Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Babak Khosravifar
    • 1
  • Mahsa Alishahi
    • 2
  • Ehsan Khosrowshahi Asl
    • 2
  • Jamal Bentahar
    • 2
  • Rabeb Mizouni
    • 3
  • Hadi Otrok
    • 3
  1. 1.McGill UniversityCanada
  2. 2.Concordia UniversityCanada
  3. 3.Khalifa UniversityUAE

Personalised recommendations