FEDERATED MEDIATORS FOR QUERY COMPOSITE ANSWERS

Dong Cheng, Nacer Boudjlida

2004

Abstract

The capture, the structuring and the exploitation of the expertise or the capabilities of an “object” (like a business partner, an employee, a software component, a Web site, etc.) are crucial problems in various applications, like cooperative and distributed applications or e-business and e-commerce applications. The work we describe in this paper concerns the advertising of the capabilities or the know-how of an object. The capabilities are structured and organized in order to be used when searching for objects that satisfy a given objective or that meet a given need. One of the originality of our proposal is in the nature of the answers the intended system can return. Indeed, the answers are not Yes/No answers but they may be cooperative answers in that sense that when no single object meets the search criteria, the system attempts to find out what a set of “complementary” objects do satisfy the whole search criteria, every object in the resulting set satisfying part of the criteria. In this approach, Description Logics (DL) is used as a knowledge representation formalism and classification techniques are used as search mechanisms. The determination of the “complementary objects” is founded on the DL complement concept.

References

  1. Beeri, C., Levy, A., and Rousset, M.-C. (1997). Rewriting Queries Using Views in Description Logics. In ACM Symposium on Principles Of Database Systems, pages 99-108, Tucson, Arizona.
  2. Borgida, A. (1995). Description Logics in Data Management. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 7(5):671-682.
  3. Borgida, A. and Devanhu, P. (1999). Adding more "DL" to IDL: Towards more Knowledgeable Component Interoperability. In 21rst International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE'99, pages 378-387, Los Angeles, CA. ACM Press.
  4. Bouchikhi, M. and Boudjlida, N. (1998). Using Larch to Specify the Behavior of Objects in Open Distributed Environments. In Proceedings of the 1998 Maghrebian Conference on Software Engineering and Arti - cial Intelligence, pages 275-287, Tunis, Tunisia. 98- R-300.
  5. Boudjlida, N. (1995). Knowledge in Interoperable and Evolutionary Systems. In Dreschler-Fischer, L. and Pribbenow, S., editors, KRDB'95, Workshop on "Reasoning about Structured Objets: Knowledge Representation Meets Databases", pages 25-26, Bielefeld, Germany. (Position Paper).
  6. Boudjlida, N. (2002). A Mediator-Based Architecture for Capability Management. In Hamza, M., editor, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications, SEA 2002, pages 45-50, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
  7. Calvanese, D., de Giacomo, D., Lenzerini, M., Nardi, D., and Rosati, R. (1998). Information Integration: Coceptual Modeling and Reasoning Support. In 6th International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, CoopIS'98, pages 280-291.
  8. DL-org (2003). Description logics. http//dl.kr.org/.
  9. Dyck, T. (2002). Uddi 2.0 provides ties that bind. (http://www.eweek.com/).
  10. Haaslev, V. and Moller, R. (2003). Racer: Renamed abox and concept expression reasoner. http://www.fhwedel.de/mo/racer/index.html.
  11. Han, T.-D., Purao, S., and Storey, V. (1999). A Methodology for Building a Repository of Object-Oriented Design Fragments. In 18th International Conference on Conceptual Modelling, ER'99, pages 203-217, Paris. Spriger Verlag. LNCS 1728.
  12. Horrocks, I. (2002a). DAML+OIL: a description logic for the semantic web. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin, 25(1):4-9.
  13. Horrocks, I. (2002b). Description Logic: Axioms and Rules. Talk given at Dagstuhl "Rule Markup Technique" Workshop. http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/ horrocks/Slides/.
  14. Napoli, A. (1997). Une introduction aux logiques de description. Technical Report RR No 3314, INRIALORIA, Nancy.
  15. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company; How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press.
  16. OMG (1992). The Object Model Architecture Guide. Technical Report 91.11.1, Revision 2.0, Object Management Group.
  17. Schmidt-Schauss, M. and Smolka, G. (1991). Concepts Description with Complements. Intelligence Journal, 48(1):1-26.
  18. Attribute Arti cial uddi.org (2000). UDDI: Universal Description, Discovery and Integration. Technical White Paper. (http://uddi.org).
  19. W3C (2003a). Semantic Web. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw. (2003b). Web http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt.
  20. W3C (2003c). Web Services. http://www.w3.org/2002/ws.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Cheng D. and Boudjlida N. (2004). FEDERATED MEDIATORS FOR QUERY COMPOSITE ANSWERS . In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 4: ICEIS, ISBN 972-8865-00-7, pages 170-175. DOI: 10.5220/0002638601700175


in Bibtex Style

@conference{iceis04,
author={Dong Cheng and Nacer Boudjlida},
title={FEDERATED MEDIATORS FOR QUERY COMPOSITE ANSWERS},
booktitle={Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 4: ICEIS,},
year={2004},
pages={170-175},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0002638601700175},
isbn={972-8865-00-7},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 4: ICEIS,
TI - FEDERATED MEDIATORS FOR QUERY COMPOSITE ANSWERS
SN - 972-8865-00-7
AU - Cheng D.
AU - Boudjlida N.
PY - 2004
SP - 170
EP - 175
DO - 10.5220/0002638601700175