![](bgc.png)
9 CONCLUSION
We presented a QoS-aware semantic matching frame-
work. The framework supports three types of match-
ing: functional attribute-level matching, functional
service-level matching, and QoS-based matching. A
series of highly customizable algorithms are adver-
tised for each type of matching.
Several issues need to be further investigated.
First, the reduction of the number of parameters re-
quired from the user by automatically generating the
boundaries of QoS classes. Second, the use of the
rough sets theory-based classification (Greco et al.,
2001) for assigning instances to QoS classes. Third,
the use of multicriteria ranking/choice approaches in-
stead of the classification approach used in this paper.
REFERENCES
Agarwal, V., Chafle, G., Dasgupta, K., Karnik, N., Kumar,
A., Mittal, S., and Srivastava, B. (2005). Synthy: A
system for end to end composition of web services.
Journal of Web Semantics, 3:311–339.
Bellur, U. and Kulkarni, R. (2007). Improved matchmaking
algorithm for semantic web services based on bipartite
graph matching. In IEEE International Conference
on Web Services, pages 86–93, Salt Lake City, Utah,
USA.
Ben Mokhtar, S., Kaul, A., Georgantas, N., and Issarny, V.
(2006). Efficient semantic service discovery in perva-
sive computing environments. In ACM/IFIP/USENIX
2006 International Conference on Middleware, pages
240–259, Melbourne, Australia.
Chakhar, S. (2012). QoS-enhanced broker for compos-
ite web service selection. In Eighth International
Conference on Signal Image Technology and Inter-
net Based Systems (SITIS 2012), pages 533–540,
Sorrento-Naples, Italy.
Chakhar, S. (2013). Parameterized attribute and service
levels semantic matchmaking framework for service
composition. In Fifth International Conference on Ad-
vances in Databases, Knowledge, and Data Applica-
tions (DBKDA 2013), pages 159–165, Seville, Spain.
Chakhar, S., Youcef, S., Mousseau, V., Mokdad, L., and
Haddad, S. (2011). Multicriteria evaluation-based
conceptual framework for composite web service
selection. Working Paper, Lamsade, University Paris-
Dauphine, France. http://basepub.dauphine.fr/ xm-
lui/bitstream/handle/123456789/5283/multicriteria
mokdad.PDF?sequence=2.
Cui, L., Kumara, S., and Lee, D. (2011). Scenario analy-
sis of web service composition based on multi-criteria
mathematical goal programming. Service Science,
3(4):280–303.
Doshi, P., Goodwin, R., Akkiraju, R., and Roeder,
S. (2004). Parameterized semantic matchmaking
for workflow composition. IBM Research Report
RC23133, IBM Research Division.
Forgy, C. (1982). Rete: A fast algorithm for the many pat-
terns/many objects match problem. Artificial Intelli-
gence, 19(1):17–37.
Fu, P., Liu, S., Yang, H., and Gu, L. (2009). Matching algo-
rithm of web services based on semantic distance. In
International Workshop on Information Security and
Application (IWISA 2009), pages 465–468, Qingdao,
China.
Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Slowinski, R., and Stefanowski,
J. (2001). An algorithm for induction of decision rules
consistent with the dominance principle. In Ziarko, W.
and Yao, Y., editors, Rough Sets and Current Trends
in Computing, volume 2005 of LNCS, pages 304–313.
Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Guo, R., Le, J., and Xiao, X. (2005). Capability matching
of web services based on OWL-S. In Sixteenth Inter-
national Workshop on Database and Expert Systems
Applications, pages 653–657.
Hao, H., Haas, H., and Orchard, D. (2004). Web services
architecture usage scenarios. W3C Working Group
Note 11, IBM Research Division.
Jeong, B., Cho, H., Kulvatunyou, B., and Jones, A. (2007).
A multi-criteria web services composition problem. In
IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse
and Integration( IRI 2007), pages 379–384.
Krithiga, R. (2012). QoS-aware web service selection us-
ing SOMA. Global Journal of Computer Science and
Technology, 12(10):46–51.
Li, L. and Horrocks, I. (2003). A software framework for
matchmaking based on semantic web technology. In
12th International World Wide Web Conference, pages
331–339, Budapest, Hungary.
Ludwig, A. (2011). Memetic algorithm for web service se-
lection. In Third Workshop on Biologically Inspired
Algorithms for Distributed Systems, BADS ’11, pages
1–8, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
Menasc
´
e, D. (2004). Composing web services: A QoS
view. IEEE Internet Computing, 8(6):88–90.
Menasc
´
e, D. and Dubey, V. (2007). Utility-based QoS bro-
kering in service oriented architectures. In IEEE In-
ternational Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2007),
pages 422–430.
Paolucci, M., Kawamura, T., Payne, T., and Sycara, K.
(2002). Semantic matching of web services capabili-
ties. In First International Semantic Web Conference
on The Semantic Web, pages 333–347, Sardinia, Italy.
Sathya, M., Swarnamugi, M., Dhavachelvan, P., and
Sureshkumar, G. (2011). Evaluation of QoS based
web-service selection techniques for service composi-
tion. International Journal of Software Engineering,
1(5):73–90.
Xia, Y., Chen, P., Bao, L., Wang, M., and Yang, J. (2011). A
QoS-aware web service selection algorithm based on
clustering. In IEEE International Conference on Web
Services (ICWS), pages 428–435.
Zeng, L., Benatallah, B., Dumas, M., Kalagnanam, J., and
Sheng, Q. (2003). Quality driven web services com-
position. In 12th International Conference on World
Wide Web, pages 411–421, New York, NY, USA.
ACM.
QoS-AwareParameterizedSemanticMatchmakingFrameworkforWebServiceComposition
61