<!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>Semantic Annotation of Web Services</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Djelloul Bouchiha</string-name>
          <email>bouchiha.dj@gmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Mimoun Malki</string-name>
          <email>malki@univ-sba.dz</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>EEDIS Laboratory, Djillali Liabes University of Sidi Bel Abbes</institution>
          ,
          <country country="DZ">Algeria</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2012</year>
      </pub-date>
      <fpage>60</fpage>
      <lpage>69</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Web services are the latest attempt to revolutionize large scale distributed computing. They are based on standards which operate at the syntactic level and lack semantic representation capabilities. Semantics provide better qualitative and scalable solutions to the areas of service interoperation, service discovery, service composition, and process orchestration. SAWSDL defines a mechanism to associate semantic annotations with Web services that are described using Web Service Description Language (WSDL). In this paper we propose an approach for semi-automatically annotating WSDL Web services descriptions. This allows SAWSDL Semantic Web Service Engineering. The annotation approach consists of two main processes: Categorization and Matching. Categorization process consists in classifying WSDL service description to its corresponding domain. Matching process consists in mapping WSDL entities to pre-existing domain ontology. Both categorization and matching rely on ontology matching techniques. A tool has been developed and some experiments have been carried out to evaluate the proposed approach.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd />
        <kwd>Annotation</kwd>
        <kwd>Engineering</kwd>
        <kwd>Web Service</kwd>
        <kwd>Semantic Web Services</kwd>
        <kwd>Ontology</kwd>
        <kwd>SAWSDL</kwd>
        <kwd>Ontology Matching Techniques</kwd>
        <kwd>Similarity Measures</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1 Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Web services are the latest attempt to revolutionize large scale distributed computing.
They provide the means to modularize software in a way that functionality can be
described, discovered and deployed in a platform independent manner over a network
(e.g., intranets, extranets and the Internet). The representation of Web services by
current industrial practice is predominantly syntactic in nature lacking the
fundamental semantic underpinnings required to fulfil the goals of the emerging
Semantic Web Services. SAWSDL defines a mechanism to associate semantic
annotations with Web services that are described using Web Service Description
Language (WSDL) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
        ]. The annotation process consists in relating and tagging the
WSDL descriptions with the concepts of ontologies.
      </p>
      <p>In this paper we propose an approach for semi-automatically engineering
SAWSDL Semantic Web service from an existing Web Service and domain ontology.
The proposed approach relies on an annotation process which consists in two phases:
(1) Categorization phase, which allows classifying WSDL documents into their
corresponding domain (2) Matching phase, which allows associating each entity from
WSDL documents with their corresponding entity in the domain ontology. The
annotation process relies on ontology matching techniques which in turn use some
similarity measures. An empirical study of our approach is presented to help evaluate
its performance.</p>
      <p>The remainder of paper is organized as follow: In section 2, we discuss some other
efforts that describe adding semantics to Web services. In section 3, we present the
proposed approach and its underlying concepts and techniques. An empirical study of
our approach is presented in section 4 to help evaluate its performance. Finally,
section 5 draws some conclusions.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2 Related Works</title>
      <p>
        Several proposals have already been suggested for adding semantics to Web services,
such as [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ], [5], [6] and [4]. Other approaches concentrate on the Web service
annotation: In a preliminary work Bouchiha and al., propose to annotate Web service
with ontology using ontology matching techniques [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>
        ]. However, they focus on
WSDL-S [1] instead of SAWSDL [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
        ].
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3 Annotation approach</title>
      <p>As shown in Fig 1, the annotation approach consists of two main processes:
Categorization and Matching. Both categorization and matching rely on ontology
matching techniques. The goal of ontology matching is to find the relations between
entities expressed in different ontologies. Very often, these relations are equivalence
relations that are discovered through the measure of the similarity between the entities
of ontologies.</p>
      <p>To be accomplished, the ontology matching process uses similarity measures
between entities. A similarity measure aims to quantify how much two entities are
alike. Formally, it is defined as follow:
Definition 1 (Similarity): Given a set O of entities, a similarity σ : O × O → R is a
function from a pair of entities to a real number expressing the similarity between two
objects such that:</p>
      <p>∀x, y ∈ O,σ (x, y) ≥ 0 (positiveness)
∀x ∈ O, ∀y, z ∈ O,σ (x, x) ≥ σ (y, z) (maximality)</p>
      <p>∀x, y ∈ O,σ (x, y) = σ (y, x) (symmetry)</p>
      <p>
        In our approach, we use WordNet based similarity measures [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. WordNet is an
online lexical database designed for use under program control [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ]. So, these
measures are computed, and then normalized. Normalisation consists generally in
inversing the measure value to obtain a new value between 0 and 1. The value 1
indicates that there is a full semantic equivalence between the two entities.
      </p>
      <p>
        Similarity measures relying on WordNet can be classified into three categories: (1)
Similarity measures based on path lengths between concepts: lch [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ], wup [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
        ], and
path; (2) Similarity measures based on information content: res [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ], lin [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ], and jcn
[7]; and (3) Relatedness measures based on relations type between concepts: hso [9],
lesk [3], and vector [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>When a set of ontologies are available, similarities between two sets have to be
computed by comparing the set of entities of the WSDL file and the set of entities of
each ontology. On the basis of such measures, systems will decide between which
ontologies to run a matching algorithm. The chosen domain ontology determines the
WSDL file category. This process is called the categorization process.</p>
      <p>Our approach considers an ontology as a set of entities (concepts), and a WSDL
file also as a set of entities (XSD data types, interface, operations, messages). Several
strategies can be adopted for computing similarities between two sets. Next we define
Single linkage, Full linkage and Average linkage strategies:
Definition 2 (Single linkage): Given a similarity function σ : O × O → R, the single
linkage measure between two sets is a similarity function Δ : 2O ×2O → R such that:
∀x, y ⊆ O, Δ( x, y) = max (e1,e2)∈x*y σ (e1, e2)
Definition 3 (Full linkage): Given a similarity function σ : O × O → R, the complete
linkage measure between two sets is a similarity function Δ : 2O ×2O → R such that:
∀x, y ⊆ O, Δ( x, y) = min (e1,e2)∈x*y σ (e1, e2)
Definition 4 (Average linkage): Given a similarity function σ : O × O → R, the
average linkage measure between two sets is a similarity function Δ : 2O ×2O → R
such that:
∀x, y ⊆ O , Δ ( x, y ) =
∑ (e1,e 2)∈x* y σ (e1, e2)
| x | * | y |</p>
      <p>Next we detail the two processes involved in our approach.</p>
      <p>Categorization process. The categorization process aims to classify WSDL service
description to its corresponding domain. For this end, the service description is
broken down into its fundamental WSDL elements (XSD data types, interface,
operations and messages). A list of concepts is also extracted from each ontology.
Similarities between two sets based on similarity measure between two entities will
be computed to identify which ontology concepts will be kept for the next process.
The selected ontology indicates the WSDL domain or category.</p>
      <p>We have developed an algorithm (see Listing 1) that implements the categorization
process. The algorithm computes the similarity between a WSDL document and a set
of domain ontologies. A WSDL document belongs to the category of the domain
ontology for which it gives the best similarity (the nearest ontology).</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Listing 1. The Categorization algorithm.</title>
        <p>Algorithm Categorization
Input
WSDL document
A set of domain ontologies
A similarity measure SM between two entities
A Similarity SD between two sets
Threshold
Output
An assigned WSDL document to a particular category
Begin_algo
Filling a vector VE with the WSDL document elements
For each domain ontology Do
Filling a vector VC with the domain ontology concepts
For each element E of the vector VE Do
For each element C of the vector VC Do
// Next, Vector_Sim is used to store the
//Similarity between the two vectors VE and VC
Switch SD of</p>
        <p>Single linkage : If (SM(E,C) &gt; Vector_Sim)</p>
        <p>then Vector_Sim • SM(E,C) End_if
Full linkage : If (SM(E,C) &lt; Vector_Sim) then</p>
        <p>Vector_Sim SM(E,C)</p>
        <p>End_if</p>
        <p>Average linkage : Vector_Sim Vector_Sim + SM(E,C)
End_switch
End_for
End_for
If SD is Average linkage</p>
        <p>then Vector_Sim Vector_Sim / (|VC| * |VE|)
End_if
// Next, Final_Sim is used to store Similarity
//between VE and the nearest ontology
If (Final_Sim &lt; Vector_Sim )</p>
        <p>then Final_Sim Vector_Sim
End_if
End_For
If (Final_Sim &gt; Threshold )
then the WSDL document is assigned to the corresponding
ontology to the Final_Sim</p>
        <p>End_if</p>
        <p>End_Algo
Matching process. The matching process aims to map WSDL elements to ontology
concepts. Similarities between a WSDL element and the concepts of the selected
ontology will be computed to identify which concept will be attached to the initial
WSDL element. This operation is repeated for all WSDL elements.</p>
        <p>We have developed an algorithm (see Listing 2) that implements the matching
process. The algorithm computes the semantic similarities between WSDL document
elements and domain ontology concepts. Each WSDL document element will be
annotated by the nearest domain ontology concept.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Listing 2. The Matching algorithm.</title>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4 Results and empirical testing</title>
      <p>
        The algorithms presented above are generic and can be adapted to most domain model
languages. The domain model language we have used is the OWL, but we believe that
our results could be applied to any similar language. To evaluate and validate our
approach a tool, called SAWSDL generator1, has been developed. SAWSDL
generator can be used to do semi-automatic annotations. It takes in a WSDL
document which has to be annotated with a set of ontologies. It selects the best
ontology for annotating the WSDL document and suggests most appropriate
mappings for the XSD data types, interface, operations and messages in the WSDL
file. The classification and matching are performed using ontology matching
techniques. The tool produces annotated WSDL 2.0 file using extensibility elements
and according to the SAWSDL recommendation [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>To test our categorization algorithm we first obtained a corpus2 of 424 Web
services [8]. Although our initial intention was to test our algorithm on the whole
corpus, we have limited our testing to one domain, due to lack of relevant domain
specific ontologies. We are in the process of creating new domain ontologies and plan
to extend our testing for remaining Web services in the future.</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>1 http://www-inf.univ-sba.dz/wsdls/ 2 http://www.andreas-hess.info/projects/annotator/ws2003.html</title>
        <p>The domain we have selected for testing is Business domain3. Although the
ontology used is not comprehensive enough to cover all the concepts in this domain,
they are sufficient enough to serve the purpose of categorization. We have taken a set
of 31 services out of which 13 are from business domain, 13 from weather domain
and 5 from the games domain.</p>
        <p>As similarity measure, the path method has been used. It is defined as follow: For
two entities e1 and e2, the similarity measure SIM can be given using the WordNet
synsets (i.e. term for a sense or a meaning by a group of synonyms) based on the
formula: SIM(e1, e2)=1/length(e1, e2), where length is the length of the shortest path
between two entities e1 and e2 using node counting.</p>
        <p>As in information retrieval [2], we use two metrics, Precision and Recall4, to evaluate
the results of our algorithm of categorization.
 Recall (R): proportion of the correctly assigned WSDL documents of all the</p>
        <p>WSDL documents that should be assigned.
 Precision (P): proportion of the correctly assigned WSDL documents of all the</p>
        <p>WSDL documents that have been assigned.</p>
        <p>
          Usually, Precision and Recall scores are not discussed in isolation. Instead, they
are combined into a single measure, such as the F-measure [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
          ], which is defined as
follow: F_measure = (2 * recall * precision)/(recall + precision).
        </p>
        <p>The services are categorized based on the categorization threshold, which decides
if the service belongs to a domain. If the best average service match calculated for a
particular Web service is above the threshold then the service belongs to the
corresponding domain.</p>
        <p>Graph 1 depicts the corresponding curves to the precision, recall and f-measure
statistics obtained by applying our categorization algorithm on this set of 31 Web
services for different threshold values according to the average linkage strategy.
1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0,00
0,01
0,02 0,03</p>
        <p>Threshold
0,04</p>
        <p>0,05
Recall</p>
        <p>Precision</p>
        <p>F_measure
Graph 1. Precision, recall and f-measure curves for the categorization algorithm.</p>
        <p>It is very important to choose the threshold value correctly. We can see from Graph
1 that for threshold = 0.02, which corresponds to the topmost value of the f-measure</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>3 http://www.getopt.org/ecimf/contrib/onto/REA/index.html 4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall</title>
        <p>curve, gives the best categorization. However, even with the best threshold, some
problems can appear. For example, The Web service "BasicOptionPricing" has not
been rightly classified into the business domain, because it includes operations which
have not meaningful names. Also, the two Web services "Weather Forecast By Zip
Code" and "World Weather Forecast by ICAO" have been wrongly classified into
business domain, although they belong to the weather domain. The reason behind this
is that the two services include "Forecast" operations which can be shared between
both business and weather domain.</p>
        <p>To verify the fitness of the obtained result, a reference annotated WSDL document
is considered as a valid. The chosen WSDL document was "TrackingAll". Now, to
evaluate the quality of the matching algorithm, we compare the match result returned
by our automatic matching process with manually determined match result in the
reference WSDL annotated document. We determine the true positives, i.e. correctly
identified matches.</p>
        <p>Graph 2 depicts the corresponding curves to the precision, recall and f-measure
statistics obtained by applying our matching algorithm on the chosen Web service for
different threshold values according to the path measure similarity.</p>
        <p>1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0,00
0,05
0,10</p>
        <p>0,15
Threshold
0,20</p>
        <p>0,25
Recall</p>
        <p>Precision</p>
        <p>F_measure
Graph 2. Precision, recall and f-measure curves for the matching algorithm.</p>
        <p>Graph 2 shows that best results of the matching algorithm are obtained with
threshold = 0,15. However, even with this threshold, a system user intervention is
suggested for withdrawing some matching, or validating the result as it is generated.
For example the WSDL elements "update_Company", "update_Customer",
"update_Status" and "update_Tracking" have been matched wrongly to the concept
"Agreement". The reason behind this is that the WSDL element names include the
term "update" which has been treated by the system as name and not as a verb. As a
name "update" means "news that updates your information". With a small threshold
(&lt;0,15), the user intervention is always necessary for keeping only right matching.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Conclusion</title>
      <p>In order to harvest all the benefits of Web services technology, an approach has been
proposed for annotating WSDL syntactic descriptions of Web services by ontological
models. The benefits of such approach are twofold: Firstly, the approach provides a
way to map WSDL descriptions to domain ontologies. Secondly, the approach
enables the migration of syntactically defined Web services toward Semantic Web
Services.</p>
      <p>The proposed annotation approach consists of two main processes: Categorization
and Matching. At the first process, WSDL service description is classified to its
corresponding domain. At the second process the WSDL entities are mapped to
preexisting domain ontology. Both categorization and matching use WordNet based
similarity measures.</p>
      <p>A tool has been developed to implement the proposed approach. Some validation
experiments have been carried out and they showed the usefulness of the proposed
approach and highlighted possible areas for improvement of its effectiveness.</p>
      <p>The developed approach provides very satisfactory and encouraging results and
supports the potential role that this approach can play in providing a suitable starting
point for SAWSDL semantic Web services development.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Akkiraju R.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Farrell</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Miller</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Nagarajan</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Schmidt M-T.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sheth</surname>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Verma</surname>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Web service semantics - WSDL-S"</article-title>
          .
          <source>Tech. rep., W3C</source>
          . http://www.w3.org/Submission/ WSDL-S/.
          <year>2005</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baeze-Yates</surname>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ribeiro-Neto</surname>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Modern information retrieval"</article-title>
          , Addison-Wesley, ACM Press, Reading, MA.
          <year>1999</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Banerjee S.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>Pedersen</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>T.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Extended gloss overlaps as a measure of semantic relatedness"</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence</source>
          . Pages:
          <fpage>805</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>810</lpage>
          .
          <year>2003</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Bell D.</given-names>
            , de Cesare S.,
            <surname>Iacovelli</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Lycett</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>and Merico A.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"A framework for deriving semantic web services"</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information Systems Frontiers</source>
          . Volume
          <volume>9</volume>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Number</surname>
            <given-names>1</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Pages:
          <fpage>69</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>84</lpage>
          .
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bouchiha D.</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Malki</surname>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Towards re-engineering Web Applications into semantic Web services"</article-title>
          .
          <source>The first International IEEE Conference on Machine and Web Intelligence</source>
          (ICMWI'
          <year>2010</year>
          ). Algeria, Algiers.
          <year>2010</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Buitelaar P.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>Gmbh</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>D.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Ontology learning for semantic Web services"</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of ONLINE2003</source>
          , Düsseldorf, Germany.
          <year>2003</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Jiang J.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>Conrath</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>D.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings on International Conference on Research in Computational Linguistics</source>
          , Pages:
          <fpage>19</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>33</lpage>
          .
          <year>1997</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Hess A.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Johnston</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>Kushmerick</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>N.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"ASSAM: A tool for semi-automatically annotating semantic Web services"</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Semantic Web Conference</source>
          . Hiroshima, Japan. Pages:
          <fpage>320</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>335</lpage>
          .
          <year>2004</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Hirst G.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>St-Onge</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>D.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Lexical chains as representations of context for the detection and correction of malapropisms"</article-title>
          . In Fellbaum, C., ed.,
          <article-title>WordNet: An electronic lexical database</article-title>
          . MIT Press. Pages:
          <fpage>305</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>332</lpage>
          .
          <year>1998</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Larsen</surname>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Aone</surname>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Fast and effective text mining using lineartime document clustering"</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Proceedings of the 5th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining</source>
          . Pages:
          <fpage>16</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>22</lpage>
          .
          <year>1999</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Leacock</surname>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chodorow</surname>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Combining local context and WordNet similarity for word sense identification"</article-title>
          . In Fellbaum, C., ed.,
          <article-title>WordNet: An electronic lexical database</article-title>
          . MIT Press. Pages:
          <fpage>265</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>283</lpage>
          .
          <year>1998</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lin</surname>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"An information-theoretic definition of similarity"</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning</source>
          .
          <year>1998</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Miller</surname>
            <given-names>G-A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"WordNet: An on-line lexical database"</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Lexicography</source>
          . Pages:
          <fpage>235</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>312</lpage>
          .
          <year>1990</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Patil</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Oundhakar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sheth</surname>
            , and
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kunal</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>"METEOR-S Web service annotation framework"</article-title>
          .
          <source>WWW</source>
          <year>2004</year>
          , ACM Press. Pages:
          <fpage>553</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>562</lpage>
          .
          <year>2004</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Patwardhan</surname>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Incorporating dictionary and corpus information into a context vector measure of semantic relatedness"</article-title>
          .
          <source>Master's thesis</source>
          , Univ. of Minnesota, Duluth.
          <year>2003</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pedersen</surname>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Patwardhan</surname>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Michelizzi</surname>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"WordNet::Similarity - measuring the relatedness of concepts"</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proceedings of the Nineteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-04)</source>
          . Pages:
          <fpage>1024</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1025</lpage>
          .
          <year>2004</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Resnik</surname>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Using information content to evaluate semantic similarity in a taxonomy"</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence</source>
          , Pages:
          <fpage>448</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>453</lpage>
          .
          <year>1995</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <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>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stuckenschmidt</surname>
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Learning domain ontologies for semantic Web service descriptions"</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Web Semantics. Volume 3, N 4</source>
          . Pages:
          <fpage>340</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>365</lpage>
          .
          <year>2005</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19. Wu
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
            , and
            <surname>Palmer</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Verb semantics and lexical selection"</article-title>
          .
          <source>In 32nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics</source>
          , Pages:
          <fpage>133</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>138</lpage>
          .
          <year>1994</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Farrell</surname>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lausen</surname>
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Semantic Annotations for WSDL and XML Schema"</article-title>
          .
          <source>W3C Recommendation</source>
          , 28
          <year>August 2007</year>
          . Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/sawsdl/.
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          21.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bouchiha</surname>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Malki</surname>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Alghamdi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Alnafjan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"An Empirical Approach for Annotating Web Services"</article-title>
          .
          <source>The 24th International Conference on Computer Applications in Industry and Engineering</source>
          . Hawaii, USA.
          <source>November 16-18</source>
          ,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          22.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Belhajjame</surname>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Embury</surname>
            <given-names>S-M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paton</surname>
            <given-names>N-W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stevens</surname>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Goble</surname>
            <given-names>C-A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Automatic annotation of web services based on workflow definitions"</article-title>
          .
          <source>ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB journal)</source>
          .
          <source>Number 2</source>
          , Volume
          <volume>2</volume>
          .
          <year>2008</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          23.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bowers</surname>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ludäscher</surname>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"A calculus for propagating semantic annotations through scientific workflow queries"</article-title>
          .
          <source>Query Languages and Query Processing workshop (QLQP2006) anised in conjunction with the 10th International Conference on Extending abase Technology</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>712</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>723</lpage>
          .
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          24.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Grcar</surname>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mladenic</surname>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Visual OntoBridge: Semi-automatic Semantic Annotation Software"</article-title>
          .
          <source>In ECML PKDD</source>
          <year>2009</year>
          , Bled, Slovenia, September 7-
          <issue>11</issue>
          ,
          <year>2009</year>
          , Proceedings,
          <source>Part II. LNAI 5782</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>726</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>729</lpage>
          , Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg.
          <year>2009</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          25.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lerman</surname>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Plangprasopchok</surname>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Knoblock</surname>
            <given-names>C-A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Automatically labeling the inputs and outputs of web services"</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2006)</source>
          . Boston, Massachusetts, USA. July
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          26.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Carman M-J.</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Knoblock</surname>
            <given-names>C-A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>"Learning Semantic Definitions of Online Information Sources"</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research</source>
          . Volume
          <volume>30</volume>
          , pages
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>50</lpage>
          .
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>