The COSMO Solution to the SWS Challenge Mediation Problem Scenarios: An Evaluation

  • Camlon H. Asuncion
  • Marten van Sinderen
  • Dick Quartel


During the course of our participation in the Semantic Web Services (SWS) Challenge, we have shown how the concepts defined in the COnceptual Services MOdeling (COSMO) framework for the modeling, reasoning and analysis of services can be used to solve the Mediation Problem Scenarios of the Challenge. Along with the service-oriented refinement and composition paradigm of COSMO, our approach is also based on model-driven and goal-oriented principles where the semantic integration of applications is designed at a layer of abstraction higher than technology specifications. The objective of this paper is to evaluate our previous and current research efforts towards advancing our solution to the semantic integration of service-oriented applications, particularly, using the mediation problem scenarios of the Challenge. We do this by presenting the state of the art of our solution while reporting our experience with applying our solution to the scenarios including lessons learned and identified research challenges.


Integration Solution Goal Model Business Rule Business Process Execution Language Model Drive Architecture 
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.



The authors are grateful to Rodrigo Mantovaneli Pessoa, Teduh Dirgahayu, and Stanislav Pokraev whose earlier works have been used in this book chapter.


  1. 1.
    C.H. Asuncion, Goal-driven service mediation solution, Master’s thesis, University of Twente, 2009Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C.H. Asuncion, M.E. Iacob, M.J. van Sinderen, Towards a flexible service integration through separation of business rules, in 14th IEEE International Enterprise Computing Conference, Vitoria, IEEE Computer Society, 2010Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C.H. Asuncion, D.A.C. Quartel, S.V. Pokraev, M.E. Iacob, M.J. van Sinderen, Combining goal-oriented and model-driven approaches to solve the payment problem scenario, in 8th Semantic Web Service (SWS) Challenge Workshop, Eindhoven, 2010Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Brambilla, I. Celino, S. Ceri, D. Cerizza, E. Della Valle, F. Facca, A software engineering approach to design and development of semantic web service applications, in The Semantic Web – ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273 (Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2006), pp. 172–186Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. Dirgahayu, D.A.C. Quartel, M.J. van Sinderen, Development of transformations from business process models to implementations by Reuse, Technical report, CTIT, University of Twente, Enschede, 2007Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    E. Friedman, Jess in Action: Rule-Based Systems in Java (Manning Publications Co., Greenwich, 2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    N.E. Fuchs, U. Schwertel, R. Schwitter, Attempto controlled english – not just another logic specification language, in 8th International Workshop on Logic Programming Synthesis and Transformation (Springer London, 1990), pp. 1–20Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M.E. Iacob, D. Rothengatter, J. van Hillegersberg, A health-care application of goal-driven software design. Appl. Med. Inform. 24(1–2), 12–33 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. Kitchenham, S. Linkman, D. Law, DESMET: a methodology for evaluating software engineering methods and tools. J. Comput. Control Eng. 8(3), 120–126 (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Lankhorst, Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modelling, Communication and Analysis (Springer, Berlin, 2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Mantovaneli Pessoa, D.A.C. Quartel, M.J. van Sinderen, A comparison of data and process mediation approaches, in 2nd Workshop on Enterprise Systems and Technology, I-WEST, vol. 1, ed. by J. Cordeiro, M.J. Sinderen van, B.B. Shishkov (INSTICC Press, Portugal, 2008), pp. 48–63Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S.V. Pokraev, Model-driven semantic integration of service-oriented applications, PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, 2009Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. Pokraev, M. Reichert, M.W.A. Steen, R.J. Wieringa, Semantic and pragmatic interoperability: a model for understanding, in Open Interop Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Ontologies for Interoperability, CEUR-WS, vol. 160, Porto, 2005, pp. 1–5Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S.V. Pokraev et al., A method for formal verification of service interoperability, in IEEE International Conference on Web Services, Chicago, Sep 2006, IEEE Computer Society, 2006, pp. 895–900Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S.V. Pokraev, D.A.C. Quartel, M.W.A. Steen, M.U. Reichert, Requirements and method for assessment of service interoperability, in 4th International Conference on Service Oriented Computing, Chicago. LNCS, Springer, 2006, pp. 1–14Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D.A.C. Quartel, M.J. Van Sinderen, Modelling and analysing interoperability in service compositions using COSMO. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2(4), 347–366 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. Quartel, L.F. Pires, M. van Sinderen, On architectural support for behaviour refinement in distributed systems design. J. Integr. Des. Process Sci. 6(1), 1–30 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D.A.C. Quartel, M.W.A. Steen, S.V. Pokraev, M.J. van Sinderen, COSMO: a conceptual framework for service modelling and refinement, Inf. Syst. Front. 9(2–3), 225–244 (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D.A.C. Quartel, S.V. Pokraev, R. Mantovaneli Pessoa, M.J. van Sinderen, Model-driven development of a mediation service, in 12th International IEEE Enterprise Computing Conference, Munich, IEEE Computer Society, 2008, pp. 117–126Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. Quartel, S. Pokraev, T. Dirgahayu, R.M. Pessoa, M. van Sinderen, Model-driven service integration using the COSMO framework, in 7th Workshops Semantic Web Services Challenge, Stanford Logic Group Technical Reports, Karlsruhe, 2008, pp. 77–88Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    D.A.C. Quartel, W. Engelsman, H. Jonkers, M.J. van Sinderen, A goal-oriented requirements modelling language for enterprise architecture, in 13th IEEE International Enterprise Computing Conference, Auckland, IEEE Computer Society, 2009, pp. 3–13Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    D.A.C. Quartel et al., Model-driven development of mediation for business services using COSMO. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 3(3), 319–345 (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    D. Quartel, T. Dirgahayu, M. Van Sinderen, Model-driven design, simulation and implementation of service compositions in COSMO. Int. J. Bus. Process Integr. Manag. 4(1), 18–34 (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    D. Roman et al., Web service modeling ontology. Appl. Ontol. 1, 77–106 (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    B. Steffen, T. Margaria, R. Nagel, S. Jörges, C. Kubczak, Model-driven development with the jABC, in Hardware and Software, Verification and Testing. LNCS, vol. 4383 (Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2007), pp. 92–108Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    A. van Lamsweerde, Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour, in 5th IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, Toronto, 2001, pp. 249–262Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    M.J. van Sinderen, Challenges and solutions in enterprise computing. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2(4), 341–346 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Camlon H. Asuncion
    • 1
  • Marten van Sinderen
    • 1
  • Dick Quartel
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Telematics and Information Technology (CTIT)University of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands
  2. 2.NovayEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations