A Flexible and Dynamic CSP Solver for Web Service Composition in the Semantic Web Environment

As the Web service composition requests planning with scheduling with many parameters, the composition by the planner alone has the limitations that apply to a more general and intelligent Web service composition. The research [1] suggests a combined architecture of Hierarchical Task Network (HTN) planning and Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) to solve the above limitation. In this paper, we focus on the CSP system on the semantic Web for the combined service composer and its applied solver, which gives the final solution set satisfying the constraints. The CSP solver, which is a part of the combined architecture, is extended by applying the semantic Web concept so that it can automatically solve a given problem more flexibly. CSP ontology is designed and implemented to work on the extension and this integrates the CSP and semantic Web concepts in the conceptual layer. The extended framework has advantages, such as generality, extendibility, dynamic configurability and parallelism due to the application of the semantic Web concept and a distributed CSP.

[1]  Vipin Kumar,et al.  Algorithms for Constraint-Satisfaction Problems: A Survey , 1992, AI Mag..

[2]  Samson W. Tu,et al.  Writing Rules for the Semantic Web Using SWRL and Jess , 2005 .

[3]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  Algorithms for Distributed Constraint Satisfaction: A Review , 2000, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[4]  Matjaz B. Juric,et al.  Business process execution language for web services , 2004 .

[5]  James A. Hendler,et al.  HTN planning for Web Service composition using SHOP2 , 2004, J. Web Semant..

[6]  Roman Barták.  CONSTRAINT-BASED SCHEDULING: AN INTRODUCTION FOR NEWCOMERS , 2003 .

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

[8]  Tran Cao Son,et al.  Adapting Golog for Composition of Semantic Web Services , 2002, KR.

[9]  H. Lan,et al.  SWRL : A semantic Web rule language combining OWL and ruleML , 2004 .

[10]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  The Distributed Constraint Satisfaction Problem: Formalization and Algorithms , 1998, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[11]  Jerry R. Hobbs,et al.  An ontology of time for the semantic web , 2004, TALIP.

[12]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

[13]  J. Carroll,et al.  Jena: implementing the semantic web recommendations , 2004, WWW Alt. '04.

[14]  R. Dechter,et al.  Algorithms and heuristics for constraint satisfaction problems , 1997 .

[15]  Deborah L. McGuinness,et al.  OWL Web ontology language overview , 2004 .

[16]  Elena Paslaru Bontas,et al.  Reasoning paradigms for SWRL-enabled ontologies , 2005 .

[17]  Monique Calisti,et al.  Constraint Satisfaction Techniques and Software Agents , 2004 .

[18]  Elena Paslaru Bontas,et al.  Reasoning paradigms for OWL ontologies , 2004 .

[19]  Michael N. Huhns,et al.  A Framework for Intelligent Web Services: Combined HTN and CSP Approach , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS'06).

[20]  Amnon Meisels,et al.  Concurrent Backtrack Search on DisCSPs , 2004, FLAIRS Conference.

[21]  James A. Hendler,et al.  The Semantic Web" in Scientific American , 2001 .

[22]  Dan Brickley,et al.  Rdf vocabulary description language 1.0 : Rdf schema , 2004 .