請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/28601完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 蔡益坤(Yih-Kuen Tsay) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Chung-Hao Hsieh | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 謝仲豪 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-13T00:13:42Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2008-07-30 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2007-07-30 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2007 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2007-07-28 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | [1] A. Arkin, S. Askary, et al. WS-BPEL: Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0, 2004.
[2] F. Baader, D. Calvanese, D. McGuinness, D. Nardi, and P. Patel-Schneider. The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press, 2003. [3] F. Baader and P. Hanschke. A scheme for integrating concrete domains into concept languages. German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI), 1991. [4] F. Baader and P. Hanschke. Extensions of Concept Languages for a Mechanical Engineering Application. Springer-Verlag London, UK, 1992. [5] T. Bellwood, L. Clement, D. Ehnebuske, A. Hately, M. Hondo, Y.L. Husband, K. Januszewski, S. Lee, B. McKee, J. Munter, and C.V. Riegen. UDDI version 3.0 published specification. Technical report, www.uddi.org, 2002. [6] T. Berners-Lee. Weaving the Web. Harper, San Francisco, 1999. [7] P.V. Biron and A. Malhotra. XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes. W3C Recommendation, 2:2–20010502, 2001. [8] A. Borgida, T. Walsh, and H. Hirsh. Towards measuring similarity in description logics. Working Notes of the International Description Logics Workshop. [9] D. Box, D. Ehnebuske, G. Kakivaya, A. Layman, N. Mendelsohn, H.F. Nielsen, S. Thatte, and D. Winer. Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) 1.1. Technical report, www.w3c.org, 2000 [10] D. Brickley and R.V. Guha. RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. W3C Working Draft, 23, 2003. [11] Po-Chun Chen. The Trip Planner: Exploring an Ontology-Based Web Service Composition and Brokering Framework. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, June 2004. [12] Yi-Shan Cheng. An Approach to Mapping Relational Databases to Ontologies. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, July 2007. [13] R. Chinnici, M. Gudgin, J.J. Moreau, J. Schlimmer, and S. Weerawarana. Web Services Description Language (WSDL) Version 2.0 Part 1: Core Language. W3C Working Draft, 26, 2004. [14] Roberto Chinnici, Martin Gudgin, Jean J. Moreau, and Sanjiva Weerawarana. Web Services Description Language (WSDL) Version 1.2. Technical report, www.w3c.org, 2002. [15] M. Dean, D. Connolly, F. V. Harmelen, J. Hendler, I. Horrocks, D. L. McGuinness, P. F. Patel-Schneider, and L. A. Stein. Web Ontology Language (OWL) reference version 1.0. Technical report, www.w3c.org, 2002. [16] T. Di Noia, E. Di Sciascio, and F.M. Donini. Extending semantic-based matchmaking via concept abduction and contraction. EKAW 2004, pages 307–320, 2004. [17] T. Di Noia, T. Di Sciascio, F.M. Donini, and M. Mongiello. Semantic matchmaking in a P-2-P electronic marketplace. In In Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual ACM (SIGAPP) Symposium on Applied Computing, Special Track on E-commerce technologies, pages 532–536, March 2003. [18] F.M. Donini. Complexity of reasoning. The description logic handbook: theory, implementation, and applications table of contents, pages 96–136, 2003. [19] D. Fensel and C. Bussler. The web service modeling framework wsmf. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 1(2):113–137, 2002 [20] V. Haarslev and R. Moller. RACER System Description. Proc. of the Int. Joint Conf. on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR 2001), 2001. [21] V. Haarslev, R. Moller, and M. Wessel. RacerPro User Guide. 2005. [22] I. Horrocks and P.F. Patel-Schneider. Reducing owl entailment to description logic satisfiability. Proc. of the 2003 International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2003), 2870:17–29, 2003. [23] I. Horrocks, P.F. Patel-Schneider, H. Boley, S. Tabet, B. Grosof, and M. Dean. SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML. W3C Member Submission, 21, 2004. [24] I. Horrocks, P.F. Patel-Schneider, and F. van Harmelen. From shiq and rdf to owl:The making of a web ontology language. Journal of Web Semantics, 1(1):7–26, 2003. [25] I. Horrocks, F. van Harmelen, P. Patel-Schneider, T. Berners-Lee, D. Brickley, D. Connolly, M. Dean, S. Decker, D. Fensel, P. Hayes, et al. DAML+ OIL (March 2001). DARPA Agent Markup Language, 2001. [26] Chia-Tzu Hsieh. The Trveller: A Service Combination System Based on Semantic Web Technology. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, July 2006. [27] R. Lara, D. Roman, A. Polleres, and D. Fensel. A conceptual comparison of WSMO and OWL-S. Proceedings of the European Conference on Web Services (ECOWS2004), 2004. [28] L. Li and I. Horrocks. A software framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(4):39–60, 2004. [29] D. Lin. An information-theoretic definition of similarity. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 296–304, 1998. [30] Wei-Lun Lu. Approximate matching of service descriptions using ontologies and rules. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, July 2006 [31] C. Lutz. Description logics with concrete domains - a survey. Advances in Modal Logics, 4:265–296, 2003. [32] D. Martin, M. Burstein, J. Hobbs, O. Lassila, D. McDermott, S. McIlraith, S. Narayanan, M. Paolucci, B. Parsia, T. Payne, et al. OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services. W3C Member Submission, 2004. [33] G.A. Miller, R. Beckwith, C. Fellbaum, D. Gross, and K.J. Miller. Introduction to WordNet: an on-line lexical database. International Journal of Lexicography, 3(4):235–244, 1990. [34] T.D. Noia, E.D. Sciascio, F.M. Donini, and M. Mongiello. A system for principled matchmaking in an electronic marketplace. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(4):9–37, 2004. [35] J.Z. Pan and I. Horrocks. OWL-E: Extending OWL with expressive datatype expressions. Technical report, IMG Technical Report, Victoria University of Manchester, 2004. [36] M. Paolucci, T. Kawamura, T. R. Payne, and K. Sycara. Semantic matching of web services capabilities. In Proceedings of the First International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), volume 2342 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 333–347. Springer-Verlag, 2002. [37] X.M.L.S. Part. 0: Primer, Part 1: Structures, Part 2: Datatypes. W3C Recommendation, 2, 2001. [38] R. Rada, H. Mili, E. Bicknell, and M. Blettner. Development and application of a metric on semantic nets. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on, 19(1):17–30, 1989. [39] P. Resnik. Using information content to evaluate semantic similarity in a taxonomy. Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1:448–453, 1995. [40] D. Roman. Web Service Modeling Ontology. Applied Ontology, 1(1):77–106, 2005. [41] S. Ross. First course in probability. 1997. [42] E. Sirin, B. Parsia, B.C. Grau, A. Kalyanpur, and Y. Katz. Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Submitted to Journal of Web Semantics, 2006. [43] N. Stojanovic, R. Studer, and L. Stojanovic. An approach for the ranking of query results in the semantic web. In Proceedings of the Second International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), volume 2870 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 500–516. Springer-Verlag, 2003. [44] K. Sycara, S. Widoff, M. Klusch, and J. Lu. LARKS: Dynamic matchmaking among heterogeneous software agents in cyberspace. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 5(2):173–203, 2002. [45] Hsin-Ying Tai. Automated Web Service Composition and Execution Based on Semantic Web Technology. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, July 2007. [46] D. Tsarkov and I. Horrocks. FaCT++ Description Logic Reasoner: System Description. Proc. of the 3rd Int. Joint Conf. on Automated Reasoning (IJCARD06), 2006. [47] A. Tversky. Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84(4):327–352, 1977. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/28601 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 網路服務,一個支援在網際網路上電腦跟電腦間互動的軟體架構,已經將目前的網路從一個靜態的資訊聚集地轉型成為一個動態的服務互動媒介。隨著網路服務的數量日益成長,服務媒合遂成為了一個越來越重要的課題。服務的媒合主要是指針對使用者所提出來的需求,透過搜尋線上的服務目錄,而找到所有滿足需求的服務廣告並將之回傳給使用者的一個過程。然而,由於每個人的對於其所期望的服務需求是因人而異的,我們很難去預期每次使用者透過服務媒合機制所找到的服務都會完美地符合他們的需求。因此,當無法搜尋到完美符合的結果時,我們就需要有一個近似媒合的機制,它能夠回傳能近似滿足使用者需求的替代服務並提供評等的結果給使用者參考。
在本論文中,我們整合之前所提出來能處理「量化數值關係」以及支援「媒合精確度設定」的媒合方法,而延伸前述的方法而加入了一個在描述邏輯裡表達「概念組合」的方式,概念組合主要是用於當我們要使用一個概念表達透過某個屬性來連結的兩個概念,由於在描述邏輯裡並不支援這種建構子,因此我們將每一個位於子節點的概念用一個個體來表達,我們利用一個特別建立的屬性來表達概念間的組合關係。在我們的方法裡,領域的知識是透過知識本體跟法則的形式存放在知識庫中, 我們利用描述邏輯裡的概念來代表服務的描述,透過這種方式,我們可以將服務媒合的問題轉化成為驗證概念跟概念間的包含關係。為了能夠近似服務的描述,我們將需求描述裡面的限制逐步放寬,放寬的方法主要是將每個條件用更廣義的概念來取代。我們將搜尋結果透過評等方法評定相對優劣等級提供給使用者使他們能透過評等結果來決定最適合的服務。為了驗證我們的方法,我們開發了一個基於旅遊領域的雛型系統-媒合者,這個媒合系統能夠被完全地整合到「旅行者」這個服務組裝的架構,這樣子的一個整合架構可以為我們展示從服務描述取得、服務媒合到服務執行的一個完整的過程。透過我們的系統,使用者能夠描述他們針對特定領域限制條件的關切程度並獲得近似符合他們需求的替代性服務。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Web Service technology, which is a software framework supporting interoperable machine-to-machine interaction over the Internet, has transformed the Web from a static collection of information into a dynamic service repository. As the number of available Web services continues to grow, service matching becomes an increasingly important issue. Matching is the process that requires a service repository to take a requirement as input, and return all the advertisements that satisfy the requirements specified in the input query. However, since users' requirements may vary from person to person, it is unrealistic to expect that a matching scheme will always find services that match requirements perfectly. When exact matches cannot be achieved, an approximate matching scheme, which gives satisfying and ranked results, will be needed.
In this thesis, we integrate previous approaches that can deal with 'quantitative relations' and allow users to specify 'matching accuracy settings'. We then extend them with an approach to model 'concept composition'. Concept composition could be useful when we want to compose two concepts linked by a certain property. Since there is no such constructor in Description Logic, we use individuals to represent concepts which are leaf nodes of the ontology. Then, we use a role to represent the composition relationship. In our scheme, domain knowledge is stored in the knowledge base in the form of ontologies and rules. We model service descriptions as concept expressions. Therefore, service matching problems can be transformed into concept subsumption checking, which is a basic reasoning service supported by reasoners. To approximate users' requirements, we try to relax the constraints of requirements by substituting these constraints with more general ones. Furthermore, we rank these results according to our ranking scheme, which can provide a relative priority for users to select services that best fit their needs. To validate our approach, we implement a prototype system - the Matchmaker, which focuses on the tourism domain. This system is fully integrated with the Traveller, which is a prototype system of the service composition framework that demonstrates the process from service description acquisition, service matching to service execution. With our matching system, users are able to specify their concern toward certain domain specific constraints by matching accuracy settings and acquire substitute services that approximately fit their needs. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-13T00:13:42Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-96-R94725047-1.pdf: 1513302 bytes, checksum: 6526a4d82e313dfa7d117bca7bb6d44a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2007 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Motivation and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Thesis Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Related Work 5 2.1 Web Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1.1 WSDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.1.2 UDDI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.1.3 SOAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.2 The Semantic Web . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.2.1 OWL-S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.2.2 WSMO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.3 Service Matching and Ranking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.3.1 Service Matching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.3.2 Service Ranking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.4 Concept Similarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3 Preliminaries 19 3.1 Basics of Description Logics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 3.2 Inference Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3.3 Concrete Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.4 Relationship Between DL and OWL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 3.5 Semantic Web Rule Language: SWRL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 3.5.1 SWRL Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 3.5.2 SWRL Reasoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 3.6 Quantitative Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 4 Matching Scheme 35 4.1 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.2 System Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.2.1 Matchmaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.2.2 Knowledge Repository . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 4.2.3 Inference Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 4.3 Matching Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 4.3.1 Approximation Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 iii 4.3.2 Service Description Unfolding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 4.3.3 Concept Substitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 4.3.4 Generate Approximate Queries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4.3.5 Matching Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 4.4 Ranking Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5 Prototype System 53 5.1 Inference Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 5.2 Tourism Domain Ontology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 5.2.1 Common Ontology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 5.2.2 Domain-Specific Ontology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 5.2.3 Requirement Ontology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 5.3 Transportation Inference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 5.4 System Demonstration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 6 Conclusion 68 6.1 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 6.2 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.subject | 規則 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 知識本體語言 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 語意網法則語言 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 描述邏輯 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 近似媒合 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 網路服務 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 知識本體 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 語意網 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Approximate Matching | en |
| dc.subject | SWRL | en |
| dc.subject | Semantic Web | en |
| dc.subject | Rules | en |
| dc.subject | OWL | en |
| dc.subject | Ontology | en |
| dc.subject | Description Logic | en |
| dc.subject | Web Services | en |
| dc.title | 運用知識本體與法則之網路服務近似媒合與評等 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Approximate Matching and Ranking of Web Services Using Ontologies and Rules | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 95-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 莊裕澤(Yuh-Jzer Joung),李瑞庭 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 網路服務,近似媒合,描述邏輯,知識本體,知識本體語言,規則,語意網,語意網法則語言, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Web Services,Approximate Matching,Description Logic,Ontology,OWL,Rules,Semantic Web,SWRL, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 75 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2007-07-28 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 資訊管理學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 資訊管理學系 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-96-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 1.48 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。
