Semantic Service Composition Framework for Multidomain Ubiquitous Computing Applications

  • Mohamed Hilila
  • Abdelghani Chibani
  • Karim Djouani
  • Yacine Amirat
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7636)


In this paper we propose a semantic framework based on constructive description logic. The main innovative aspect of our work consists in the formalization of a composition in the form of e-contract semantic statements where the semantic and logic correctness/soundness are formally checked. The e-contract model is based on cooperation ontology and includes control rules. This model improves on the one hand the common understanding between heterogeneous domains, and on the other hand, it ensures an efficient control of each service from remote requester and preserves the confidentiality of the know-how and the privacy of the local domains. In the conclusion of this paper we present a health care scenario that demonstrates the feasibility of our framework and the demonstration statements of the e-contract in \(\mathcal{BCDL}_0\).


Collaborative Provisioning Process Service Composition Constructive Description Logics Theorem Proving 


  1. 1.
    Ayed, S., Boulahia, N.C., Cuppens, F.: Deploying access control in distributed workflow. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Conference on Information Security, AISC 2008, vol. 81, pp. 9–17 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baader, F.: The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bozzato, L.: Kripke Semantics and Tableau Procedures for Constructive Description Logics. PhD thesis, Università Degli Studi Dell’inubria (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bozzato, L., Ferrari, M.: A note on semantic web services specification and composition in constructive description logics. Journal of Syntax and Semantics (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferrari, M., Fiorentini, C., Fiorino, G.: BCDL: Basic constructive description logic. Journal of Automated Reasoning 44(4), 371–399 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hafner, M., Breur, M., Breu, R., Nowak, A.: Modelling inter-organizational workflow security in a peer-to-peer environment. In: IEEE International Conference on Web Services, pp. 533–540 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hilia, M.: Methodology steps (2012), (accessed July 30, 2012)
  8. 8.
    Hilia, M., Chibani, A., Amirat, Y., Djouani, K.: Cross-organizational cooperation framework for security management in ubiquitous computing environment. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 464–471 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lin, D., Ishida, T.: Interorganizational workflow collaboration based on local process views. In: Asia-Pacific Services Computing Conference, pp. 789–794. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Martin, D., Burstein, M., Mcdermott, D., Mcilraith, S., Paolucci, M., Sycara, K., Mcguinness, D., Sirin, E., Srinivasan, N.: Bringing semantics to web services with owl-s. Journal of World Wide Web Internet and Web Information Systems 10(3), 243–277 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Papapanagiotou, P., Fleuriot, J.: A theorem proving framework for the formal verification of web services composition. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Automated Specification and Verification of Web Systems, pp. 1–16 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rao, J., Küngas, P.: Logic-based web services composition: From service description to process model. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), pp. 446–453 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reul, Q., Zhao, G., Meersman, R.: Ontology-based access control policy interoperability. In: Proc. 1st Conference on Mobility, Individualisation, Socialisation and Connectivity, MISC (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roman, D., Toma, I.: A CTR-based approach to service composition patterns. In: Third International Conference on Next Generation Web Services Practices, NWeSP, pp. 13–18 (October 2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Russell, N., Ter Hofstede, A., Mulyar, N.: Workflow controlflow patterns: A revised view (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sheng, Q., Benatallah, B., Maamar, Z., Ngu, A.: Configurable composition and adaptive provisioning of web services. Journal of IEEE Transactions on Services Computing 2, 34–49 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stavropoulos, T., Vrakas, D., Vlahavas, I.: A survey of service composition in ambient intelligence environments. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Review, 1–24 (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Troelstra, A.: Aspects of constructive mathematics. Journal of Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics 90, 973–1052 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Urbieta, A., Barrutieta, G., Parra, J., Uribarren, A.: A survey of dynamic service composition approaches for ambient systems. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ambient Media and Systems, pp. 1–8 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weigand, H., van den Heuvel, W.J.: Cross-organizational workflow integration using contracts. Decision Support Systems 33(3), 247–265 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhou, C., Tien Chia, L., Sung Lee, B.: DAML-QOS ontology for web services. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services, ICWS 2004, pp. 472–479 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohamed Hilila
    • 1
  • Abdelghani Chibani
    • 1
  • Karim Djouani
    • 1
  • Yacine Amirat
    • 1
  1. 1.Signals Images & Intelligent Systems LaboratoryParis-Est Créteil University (UPEC)France

Personalised recommendations