Evaluating Proposals in Web Services Negotiation

  • Yonglei Yao
  • Fangchun Yang
  • Sen Su
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4263)


Negotiation is a crucial stage of Web Services interaction lifecycle. By exchanging a sequence of proposals in the negotiation stage, a service provider and a consumer try to establish a formal contract, to specify agreed terms on the service, particularly terms on non-functional aspects. In this paper, we propose an approach for proposal evaluation, one of the key decisions in negotiation that determines the acceptability of a proposal. Fuzzy truth propositions are employed to represent the restrictions attached to a service, and a utility function is used to capture the negotiator’s preferences over service attributes. The overall acceptability of the proposal can be determined by the restriction obedience and the utility of values for service attributes, collectively. Based on the acceptability of a proposal, a negotiator can decide whether to accept it as a contract, then enact with the party that offers the proposal.


Service Attribute Satisfaction Degree Negotiation Protocol Negotiation Model Negotiation Stage 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Sivashanmugam, K., Verma, K., Sheth, A.: Discovery of Web Services in a Federated Registry Environment. In: Proceedings of 2004 IEEE International Conference on Web Services, July 6-9, 2004, pp. 270–278 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shen, Z., Su, J.: Web service discovery based on behavior signatures. In: Proceedings of 2005 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, July 11-15, 2005, vol. 1, pp. 279–286 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Agarwal, V., Dasgupta, K., Karnik, N., Kumar, A., Kundu, A., Mittal, S., Srivastava, B.: A Service Creation Environment Based on End to End Composition of Web Services. In: Proceedings of the fourteenth International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2005), Chiba, Japan, May 10–14, 2005, pp. 128–137 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Maamar, Z., Mostefaoui, S.K., Yahyaoui, H.: Toward an Agent-Based and Context-Oriented Approach for Web Services Composition. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 17(5), 686–697 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zadeh, L.: Fuzzy sets. Inform. and Control 8, 338–353 (1965)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zadeh, L.: The calculus of fuzzy restrictions. In: Zadeh, L.A., et al. (eds.) Fuzzy Sets and Applications to Cognitive and Decision Making Processes, pp. 1–39. Academic Press, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Preist, C.: A Conceptual Architecture for Semantic Web Services. In: Proceeding of International Semantic Web Conference, November 8-11, 2004, Hiroshima, Japan (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burstein, M., Bussler, C., Finin, T., Huhns, M.N., Paolucci, M., Sheth, A.P., Williams, S., Zaremba, M.: A semantic Web services architecture. Internet Computing 9(5), 72–81 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Oldham, N., Verma, K., Sheth, A., Hakimpour, F.: Semantic WS-Agreement Partner Selection. In: Proceedings of the 15th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2006), May 23-26, 2006, Edinburgh, Scotland (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Patrick, C., Hung, K., Li, H., Jeng, J.-J.: WS-Negotiation: an overview of research issues. In: Proc. HICSS 2004, January 5-8 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bui, T., Gachet, A.: Web Services for Negotiation and Bargaining in Electronic Markets: Design Requirements and Implementation Framework. In: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January 3-6, 2005, pp. 38–38 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Andrieux, A., Czajkowski, C., Dan, A., Keahey, K., Ludwig, H., Pruyne, J., Rofrano, J., Tuecke, S., Xu, M.: Web Services Agreement Specification (WS-Agreement), June 29 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Paurobally, S., Tamma, V., Wooldridge, M.: Cooperation and Agreement between Semantic Web Services. In: W3C Workshop on Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services, Innsbruck, Austria (June 2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Faratin, P., Sierra, C., Jennings, N.R.: Using Similarity Criteria to Make Negotiation Trade-Offs. Journal of Artificial Intelligence 142(2), 205–237 (2003)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Luo, X., Jennings, N.R., Shadbolt, N., Leung, H., Lee, J.H.: A fuzzy constraint based model for bilateral multi-issue negotiations in semi-competitive environments. Artificial Intelligence Journal 148(1-2), 53–102 (2003)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Aiello, M., Frankova, G., Malfatti, D.: What’s in an Agreement?An Analysis and an Extension of WS-Agreement. In: Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Traverso, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3826, pp. 424–436. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yonglei Yao
    • 1
  • Fangchun Yang
    • 1
  • Sen Su
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Networking & Switching TechnologyBeijing University of Posts & Telecommunications (BUPT)BeijingChina

Personalised recommendations