Understanding approaches for web service composition and execution

ABSTRACT

Web services have received much interest due to their potential in facilitating seamless business-to-business or enterprise application integration. Of particular interest is the Web Service Composition and Execution (WSCE) process - the creation of a workflow that realizes the functionality of a new service and its subsequent deployment and execution on a runtime environment. A significant number of solutions have been proposed in the literature for composition and execution of web services. However, in order to choose a suitable technique for an application scenario, one needs to systematically analyze the strengths and weaknesses of each of these solutions. To this end, we present an analysis that includes formalization of the WSCE process, a classification of existing solutions into four distinct categories (approaches), and an in-depth evaluation of these approaches. Our evaluation is based on multiple metrics that we deem critical for a WSCE system, e.g. composition effort, composition control, and ability to handle failures. We also present an application of this analysis to three different scenarios.

REFERENCES

• 1: Vikas Agarwal , Koustuv Dasgupta , Neeran Karnik , Arun Kumar , Ashish Kundu , Sumit Mittal , Biplav Srivastava, A service creation environment based on end to end composition of Web services, Proceedings of the 14th international conference on World Wide Web, May 10-14, 2005, Chiba, Japan [doi>10.1145/1060745.1060768]
• 2: José Luis Ambite , Greg Barish , Craig A. Knoblock , Maria Muslea , Jean Oh , Steven Minton, Getting from here to there: interactive planning and agent execution for optimizing travel, Eighteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence, p.862-869, July 28-August 01, 2002, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
• 3: J. Blythe et al. The Role of Planning in Grid Computing. Proceedings of International Conference on AI Planning and Scheduling, 2003.
• 4: Soon Ae Chun, V. Atluri, and N. R. Adam. Policy-based Web Service Composition. In Research Issues on Data Engineering: Web Services for e-Commerce and e-Government Applications (RIDE), 2004.
• 5: Ugo Dal Lago , Marco Pistore , Paolo Traverso, Planning with a language for extended goals, Eighteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence, p.447-454, July 28-August 01, 2002, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
• 6: M. DesJardins, E. Durfee, C. Ortiz, and M. Wolverton. A Survey of Research In Distributed, Continual Planning. AI Magazine, 20(4):13--22, 1999.
• 7: M. B. Do and S. Kambhampati. Sapa: A Scalable Multi-objective Heuristic Metric Temporal Planner. Journal of AI Research, 20:155--194, 2003.
• 8: Kutluhan Erol , James Hendler , Dana S. Nau, HTN planning: complexity and expressivity, Proceedings of the twelfth national conference on Artificial intelligence (vol. 2), p.1123-1128, October 1994, Seattle, Washington, United States
• 9: José Luis Ambite et al. Getting from here to there:. interactive planning and agent. execution for optimizing travel. In IAAI, 2002.
• 10: Fausto Giunchiglia , Paolo Traverso, Planning as Model Checking, Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Planning: Recent Advances in AI Planning, p.1-20, September 08-10, 1999
• 11: A. Johnson, P. Morris, N. Muscettola, and K. Rajan. Planning in Interplanetary Space: Theory and Practice. In Proceedings AIPS, 2000.
• 12: Henry Kautz , Joachim P. Walser, State-space planning by integer optimization, Proceedings of the sixteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence and the eleventh Innovative applications of artificial intelligence conference innovative applications of artificial intelligence, p.526-533, July 18-22, 1999, Orlando, Florida, United States
• 13: D. McDermott. Estimated-Regression Planning for Interactions with Web Services. In Proc. AIPS, 2002.
• 14: S. Ponnekanti and A. Fox. SWORD: A Developer Toolkit for Web Service Composition. In Proceedings of the 11th International World Wide Web Conference, 2002.
• 15: E. Sirin, B. Parsia, and J. Hendler. Composition-driven Filtering and Selection of Semantic Web Services. In AAAI Spr. Symposium on Semantic Web Services, March 2004.
• 16: Evren Sirin, Bijan Parsia, and James Hendler. Template-based Composition of Semantic Web Services. In AAAI Fall Symposium on Agents and the Semantic Web, Virginia, USA, November 2005. To Appear.
• 17: B. Srivastava. Automatic Web Services Composition Using Planning. In Proceedings of KBCS, Mumbai, 2002., pages 467--477, 2002.
• 18: B. Srivastava and J. Koehler. Web Service Composition - Current Solutions and Open Problems. ICAPS 2003 Workshop on Planning for Web Services, 2003.
• 19: S. Thakkar, C. Knoblock, and J. Ambite. A view integration approach to dynamic composition of web services. In Proc. ICAPS 2003 Workshop on Planning for Web Services, 2003.
• 20: P. Traverso and M. Pistore. Automated Composition of Semantic Web Services into Executable Processes. In 3rd International Semantic Web Conference, 2004.
• 21: Liangzhao Zeng , Boualem Benatallah , Anne H.H. Ngu , Marlon Dumas , Jayant Kalagnanam , Henry Chang, QoS-Aware Middleware for Web Services Composition, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.30 n.5, p.311-327, May 2004 [doi>10.1109/TSE.2004.11]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.3 INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL
      H.3.5 On-line Information Services
          Subjects: Web-based services

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.m Miscellaneous

  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.8 Problem Solving, Control Methods, and Search
          Subjects: Plan execution, formation, and generation

General Terms:
Design, Languages

Keywords:
QoS, planning, web services composition and execution