A New Approach for Semantic Web Matching

  • Kamran Zamanifar
  • Golsa Heidary
  • Naser Nematbakhsh
  • Farhad Mardukhi
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 78)


In this work we propose a new approach for semantic web matching to improve the performance of Web Service replacement. Because in automatic systems we should ensure the self-healing, self-configuration, self-optimization and self-management, all services should be always available and if one of them crashes, it should be replaced with the most similar one. Candidate services are advertised in Universal Description, Discovery and Integration (UDDI) all in Web Ontology Language (OWL). By the help of bipartite graph, we did the matching between the crashed service and a Candidate one. Then we chose the best service, which had the maximum rate of matching. In fact we compare two services‘ functionalities and capabilities to see how much they match. We found that the best way for matching two web services, is comparing the functionalities of them.


Semantic web matching algorithm UDDI OWL 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Okutan, a.C., Kesim Cicekli, b.N.: A Monolithic Approach to Automated Composition of Semantic Web Services With The Event Calculus. Knowledge-Based Systems 23, 440–454 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abramowicz, W., Haniewicz, K., Kaczmarek, M., Zyskowski, D.: Architecture for Web Services Filtering and Clustering. In: 2nd IEEE International Conference on Internet and Web Applications and Services (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Segev, A.: Circular Context-Based Semantic Matching to Identify Web Service Composition. In: CSSSIA, Beijing, China (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yue, a.K., Liu, a.W., Wang, b.X., Zhou, A., Li, J.: Discovering Semantic Associations Among Web Services Based on the Qualitative Probabilistic Network. Expert Systems with Applications 36, 9082–9094 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ivan, H., Akkiraju, R., Goodwin, R.: Learning Ontologies to Improve the Quality of Automatic Web Service Matching. In: IEEE International Conference on Web Services (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Doan, A., Madhavan, J., Domingos, P., Halevy, A.: Learning to Map Between Ontologies on the Semantic Web, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ontology Matching Approaches in Semantic Web: a Survey. Department of Computing Science, University of Alberta, Cdmonton, Canada Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nacer Talantikite, H., Aissani, D., Boudjlida, N.: Semantic Annotations for Web Services Discovery and Composition. Computer Standards & Interfaces 31, 1108–1117 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fan, J.: Semantics-Based Web Service Matching Model. In: IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics, pp. 323–328 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Verma, K., Akkiraju, R., Goodwin, R.: Semantic Matching of Web Service PoliciesGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chan Oh, S., Woon Yoo, J., Kil, H., Lee, D., Kumara, S.R.T.: Semantic Web-Service Discovery and Composition Using Flexible Parameter Matching. In: The 9th IEEE International Conference on e-Commerce Technology and the 4th International Conference on Enterprise Computing, e-Commerce and e-Services (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ben Mokhtar, S., Kaul, A., Georgantas, N., Issarny, V.: Towards Efficient Matching of Semantic Web Service Capabilities. In: International Workshop on Web Services Modeling and Testing, pp. 137–152 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
  15. 15.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kamran Zamanifar
    • 1
  • Golsa Heidary
    • 2
  • Naser Nematbakhsh
    • 1
  • Farhad Mardukhi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer ScienceUniversity of IsfahanIsfahanIran
  2. 2.Young Researchers Club, Computer Engineering DepartmentIslamic Azad UniversityNajafabad BranchIran

Personalised recommendations