Composition of Services with Nondeterministic Observable Behavior

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3826)


In [3] we started studying an advanced form of service composition where available services were modeled as deterministic finite transition systems, describing the possible conversations they can have with clients, and where the client request was itself expressed as a (virtual) service making use of the same alphabet of actions. In [4] we extended our studies by considering the case in which the client request was loosen by allowing don’t care nondeterminism in expressing the required target service. In the present paper we complete such a line of investigation, by considering the case in which the available services are only partially controllable and must be modeled as nondeterministic finite transition systems, possibly because of our lack of information on their exact behavior. Notably such services display a “devilish” form of nondeterminism, since we want to model the inability of the orchestrator to actually choose between different executions of the same action. We investigate how to automatically perform the synthesis of the composition under these circumstances.


Transition System Service Composition Search Display Client Request Partial Observability 
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.


  1. 1.
    Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., Machiraju, V.: Web Services. Concepts, Architectures and Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Hull, R., Mecella, M.: Automatic composition of transition-based semantic web services with messaging. In: Proc. of VLDB 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Mecella, M.: Automatic composition of e-services that export their behavior. In: Proc. of ICSOC 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Mecella, M.: Synthesis of underspecified composite e-Services based on automated reasoning. In: Proc. of ICSOC 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harel, D., Kozen, D., Tiuryn, J.: Dynamic Logic. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hull, R., Su, J.: Tools for design of composite web services. In: Proc. of ACM SIGMOD, pp. 958–961 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kuter, U., Sirin, E., Nau, D., Parsia, B., Hendler, J.: Information gathering during planning for web service composition. In: Proc. of Workshop on Planning and Scheduling for Web and Grid Services (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    McIlraith, S.A., Son, T.C.: Adapting Golog for composition of semantic web services. In: Proc. of KR 2002, pp. 482–496 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Medjahed, B., Bouguettaya, A., Elmagarmid, A.K.: Composing web services on the semantic web. VLDB Journal 12(4), 333–351 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Michalowski, M., Ambite, J.L., Knoblock, C.A., Minton, S., Thakkar, S., Tuchinda, R.: Retrieving and semantically integrating heterogeneous data from the web. IEEE Intelligent Systems 19(3), 72–79 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pnueli, A., Rosner, R.: On the synthesis of a reactive module. In: Proc. of POPL 1989, pp. 179–190 (1989)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rintanen, J.: Complexity of planning with partial observability. In: Proc. of the 14th Int. Conf. on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS 2004), pp. 345–354 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thomas, W.: Languages, automata, and logic. In: Handbook of Formal Language Theory, vol. III, pp. 389–455 (1997)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thomas, W.: Infinite games and verification (Extended abstract of a tutorial). In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 58–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Traverso, P., Pistore, M.: Automated 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)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vardi, M.Y.: An automata-theoretic approach to fair realizability and synthesis. In: Wolper, P. (ed.) CAV 1995. LNCS, vol. 939, pp. 267–292. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universitá di Roma “La Sapienza”Italy
  2. 2.Free University of Bozen-BolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations