A Hierarchical Framework for Composing Nested Web Processes

  • Haibo Zhao
  • Prashant Doshi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4294)


Many of the previous methods for composing Web processes utilize either classical planning techniques such as hierarchical task networks (HTNs), or decision-theoretic planners such as Markov decision processes (MDPs). While offering a way to automatically compose a desired Web process, these techniques do not scale to large processes. In addition, classical planners assume away the uncertainties involved in service invocations such as service failure. In this paper, we present a hierarchical approach for composing Web processes that may be nested – some of the components of the process may be Web processes themselves. We model the composition problem using a semi-Markov decision process (SMDP) that generalizes MDPs by allowing actions to be temporally extended. We use these actions to represent the invocation of lower level Web processes whose execution times are uncertain and different from simple service invocations.


Markov Decision Process Abstract Action Hierarchical Framework Primitive Action Service Invocation 
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.
    Cardoso, J., Sheth, A.P.: Introduction to semantic web services and web process composition. In: Cardoso, J., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) SWSWPC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3387, pp. 1–13. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wu, D., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Hendler, J., Nau, D.: Automating daml-s web services composition using shop2. In: ICWC, Sanibel Island, Florida (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Doshi, P., Goodwin, R., Akkiraju, R., Verma, K.: Dynamic workflow composition: Using markov decision processes. JWSR (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Traverso, P., Pistore, M.: Automated composition of semantic web services into executable processes (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Puterman, M.L.: Markov Decision Processes: Discrete Stochastic Dynamic Programming. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McIlraith, S., Son, T.C.: Adapting golog for composition of semantic web services. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2002), Toulouse, France (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Medjahed, B., Bouguettaya, A., Elmagarmid, A.K.: Composing web services on the semantic web. The VLDB Journal (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nau, D.S., Au, T.C., Ilghami, O., Kuter, U., Murdock, J.W., Wu, D., Yaman, F.: Shop2: An HTN planning system. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kuter, U., Sirin, E., Nau, D., Parsia, B., Hendler, J.: Information gathering during planning for web serivce composition. Journal of Web Semantics (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ludwig, H., Keller, A., Dan, A., King, R.P., Franck, R.: Web Service Level Agreeement (WSLA) Language Specification (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Haibo Zhao
    • 1
  • Prashant Doshi
    • 1
  1. 1.LSDIS Lab., Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations