Semantic Structure Matching for Assessing Web-Service Similarity

The web-services stack of standards is designed to support the reuse and interoperation of software components on the web. A critical step in the process of developing applications based on web services is service discovery, i.e., the identification of existing web services that can potentially be used in the context of a new web application. UDDI, the standard API for publishing web-services specifications, provides a simple browsing-by-business-category mechanism for developers to review and select published services. To support programmatic service discovery, we have developed a suite of methods that utilizes both the semantics of the identifiers of WSDL descriptions and the structure of their operations, messages and data types to assess the similarity of two WSDL files. Given only a textual description of the desired service, a semantic information-retrieval method can be used to identify and order the most similar service-description files. This step assesses the similarity of the provided description of the desired service with the available services. If a (potentially partial) specification of the desired service behavior is also available, this set of likely candidates can be further refined by a semantic structure-matching step assessing the structural similarity of the desired vs. the retrieved services and the semantic similarity of their identifier. In this paper, we describe and experimentally evaluate our suite of service-similarity assessment methods.

[1]  Christiane Fellbaum,et al.  Using Wordnet for Text Retrieval , 1998 .

[2]  Eleni Stroulia,et al.  Flexible interface matching for Web-service discovery , 2003, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering, 2003. WISE 2003..

[3]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  A survey of information retrieval and filtering methods , 1995 .

[4]  Jeannette M. Wing,et al.  Signature matching: a tool for using software libraries , 1995, TSEM.

[5]  James M. Purtilo,et al.  Module reuse by interface adaptation , 1991, Softw. Pract. Exp..

[6]  Tim Berners-Lee,et al.  Agent Technology on the Internet. 3. Integrating Applications on the Semantic Web. , 2002 .

[7]  Shinji Kusumoto,et al.  Java program analysis projects in osaka university: aspect-based slicing system ADAS and ranked-component search system SPARS-J , 2003, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings..

[8]  Steffen Staab,et al.  Semantic Web Service Architecture -- Evolving Web Service Standards toward the Semantic Web , 2002, FLAIRS Conference.

[9]  Taher H. Haveliwala.  Efficient Computation of PageRank , 1999 .

[10]  Shinji Kusumoto,et al.  Component rank: relative significance rank for software component search , 2003, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings..

[11]  Jeannette M. Wing,et al.  Specification matching of software components , 1997 .

[12]  Matthias Klusch,et al.  Larks: Dynamic Matchmaking Among Heterogeneous Software Agents in Cyberspace , 2002, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[13]  George A. Miller,et al.  Nouns in WordNet: A Lexical Inheritance System , 1990 .

[14]  George A. Miller,et al.  Introduction to WordNet: An On-line Lexical Database , 1990 .

[15]  S. B. Palmer.  The Semantic Web: the introduction , 2001 .

[16]  Jerry R. Hobbs,et al.  DAML-S: Web Service Description for the Semantic Web , 2002, SEMWEB.

[17]  John D. McGregor,et al.  A protocol based approach to specifying interoperability between objects , 1998, Proceedings. Technology of Object-Oriented Languages. TOOLS 26 (Cat. No.98EX176).

[18]  Takenobu Tokunaga,et al.  The Use of WordNet in Information Retrieval , 1998, WordNet@ACL/COLING.

[19]  Alan F. Smeaton,et al.  Using WordNet in a Knowledge-Based Approach to Information Retrieval , 1995 .

[20]  Jerry R. Hobbs,et al.  DAML-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services , 2001, SWWS.

[21]  D. Box,et al.  Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) 1.1, W3C Note , 2000 .