Functionality Evaluation of Ubiquitous Service Ontology for Dynamic Service Composition

  • Meeyeon Lee
  • Jung-Won Lee
  • Nammee Moon
  • Seung Soo Park
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 114)

Abstract

Effective service description and modeling methodologies for dynamic service composition are essential techniques for providing autonomous services in ubiquitous computing environments. In our previous paper, we proposed “u-Service” as an abstract and structured concept for operations of devices in ubiquitous environments. In addition, we established the mechanism to structure u-Services in ontology and the description specification to represent the attributes of u-Services. However, we did not present methods or standards that are sufficient to analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of the u-Service ontology during the design time. Since the existing quality models for software products or computing systems cannot consider the characteristics of u-Services, they are not suitable for a u-Service ontology. Therefore, in this paper, we propose an evaluation model to assess the functionality of u-Service ontologies, based on our u-Service ontology building process. We extract a modeling goal and evaluation indicators according to characteristics of u-Service ontology and establish quality metrics to quantify them. The experimental results for u-Service ontologies that were constructed in our previous studies show that we can comprehensively analyze the design of u-Service ontology. Further, on the basis of the evaluation results, improvement in design quality can be achieved.

Keywords

Ubiquitous computing Service ontology Evaluation metric Dynamic service composition Service-oriented architecture 

References

  1. 1.
    Chakraborty D, Perich F, Joshi A, Yesha Y (2002) A reactive service composition architecture for pervasive computing environments. In: 7th Personal Wireless Communications Conference, pp 53–62Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chakraborty D, Joshi A (2001) Dynamic service composition: state-of-the-art and research directions. Technical Report TR-CS-01-19, University of MarylandGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee M, Lee JW, Park SS, Cho W (2008) Ontology-based service description and overloading method for ubiquitous computing. J Korea Inf Process Soc 15B(5):465–476Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee M, Lee JW, Park SS, Cho W (2010) SOA-based service layering for facilitating dynamic service composition and alternative service discovery. J Inf Sci Eng 26(3):991–1010Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Erl T (2005) Service-oriented architecture: concepts technology and design. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gomez-Perez A (1995) Some ideas and examples to evaluate ontologies. In: 11th Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Applications, pp 299–305Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tartir S, Arpinar IB, Sheth AP (2008) Ontological Evaluation and Validation Theory and Applications of Ontology 2. Springer-Berlin,  Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    O’Sullivan J, Edmond D, Hofstede AHM (2002) Service description: a survey of the general nature of services Technical Report. Queensland University of Technology,  Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Martin D, Burstein M, Hobbs J, Lassila O, McDermott D, Mcllraith S, Narayanan S, Paolucci M, Parsia B, Payne T, Sirin E, Srinivasan N, Sycara K (2004) OWL-S: semantic markup for web services. W3C Member SubmissionGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGuinness DL, Hamelen F (2004) OWL web ontology language overview. W3C Member SubmissionGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC 9126-1 Software engineering-product quality-part 1: quality model. ISO/IEC Technical Report (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC 9126-2 Software engineering-product quality-part 2: external metrics. ISO/IEC Technical Report (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC 9126-3 Software engineering-product quality-part 3: internal metrics. ISO/IEC Technical Report (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC 9126-4 Software engineering-product quality-part 4: quality in use metrics. ISO/IEC Technical Report (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bansiya J, Davis CG (2002) A hierarchical model for object-oriented design quality assessment. IEEE Trans Software Eng 28(1):4–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shim B, Choue S, Kim S, Park S (2008) A design quality model for service-oriented architecture. In: 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp.403-410Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oh S, Kim S, Rhew S (2007) UCQM: a quality model for practical evaluation of ubiquitous computing systems. J Korean Inst Inf Sci Eng Softw Appl 34(4):342–358Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee S, Shin D (2008) Web service QoS in multi-domain. In: 10th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology, pp 1759–1762Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ko JM, Kim CO, Kwon IH (2008) Quality-of-service oriented web service composition algorithm and planning architecture. J Sys Softw 81(11):2079–2090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Prahmkaew S (2010) Performance evaluation of convergence ad hoc networks. J Converg 1(1):101–106Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Malakuti S, Aksit M, Bockisch C (2011) Runtime verification in distributed computing. J Converg 2(1):1–10Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shah SNM, Mahmood AKB, Oxley A (2011) Development and performance analysis of grid resource allocation methods. Int J Inf Technol Commun Converg 1(3):331–355Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Halim Z, Baig AR, Mujtaba H (2010) Measuring entertainment and automatic generation of entertaining games. Int J Inf Technol Commun Converg 1(1):92–107Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Erl T (2007) SOA Principles of service design, Prentice Hall, New JercyGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meeyeon Lee
    • 1
  • Jung-Won Lee
    • 2
  • Nammee Moon
    • 3
  • Seung Soo Park
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringEwha Womans UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringAjou UniversitySuwonKorea
  3. 3.Department of IT App. Tech. GSVHoseo UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations