ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Top-k dominant web services under multi-criteria matching
Full text PdfPdf (496 KB)
Source Extending Database Technology; Vol. 360 archive
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Extending Database Technology: Advances in Database Technology table of contents
Saint Petersburg, Russia
SESSION: Research sessions: Top-k techniques table of contents
Pages 898-909  
Year of Publication: 2009
ISBN:978-1-60558-422-5
Authors
Dimitrios Skoutas  National Technical University of Athens, Greece and Institute for the Management of Information Systems, R.C. "Athena", Greece
Dimitris Sacharidis  National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Alkis Simitsis  HP Labs, Palo Alto
Verena Kantere  Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland
Timos Sellis  Institute for the Management of Information Systems, R.C. "Athena", Greece and National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 23,   Downloads (12 Months): 97,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1516360.1516463
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

As we move from a Web of data to a Web of services, enhancing the capabilities of the current Web search engines with effective and efficient techniques for Web services retrieval and selection becomes an important issue. Traditionally, the relevance of a Web service advertisement to a service request is determined by computing an overall score that aggregates individual matching scores among the various parameters in their descriptions. Two drawbacks characterize such approaches. First, there is no single matching criterion that is optimal for determining the similarity between parameters. Instead, there are numerous approaches ranging from using Information Retrieval similarity metrics up to semantic logic-based inference rules. Second, the reduction of individual scores to an overall similarity leads to significant information loss. Since there is no consensus on how to weight these scores, existing methods are typically pessimistic, adopting a worst-case scenario. As a consequence, several services, e.g., those having a single unrelated parameter, can be excluded from the result set, even though they are potentially good alternatives. In this work, we present a methodology that overcomes both deficiencies. Given a request, we introduce an objective measure that assigns a dominance score to each advertised Web service. This score takes into consideration all the available criteria for each parameter in the request. We investigate three distinct definitions of dominance score, and we devise efficient algorithms that retrieve the top-k most dominant Web services in each case. Extensive experimental evaluation on real requests and relevance sets, as well as on synthetically generated scenarios, demonstrates both the effectiveness of the proposed technique and the efficiency of the algorithms.


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
R. Akkiraju and et. al. Web Service Semantics -- WSDL-S. In W3C Member Submission, November 2005.
 
2
G. Alonso, F. Casati, H. A. Kuno, and V. Machiraju. Web Services -- Concepts, Architectures and Applications. Data-Centric Systems and Applications. Springer, 2004.
3
 
4
 
5
W.-T. Balke, U. Güntzer, and C. Lofi. Eliciting matters -- controlling skyline sizes by incremental integration of user preferences. In DASFAA, pages 551--562, 2007.
 
6
W.-T. Balke and M. Wagner. Cooperative Discovery for User-Centered Web Service Provisioning. In ICWS, pages 191--197, 2003.
7
 
8
U. Bellur and R. Kulkarni. Improved Matchmaking Algorithm for Semantic Web Services Based on Bipartite Graph Matching. In ICWS, pages 86--93, 2007.
 
9
 
10
M. Burstein and et. al. OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services. In W3C Member Submission, November 2004.
 
11
12
13
 
14
J. Chomicki, P. Godfrey, J. Gryz, and D. Liang. Skyline with Presorting. In ICDE, pages 717--816, 2003.
 
15
 
16
17
 
18
E. A. Fox and J. A. Shaw. Combination of Multiple Searches. In 2nd TREC, NIST, pages 243--252, 1993.
 
19
H. Lausen, A. Polleres, and D. Roman (eds.). Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO). In W3C Member Submission, June 2005.
 
20
 
21
 
22
M. Klusch and B. Fries. Hybrid OWL-S Service Retrieval with OWLS-MX: Benefits and Pitfalls. In SMRR, 2007.
23
 
24
25
26
 
27
28
29
 
30
X. Lin, Y. Yuan, Q. Zhang, and Y. Zhang. Selecting Stars: The k Most Representative Skyline Operator. In ICDE, pages 86--95, 2007.
31
 
32
33
 
34
35
 
36
 
37
L. Si and J. Callan. CLEF 2005: Multilingual Retrieval by Combining Multiple Multilingual Ranked Lists. In Proceedings of the 6th Workshop of the Cross-Language Evalution Forum, pages 121--130, 2005.
38
 
39
D. Skoutas, A. Simitsis, and T. K. Sellis. A Ranking Mechanism for Semantic Web Service Discovery. In IEEE SCW, pages 41--48, 2007.
 
40
 
41
 
42
Collaborative Colleagues:
Dimitrios Skoutas: colleagues
Dimitris Sacharidis: colleagues
Alkis Simitsis: colleagues
Verena Kantere: colleagues
Timos Sellis: colleagues