ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
CTR-S: a logic for specifying contracts in semantic web services
Full text PdfPdf (189 KB)
Source International World Wide Web Conference archive
Proceedings of the 13th international World Wide Web conference on Alternate track papers & posters table of contents
New York, NY, USA
SESSION: Business processes and conversations table of contents
Pages: 144 - 153  
Year of Publication: 2004
ISBN:1-58113-912-8
Authors
Hasan Davulcu  Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ
Michael Kifer  Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY
I. V. Ramakrishnan  Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY
Sponsor
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 7,   Downloads (12 Months): 30,   Citation Count: 7
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1013367.1013391
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

A requirements analysis in the emerging field of Semantic Web Services (SWS) (see http://daml.org/services/swsl/requirements/) has identified four major areas of research: intelligent service discovery, automated contracting of services, process modeling, and service enactment. This paper deals with the intersection of two of these areas: process modeling as it pertains to automated contracting. Specifically, we propose a logic, called CTR-S,which captures the dynamic aspects of contracting for services.Since CTR-S is an extension of the classical first-order logic, it is well-suited to model the static aspects of contracting as well. A distinctive feature of contracting is that it involves two or more parties in a potentially adversarial situation. CTR-S is designed to model this adversarial situation through its novel model theory, which incorporates certain game-theoretic concepts. In addition to the model theory, we develop a proof theory for CTR-S and demonstrate the use of the logic formodeling and reasoning about Web service contracts.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
 
2
P. C. Attie, M. P. Singh, E. A. Emerson, A. P. Sheth, and M. Rusinkiewicz. Scheduling workflows by enforcing intertask dependencies. Distributed Systems Engineering Journal, 3(4):222--238, December 1996.
 
3
F. Bacchus and F. Kabanza. Planning for temporally extended goals. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI -96), pages 1215--1222, Portland, Oregon, USA, 1996. AAAI Press / The MIT Press.
4
 
5
A. J. Bonner and M. Kifer. Concurrency and communication in transaction logic. In Joint Intl. Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, pages 142--156, Bonn, Germany, September 1996. MIT Press.
 
6
7
8
 
9
 
10
11
 
12
R. Gunthor. Extended transaction processing based on dependency rules. In Proceedings of the RIDE-IMS Workshop , 1993.
 
13
J. Hintikka. Logic, Language Games, and Information. Oxford Univ. Press, Clarendon, Oxford, 1973.
14
 
15
F. Leymann. Web services flow language (wsfl 1.0). Technical report, IBM, 2001. http://www-4.ibm.com/software/solutions/webservices/pdf/WSFL.pdf.
 
16
R. McNaughton. Infinite games played on finite graphs. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 65:149--184, 1993.
 
17
S. Mukherjee, H. Davulcu, M. Kifer, G. Yang, and P. Senkul. Survey of logic based approaches to workflow modeling. In J. Chomicki, R. van der Meyden, and G. Saake Springer, editors, Logics for Emerging Applications of Databases , LNCS. Springer-Verlag, October 2003.
 
18
M. Osborne and A. Rubinstein. A Course in Game Theory. The MIT Press, 1998.
 
19
20
 
21
 
22
 
23

CITED BY  7

Collaborative Colleagues:
Hasan Davulcu: colleagues
Michael Kifer: colleagues
I. V. Ramakrishnan: colleagues