Advertisement

Goal Preservation by Choreography-Driven Matchmaking

  • Matteo Baldoni
  • Cristina Baroglio
  • Alberto Martelli
  • Viviana Patti
  • Claudio Schifanella
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4907)

Abstract

In this work we give a formal background and identify the limits of applicability of local matching criteria (among which the well-known Zaremski and Wings’s plugin-match) when they are used to automatically retrieve all the capabilities that are necessary to instantiate a given choreography. In doing this it is necessary to take into account and somehow merge two possibly conflicting perspectives: the local criterion for selecting single capabilities and the overall goal that we mean the composition to pursue. Formally, the problem is interpreted as the study of the preservation of the global properties of a choreography, when its roles are played by specific services.

Keywords

Multiagent System Atomic Action Execution Trace Local Match Role Description 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., Machiraju, V.: Web Services. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Martelli, A., Patti, V.: Reasoning about interaction protocols for customizing web service selection and composition. JLAP, special issue on Web Services and Formal Methods 70(1), 53–73 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Martelli, A., Patti, V., Schifanella, C.: Reasoning on choreographies and capability requirements. International Journal of Business Process Integration and Management 2(4) (2007) (in press)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Martelli, A., Patti, V., Schifanella, C.: Service selection by choreography-driven matching. In: Proc. of the 2nd ECOWS Workshop WEWST 2007, January 2008. CEUR, vol. 313, pp. 1–17 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baldoni, M., Giordano, L., Martelli, A., Patti, V.: Programming Rational Agents in a Modal Action Logic. AMAI 41(2-4), 207–257 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bryson, J., Martin, D., McIlraith, S., Stein, L.A.: Agent-based composite services in DAML-S: The behavior-oriented design of an intelligent semantic web. In: Web Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Casati, F., Chien, M.C.: Dynamic and adaptive composition of e-services. Information Systems 26, 143–163 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fensel, D., Polleres, A., Lausen, H., de Bruijn, J., Stollberg, M., Roman, D., Domingue, J.: Enabling Semantic Web Services: The Web Service Modeling Ontology. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Graf, S., Steffen, B.: Compositional minimization of finite state systems. In: Clarke, E., Kurshan, R.P. (eds.) CAV 1990. LNCS, vol. 531, pp. 186–196. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huget, M.-P., Koning, J.-L.: Interaction protocol engineering. In: Huget, M.-P. (ed.) Communication in Multiagent Systems. LNCS, vol. 2650, pp. 179–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaufer, F., Klusch, M.: Wsmo-mx: A logic programming based hybrid service matchmaker. In: Proc. of ECOWS 2006, pp. 161–170. IEEE Comp. Soc., Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Keller, U., Laraand, R., Polleres, A., Toma, I., Kifer, M., Fensel, D.: D5.1 v0.1 WSMO web service discovery. Technical report, WSML deliverable (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levesque, H.J., Reiter, R., Lespérance, Y., Lin, F., Scherl, R.B.: GOLOG: A logic programming language for logic domains. JLP 31, 59–83 (1997)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, L., Horrocks, I.: A software framework for matchmaking based on semantic technology. In: Proc. of WWW Conference. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Medjahed, B., Bouguettaya, A.: A multilevel composability model for semantic web services. IEEE Trans. on KDE 17(7), 954–968 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Örrens, B., Yang, J., Papazoglou, M.P.: Model driven service composition. In: Orlowska, M.E., Weerawarana, S., Papazoglou, M.P., Yang, J. (eds.) ICSOC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2910, pp. 75–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paolucci, M., Kawamura, T., Payne, T.R., Sycara, K.P.: Semantic matching of web services capabilities. In: Proc. of ISWC 2002, pp. 333–347. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pistore, M., Spalazzi, L., Traverso, P.: A minimalist approach to semantic annotations for web processes compositions. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 620–634. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schifanella, C.: Reasoning on Web Services with Choreographies and Capabilities. PhD thesis, Dip. Informatica, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Steffen, B., Margaria, T., Braun, V.: The electronic tool integration platform: Concepts and design. STTT 1(1-2), 9–30 (1997)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Moormann Zaremski, A., Wing, J.M.: Specification matching of software components. ACM Transactions on SEM 6(4), 333–369 (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matteo Baldoni
    • 1
  • Cristina Baroglio
    • 1
  • Alberto Martelli
    • 1
  • Viviana Patti
    • 1
  • Claudio Schifanella
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità degli Studi di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations