View
26
Download
0
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
A Logical Framework for Web Service Discovery. The Third International Semantic Web Conference Hiroshima, Japan, 08-11-2004 Michael Kifer 1 , Rubén Lara 2 , Axel Polleres 2 , Chang Zhao 1 , Uwe Keller 2 , Holger Lausen 2 , and Dieter Fensel 2 ruben.lara@deri.org - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
A Logical Framework for Web Service Discovery
The Third International Semantic Web Conference Hiroshima, Japan, 08-11-2004
Michael Kifer1, Rubén Lara2, Axel Polleres2, Chang Zhao1,
Uwe Keller2, Holger Lausen2, and Dieter Fensel2
ruben.lara@deri.org
1Department of Computer Science University at Stony Brook, New Department of Computer Science University at Stony Brook, New York, USAYork, USA
2Digital Enterprise Research Institute, Innsbruck, Austria, and Digital Enterprise Research Institute, Innsbruck, Austria, and Galway, IrelandGalway, Ireland
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
2
Overview
1. Introduction
2. Proof obligations and formalization
3. Realization
4. Semantics of rule reification
5. Conclusions & future work
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
3
Automatic discovery
• Current Web Services have to be selected and hard-wired at design time– No dynamic reconfiguration of services
• Semantics can enable the automatic location of Web Services providing particular functionality
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
4
WSMO & WSML
Objectives that a client may have when consulting a Web Service
Provide the formally specified terminology used by all other components
Semantic description of Web Services: - Capability - Interfaces
Connectors between components to bypass heterogeneity
F-Logic + Transaction Logic
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
5
The problem
• Matching capabilities of existing Web Services against the goal described by the requester
– Consideration of the functionality of the Web Service
– Distinction between discovery and contracting
– Example implementation using
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
6
Overview
1. Introduction
2. Proof obligations and formalization
3. Realization
4. Semantics of rule reification
5. Conclusions & future work
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
7
Goals, capabilities & mediators
• Goal describes (in terms of domain ontologies) the desired state of:– Information space– State of the world
• Web Service capabilities describe (in terms of domain ontologies):– What the service expects to provide its functionality– What is guaranteed to hold after execution
• wgMediators link Web Services and goals, resolving heterogeneity– Resolve possible terminology differences
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
8
Logics and scalability issues
• Logic can be used to formalize goals, capabilities and proof obligations– Scalable framework must rely on a relatively small
number of logicians
Customer:
- no training in KR
-pre-defined discovery queries
-goal ontology
Service Provider:
- modest requirements
-Capabilities written to relatively simple ontologies
-Relatively simple types of rules
Mediation Provider:
- Bulk of logical expertise
-Link ontologies, not customers and providers
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
9
Proof obligations (I)
• Set of imported ontologies O
• Goal G
• Service capability C (Ceff and Cpre)
• wgMediator wg– takes a goal G and constructs input Inwg(G) suitable for services
mediated– Converts the goal into a postcondition Postwg(G) expressed in terms of
the service ontology– Mediation can be complex:
• Goals can be expressed in a very high level syntax• Service capabilities can be rather simple
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
10
Proof obligations (II)
• Service discovery– Given a goal G, can the service execute in a way
such that G can be achieved?
• Service contracting– Given an actual input to a specific service, does this
input lead to the results expected by the requester?
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
11
Proof obligations (III)
• Proof obligations before– Deal with a particular service– Different services have different effects
• Use of transaction logic
• is the sequence operator• is the hypothetical operator
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
12
Overview
1. Introduction
2. Proof obligations and formalization
3. Realization
4. Semantics of rule reification
5. Conclusions & future work
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
13
Realization
• Use of :– Support for F-Logic, HiLog, Transaction Logic and
rule reification
• Geographic ontology
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
14
Realization (II)
• Goal ontology:
• Service1:Conditions over the input
Input is a search -> provide itinerary
wgMediator used
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
15
Realization (III)
• Service 3:
• Goals:
Uses goal ontologyRegion!
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
16
Realization (IV)
• Mediator: Takes the goal and constructs input to the service
Takes the result and checks it according to the format specified in the goal
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
17
Realization
• Discovery
Construct input
Generate effects
Assume effects
Check goal
Remove effects
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
18
Overview
1. Introduction
2. Proof obligations and formalization
3. Realization
4. Semantics of rule reification
5. Conclusions & future work
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
19
Semantics of rule reification
• Model theory for F-Logic extended with rule reification defined
• Reified F-Logic avoids paradoxes through two restrictions:– No negation is allowed in the rule head, and– Reification of negation of any fact or any rule is not
permitted
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
20
Overview
1. Introduction
2. Proof obligations and formalization
3. Realization
4. Semantics of rule reification
5. Conclusions & future work
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
21
Conclusions
• Logical framework and realization for: – dynamic discovery of Web Services– verification of contractual statements
• Scalable framework in terms of human resources by exploiting mediators
• The framework captures the relation between inputs and effects, thus providing more accurate descriptions and discovery
• Easily extendable to include invocation
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
22
Future work
• In progress– Alignment with WSML– Integration with other types of web service discovery– Further investigation on border between ggMediation
and wgMediation– Complete knowledge goals in the absence of sufficient
domain knowledge– Implementation of WSMO discovery engine
• Planned– Integration with composition
08-11-2004 Rubén Lararuben.lara@deri.org
23
Conclusions
</A Logical Framework for Web Service Discovery>
<Q&A>
Recommended