Hybrid cognitive model for semantic discovery and selection of services

Lack of (semi)automatic mechanisms for service classification in the Universal Description Discovery and Integration repositories and non utilization of explicit or implicit semantic information of a service during its publishing are the two major challenges in the area of web service discovery and selection. We propose a semantic model of human-machine collaboration for the classification, discovery and selection of web services that integrates the semantic as well as syntactic data of the web services to achieve the hybrid cognition. This proposed cognitive approach uses the principals from the machine learning, measures of semantic relatedness and information retrieval where the cognitive information from the WordNet based Omiotis measure of semantic relatedness is merged with the syntactic service profiles and further these semantically enriched service vectors are passed to the supervised learning algorithms to achieve the decision support for the discovery and selection of relevant services. Empirical evaluation of the proposed approach implemented on OWL-X data set has been presented and a comparison of two different supervised classifiers has been made.

[1]  Vadlamani Ravi,et al.  Classification of Web Services Using Bayesian Network , 2012 .

[2]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  Meteor-s web service annotation framework , 2004, WWW '04.

[3]  Iraklis Varlamis,et al.  A Knowledge-Based Semantic Kernel for Text Classification , 2011, SPIRE.

[4]  Seema Bawa,et al.  Semantic discovery of web services using principal component analysis , 2011 .

[5]  Pablo Castells,et al.  Semi-automatic Semantic-Based Web Service Classification , 2006, Business Process Management Workshops.

[6]  Marcelo R. Campo,et al.  AWSC: An approach to Web service classification based on machine learning techniques , 2008, Inteligencia Artif..

[7]  Jos de Bruijn,et al.  Enabling Semantic Web Services , 2007 .

[8]  Iraklis Varlamis,et al.  Text Relatedness Based on a Word Thesaurus , 2010, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[9]  Abraham Bernstein,et al.  The Creation and Evaluation of iSPARQL Strategies for Matchmaking , 2008, ESWC.

[10]  Paul M. B. Vitányi,et al.  The Google Similarity Distance , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[11]  Zhang Duo,et al.  Web service annotation using ontology mapping , 2005, IEEE International Workshop on Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE'05).

[12]  Georgios Meditskos,et al.  On the Combination of Textual and Semantic Descriptions for Automated Semantic Web Service Classification , 2009, AIAI.

[13]  Nicholas Kushmerick,et al.  Learning to Attach Semantic Metadata to Web Services , 2003, International Semantic Web Conference.

[14]  Philip Resnik,et al.  Using Information Content to Evaluate Semantic Similarity in a Taxonomy , 1995, IJCAI.

[15]  Matthias Klusch,et al.  OWLS-MX: A hybrid Semantic Web service matchmaker for OWL-S services , 2009, J. Web Semant..

[16]  Ting Wang,et al.  SAWSDL-iMatcher: A customizable and effective Semantic Web Service matchmaker , 2011, J. Web Semant..

[17]  Dekang Lin,et al.  An Information-Theoretic Definition of Similarity , 1998, ICML.

[18]  David W. Conrath,et al.  Semantic Similarity Based on Corpus Statistics and Lexical Taxonomy , 1997, ROCLING/IJCLCLP.

[19]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  METEOR-S Web Service Annotation Framework with Machine Learning Classification , 2004, SWSWPC.

[20]  Matthias Klusch,et al.  WSMO-MX: A hybrid Semantic Web service matchmaker , 2009, Web Intell. Agent Syst..

[21]  Evgeniy Gabrilovich,et al.  Computing Semantic Relatedness Using Wikipedia-based Explicit Semantic Analysis , 2007, IJCAI.