Strategic Composition of Semantic Web Services Using SLAKY Composer

  • P. Sandhya
  • M. Lakshmi
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 178)


Web service composition is the process of aggregation of elementary services to build composite applications. To automate composition several algorithms based on artificial intelligence planning [1], association rule mining [2], petri net [3], case based reasoning [4], genetic algorithm [5][6], neural network [7], etc, have been proposed. However all of these methods select services that only satisfy client’s requirements and behavior [8]. In a real world scenario choosing business service partners for composition on the fly automatically is impractical and often referred to as a toy model [9]. SLAKY System is a new realistic model for selection of business service partners. SLAKY System selects services on the fly considering the vision, time planning, environmental context, user adoption, usage policies, trust management, risk management, market scenario, native intelligence, and competitive profit management of collaborating service partners apart from functionality satisfaction for client’s requirements. In this paper we focus on profit management module. We have proposed SLAKY BWG algorithm for profit management where composition is done in a competitive manner by considering service providers and agent as competitors seeking to maximize their profits by selecting strategic composition as a Non-Zero sum business war game. The execution module executes the compositions as a mixed strategy so that both the agent and service provider gains profit.


Automatic Web Service Composition SLAKY OWL-S Upper Ontology Non-Zero sum game SLAKY Composer 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Peer, J.: Web Service Composition as AI Planning - a Survey, Language (2005),
  2. 2.
    Bayati, S., Nejad, A.F., Kharazmi, S.: Bahreininejad Using Association Rule Mining to Improve Semantic Web Service Composition Performance. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer, Control and Communication IC4 2009, Karachi, February 17-18, pp. 978–971 (2009) ISBN: 978-1-4244-3313-1Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhu, C.Y., Du, Y.: Application of Logical Petri Nets in Web Service Composition. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation, ICMA 2010, Xi’an, China, August 4-7, pp. 978–971 (2010) ISBN: 978-1-4244-5140-1Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Osman, T., Thakker, D., Al-Dabass, D.: Semantic-Driven Match Making of Web services Using Case-Based Reasoning. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Web Service, ICWS 2006, Chicago, September 18-22, pp. 29–36 (2006) ISBN: 0-7695-2669-1Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fanjiang, Y.-Y., Syu, Y., Wu, C.-H., Kuo, J.-Y., Ma, S.-P.: Genetic Algorithm for QOS-Aware Dynamic Web service Composition. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, ICMLC 2010, Qingdao, July 11-14, pp. 978–971 (2010) ISBN: 978-1-4244-6526-2Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pejman, E., Rastegari, Y., Majlesi Esfahani, P., Salajegheh, A.: Web service Composition Methods: A Survey. In: Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists, IMECS-2012, Hong Kong, March 14-15, vol. I, pp. 978–988 (2012) ISBN:978-988-19251-1-4Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maamar, Z., Younas, I., Benslimane, D., Ghedira, C., Yahyaoui, H.: On Self-Coordinating Web Service Using Similarity and Neural Networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on e-Technology, e-Commerce, and e-Service 2005, EEE 2005, Hong Kong, March 29- April 1, pp. 171–176 (2005) ISBN: 0-7695-2274-2Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Feng, Z.: Towards a Behavior Based Restructure for Service Composition. In: Proceedings of 10th IEEE International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications 2011, Changsha, November 16-18, pp. 1564–1571 (2011) ISBN: 978-1-4577-2135-9Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mehandjiev, N., Lécué, F., Wajid, U.: Provider-Composer Negotiations for Semantic Robustness in Service Compositions. In: Baresi, L., Chi, C.-H., Suzuki, J. (eds.) ICSOC-ServiceWave 2009. LNCS, vol. 5900, pp. 205–220. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Talantikite, H.N., Aissani, D., Boudjlida, N.: In: Semantic Annotations For Web Services Discovery and Composition. Elsevier (2008), doi:10.1016/j.csi.2008.09.041Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ma, J., Zhang, Y., He, J.: Efficient Finding Web Services Using a Clustering Semantic Approach. In: ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, April 22, vol. 292. ACM Press, China (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vieira, T.A.S.C., Casanova, M.A., Ferrao, L.G.: On the design of ontology-driven workflow flexibilization mechanisms. Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society, Ontology Issues and Applications 10(4), 33–43 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang, H.W., Gibbins, N., Payne, T.R., Redavid, D.: A formal model of the Semantic Web Service Ontoogy (WSMO). Information Systems Journal 37(1), 33–60 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muller, I., Kowalczyk, R.: Braun Towards agent-based coalition formation for service composition. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, IAT 2006, pp. 73–80. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information TechnologySathyabama UniversityChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSathyabama UniversityChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations