<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Acquisition and Management of Semantic Web Service Descriptions</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Institute of Applied Informatics and Formal Description Methods (AIFB), University of Karlsruhe (TH)</institution>
          ,
          <country country="DE">Germany</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>The increasing importance and use of Web services have resulted in a number of e orts targeted at automating Web service discovery and composition based on semantic descriptions of their properties. However, the progress in the automation of Web service discovery is still held back by the fact that the description of Web services in terms of semantic metadata is still mainly manually. This Ph.D. thesis addresses this problem by developing an approach for the acquisition and management of semantic Web service descriptions in order to facilitate e cient service discovery and composition. Speci cally, this involves the collection of information about a Web service, the acquisition of semantic descriptions based on the collected information, and the structured storage of the generated semantic descriptions.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>A clearly developing trend in the recent years is towards exposing the
functionalities provided by existing software components in the form of services and
facilitating in this way software reuse and added value through service composition.
This development is strongly supported by the Web, which enables ubiquitous
access via a set of Web standards and protocols to software components
residing on di erent platforms. As a result, Web services are seen increasingly as
the basic construct for the development of rapid, low-cost and easy-to-compose
distributed applications in heterogeneous environments.</p>
      <p>When it comes to nding appropriate services and composing distributed
applications, current technologies still require a large amount of human
interaction. This results in the restricted number of use cases for service integration and
the limited scalability of solutions involving manual activities in the process of
service discovery and compositions. In order to address these problems, the idea
of supplementing Web services with a semantic description of their functionality,
that could facilitate their discovery and integration, has been developed.
However, the information, on which these semantic descriptions are based, is rarely
discussed. In addition, there is still no established method for acquiring semantic
Web service descriptions, which not only describe the functionality but also
specify functional and non-functional properties in a way that supports automatic
matchmaking processes. Therefore, there is the strong need of developing an
automatic approach, which enables the acquisition and management of semantic
Web Service descriptions with the goal of supporting e cient service discovery
and composition.</p>
      <p>1</p>
      <p>Technical Service</p>
      <p>Descriptions
Natural Language</p>
      <p>Descriptions
User-provided Tags,
Ratings, Comments
2</p>
      <p>Extraction of Functional and
Non-Functional Properties
3
Semantic Web
Service
Descriptions
This Ph.D. thesis targets to explore the problem of semi-automatically
acquiring and publishing semantic descriptions for Web services and aims to use
Semantic Web techniques to develop a methodology to enhance the situation.
Figure 1 shows the three main challenges connected with the acquisition and
management of semantic Web Service descriptions.
1. How can information about Web services be collected? To answer
this question, the relevant sources of information have to be identi ed,
including not only technical and text descriptions, but also information
inspired by Web 2.0 such as user tags, ratings and comments. After this,
automatic mechanisms for data collection from the Web have to be developed.
2. How can semantic Web service descriptions be automatically
acquired? This question is in the focus of the Ph.D. thesis and is addressed
by exploring existing methods for metadata acquisition and identifying their
advantages and disadvantages. The main goal is to develop a method, which
semi-automatically acquires metadata by extracting functional and
nonfunctional service properties in order to facilitate discovery and composition.
3. How can semantic Web service descriptions be stored? The acquired
semantic descriptions have to be stored in a way that facilitates the manual
as well as the automatic matchmaking processes. It is important to employ
the metadata's syntactical or semantical interconnections in order to enable
indexing and e cient service search.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Related Work</title>
      <p>
        There is already some work done related to the automatic creation of semantic
Web service descriptions. In particular, there are two main areas of research: the
acquisition of a suitable Web service domain ontology and the actual process of
annotating Web services. Sabou et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] present two ontology building process
in the context of two concrete research projects, revealing some of the major
aspects that make Web service ontology building di cult.
      </p>
      <p>
        Focusing on the Web service annotation task, Patil et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ] apply graph
similarity techniques to select a relevant domain ontology for a given WSDL le
from a collection of ontologies. Hess and Kushmerick [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ] employ Naive Bayes and
SVM machine learning methods to classify WSDL les in manually de ned task
hierarchies. However, none of the developed approaches focuses on facilitating
Web service discovery by specifying functional and non-functionally properties
and in the same time taking into consideration temporal conditions on e ects,
trust and access control policies.
      </p>
      <p>
        There are a number of state of the art Web service repositories including
UDDI, Bindingpoint, .NET XML Web Services Repertory, WebserviceX.NET,
Web Service List, Xmethods and SalCental. An overview of these repositories
presented in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ] shows that in contrast to traditional software libraries, Web
service repositories rely on little metadata to support service discovery, mainly
because of the di culty of automatically deriving metadata describing Web
service collections. In order to overcome the lack of metadata, there are a number of
approaches which aim to enhance existing Web service repositories, in particular
UDDI, with complex semantic markup [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ]. Still, the existing repositories do not
target the structured storage of semantic Web service descriptions in order to
facilitate the e ective service discovery but rather use semantic information as
an extension to stored descriptions.
3
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Contributions</title>
      <p>A number of Web service tasks can be automated by using semantic
descriptions. In particular, service o ers and requests can be matched automatically.
However, semantic descriptions still have to be manually generated. The
major goal of this Ph.D. thesis is to develop an semi-automatic method for the
acquisition of semantic descriptions of Web services, based on metadata and
tags extracted from the Web. The resulting semantic descriptions will be stored
in an online semantic Web service descriptions repository, which can be used
for both manual and automatic service discovery. The acquisition of semantic
descriptions facilitates matchmaking approaches and can reduce the required
human interaction to a minimum. Especially in use cases, where Web services
are used as building blocks in distributed applications or where Web services
provide functionality integrated in business processes, the automated deriving
of semantic description plays a key role.</p>
      <p>There are three main contributions, which are to be archived. First, the
automatic collection of information describing a Web service is facilitated. Second,
semantic descriptions of Web services are semi-automatically acquired from the
collected information, in the form of semantic annotations. Finally, Web service
semantic annotations are stored in an online repository, which provides semantic
indexing to allow for e cient queries and support matchmaking processes. Each
of these contributions is described in detail in the following sections.</p>
      <p>Web Service Crawlers are developed to support the automatic
collection of information about Web services. Web service descriptions are usually
given in a standardized form such as WSDL. Unfortunately, WSDL provides
mainly technical description of services and this information is insu cient for
automatic service discovery because it presumes increased human interaction.
Therefore, it is necessary to automatically collect additional information. A Web
service crawler can e ectively be used to perform this task. In particular, this
involves the identi cation of relevant sources and types of Web service information.
Sources include natural language text descriptions, for example, documentation
on provider Web-sites, and technical Web service descriptions such as WSDL, or
WSMO variants. In addition, sources of information inspired by Web 2.0 such
as user tags, ratings, and community inputs are also considered. The de nition
of the Web service crawlers is based on semantic attributes for service
description, based on information needed for service discovery and composition. This
involves mainly the speci cation of functional and non-functional Web service
properties.</p>
      <p>
        Web Service Semantic Annotations comprise the acquired semantic Web
services descriptions, which are based on the data collected by the Web service
crawlers. The main focus of this Ph.D. thesis is on developing a mechanism
for the acquisition of semantic descriptions from the collected data, based on a
determined formalism for the speci cation of semantic information. This
mechanism is developed by using existing techniques for data mining and ontology
learning and thereby, automatically constructing service annotations. In
addition, the formalism, chosen as the basis for the semantic annotation, annotates
functional and non-functional properties of Web services in a unifying way. The
approach described in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ] will be used as a basis where semantic, temporal and
security constraints are described by using a combination of the -calculus and
description logics and will be adjusted based on requirements resulting from the
speci cation of the developed mechanism for acquisition of semantic descriptions.
      </p>
      <p>Semantic Indexing is necessary in order to facilitate e cient queries on
top of the semantic annotations. The structured storage of the acquired
semantic annotations is targeted to improve performance of automatic matchmaking
processes and speed up manual search. During semantic indexing, the collection
of Web service semantic annotations will be analyzed and organized in a way
that allows the e cient answering of expressive queries.
4</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Evaluation</title>
      <p>The planned evaluation consists of three main steps. First, the developed
mechanism for data collection is evaluated by determining a xed domain of source
data and assessing how much data was correctly retrieved. This evaluation can
easily be performed by using the well-established recall/precision metrics.
Second, semantic annotations evaluation assesses the performance of extracting Web
service properties relevant for matchmaking from the corpus of collected data.
Naturally, the quality of semantic annotation extraction has a direct in uence
on the quality of the service discovery and composition, which are based on
these semantic annotations. This evaluation can be done by comparing the Web
service functional and non-functional properties present in the collected data
to the ones present in the acquired semantic descriptions. Third, the chosen
structure for storage of Web service semantic annotations is evaluated by
comparing the performance of matchmaking algorithms ran on the repository to the
performance of these matchmaking algorithms ran on the same semantic
annotations but in unstructured list collection. This evaluation will point out what
improvements the developed repository structure brings in means of search
performance. Finally, the best evaluation for the developed approach would be the
making public of the semantic annotations repository so that other researchers
can use it to test their discovery and composition algorithms.
5</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Work Plan</title>
      <p>The work plan is divided into three stages, each stage marking one year of the
Ph.D. studies. Initialization State of the art report on formalisms for Web
service semantic descriptions, in the context of service discovery (M6). State of the
art report on data-mining techniques and ontology learning (M6). State of the
art report on possible structures for semantic annotations storage (M6).
Identied sources of Web service information (M12). Identi ed formalism for semantic
annotations (M12). Development De nition of semantic attributes for the Web
service crawlers. First Web service crawlers prototype (M18). Identi ed
structure for annotations storage (M18). Identi ed data-mining and ontology learning
approach (M24). First prototype implementation of acquisition of semantic
annotations (M24). Evaluation of the rst prototypes (M24). Re nement First
prototype of semantic annotations repository (M30). Re ned methodology based
on the rst prototypes (M30). Re ned implementation (M36). Evaluation (M36).</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sabou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wroe</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Goble</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stuckenschmidt</surname>
          </string-name>
          , H.:
          <article-title>Learning Domain Ontologies for Semantic Web Service Descriptions</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Web Semantics</source>
          <volume>3</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ) (
          <year>2005</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Patil</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Oundhakar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sheth</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Verma</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>METEOR-S Web service Annotation Framework</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 13th World Wide Web Conference</source>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hess</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            <surname>Kushmerick</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>N.</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>: Machine Learning for Annotating Semantic Web Services</article-title>
          .
          <source>In AAAI Spring Symposium on Semantic Web Services (March</source>
          <year>2004</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sabou</surname>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pan</surname>
          </string-name>
          , J.:
          <article-title>Toward Improving Web Service Repositories through Semantic Web Techniques</article-title>
          . Workshop on Semantic Web Enabled Software
          <string-name>
            <surname>Engineering (SWESE) at</surname>
            <given-names>ISWC</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (November
          <year>2005</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Akkiraju</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Goodwin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Doshi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Roeder</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A Method for Semantically Enhancing the Service Discovery Capabilities of UDDI</article-title>
          .
          <source>IIWeb 87-92</source>
          (
          <year>2003</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Agarwal</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Studer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <source>Automatic Matchmaking of Web Services. International Conference on Web Services (ICWS'06)</source>
          . IEEE Computer Society (
          <year>September 2006</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>