跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(216.73.216.185) 您好!臺灣時間:2026/09/08 16:19
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:龍秋明
研究生(外文):Chiu-Ming Lung
論文名稱:利用描述邏輯推論能力之網路服務近似媒合
論文名稱(外文):Approximate Matching of Web Services with Description Logic Reasoning
指導教授:蔡益坤
指導教授(外文):Yih-Quen Tsay
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:資訊管理學研究所
學門:電算機學門
學類:電算機一般學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2005
畢業學年度:93
語文別:英文
論文頁數:62
中文關鍵詞:近似媒合描述邏輯本體論語義網路網路服務
外文關鍵詞:Approximate MatchingDescription LogicOntologySemantic WebWeb Services
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:252
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
Heterogeneous Internet applications can be easily integrated when they are exported as Web Services, which use XML-based standards for service description and communication.
It becomes possible to provide more sophisticated compound services by combining simpler services. This entails, among other things, the need of precise semantic description
of service demands and supplies and an associated matching mechanism. Technologies under development in the Semantic Web, in particular ontology and rule definition languages, appear to meet the need perfectly. However, as exact matches may be difficult to find and often unnecessary, the matching mechanism ideally should allow certain degree of fuzziness.

In this thesis, we propose an approximate matching scheme that fully exploits the expressiveness of Semantic Web''s ontology definition language OWL, which is based on Description Logic, and the inference ability that comes with the logic. To demonstrate the applicability of our scheme, we develop a prototype service matchmaker for the Trip Planner, which is a service composer for the tourism industry developed on Protege.
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Motivation and Objective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Thesis Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2 Related Work 5
2.1 Web Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1.1 SOAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.2 WSDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.3 UDDI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
2.2 The Semantic Web . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.1 RDF and RDFS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2.2 OWL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
2.2.3 OWL-S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
2.2.4 Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.5 Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
2.3 Semantic Web Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
2.4 Service Matching and Ranking . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.4.1 Service Matching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.4.2 Service Ranking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
3 Preliminaries 21
3.1 Basics of Description Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
3.2 Inference Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3 Concrete Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.4 Relationship Between DL and OWL . . . . . . . . . . . .27
3.5 Semantic Web Rule Language: SWRL . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.5.1 SWRL Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31
3.5.2 SWRL Reasoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4 A Matching Scheme 33
4.1 Service Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
4.2 Difficulties of Approximate Matching . . . . . . . . . 34
4.3 System Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
4.3.1 Inference Layer: Description Logic Reasoner . . . . .36
4.3.2 Matching Layer: Service Matchmaker . . . . . . . . . 37
4.3.3 Approximate Layer: Concept Approximator . . . . . . .37
4.3.4 Rule Layer: SWRL Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.3.5 Ontology Layer: Domain Ontology . . . . . . . . . . .38
4.4 Matching Degree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
4.5 Concept Approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
4.6 Bottom-up ranking scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5 Prototype System: A Service Matchmaker for the Trip Planner 43
5.1 Inference Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.2 TourismDomain Ontology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.3 Approximation Issue for Ontology . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.4 Rules implementation issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
5.5 System Demonstration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.5.1 The Trip Planner Plugin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50
6 Conclusion 54
6.1 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54
6.2 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55
[1] Tim Berners-Lee. Weaving the Web. Harper, San Francisco, 1999.
[2] Tim Bray, Jean Paoli, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, and Eve Maler. Extensible markup
language (XML) 1.0 (second edition). Technical report, www.w3c.org, 2000.
[3] Tom Bellwood, Luc Clement, David Ehnebuske, Andrew Hately, Maryann Hondo,
Yin L. Husband, Karsten Januszewski, Sam Lee, Barbara McKee, Joel Munter,
and Claus V. Riegen. UDDI version 3.0 published specification. Technical report,
www.uddi.org, 2002.
[4] Roberto Chinnici, Martin Gudgin, Jean J. Moreau, and Sanjiva Weerawarana. Web
Services Description Language (WSDL) Version 1.2. Technical report, www.w3c.org,
2002.
[5] Don Box, David Ehnebuske, Gopal Kakivaya, Andrew Layman, Noah Mendelsohn,
Henrik F. Nielsen, Satish Thatte, and Dave Winer. Simple Object Access Protocol
(SOAP) 1.1. Technical report, www.w3c.org, 2000.
[6] Ian Jacobs. About the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Technical report,
www.w3c.org, March 2000.
[7] Mike Dean, Dan Connolly, Frank V. Harmelen, James Hendler, Ian Horrocks, Deborah
L. McGuinness, Peter F. Patel-Schneider, and Lynn A. Stein. Web Ontology
Language (OWL) reference version 1.0. Technical report, www.w3c.org, 2002.
[8] J. Hendler and D. L. McGuinness. The DARPA agent markup language. IEEE
Intelligent Systems, 15(6):72–73, November/December 2000.
[9] Marlon Dumas, Boualem Benatallah, Nick Russell, and Murray Spork. A configurable
matchmaking framework for electronic marketplaces. Electronic Commerce
Research and Applications, 3(1):95–106, 2004.
[10] Franz Baader, Diego Calvanese, McGuinness Deborah, Daniele Nardi, and Peter F.
Patel-Schneider. The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and
Applications. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[11] Chih-Hsiung liu. Web Services Matchmaking Based on OWL Ontologies and Description
Logic Inferences. Master’s thesis, Nation Taiwan University, 7 2004.
[12] Michael Champion, Chris Ferris, Eric Newcomer, and David Orchard. Web services
architecture. Technical report, www.w3c.org, 2004.
[13] UDDI. The UDDI technical white paper. Technical report, www.uddi.org, 2000.
[14] Hendler Tim Berners-Lee and Lassila. The semantic web. Technical report, Scientific
American, 2001.
[15] Thomas R. Gruber. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications.
Technical report, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Computer Science Department,
Stanford University, 1993.
[16] Ora Lassila and Ralph R. Swick. Resource description framework(RDF) model and
syntax specification. Technical report, www.w3c.org, February 1999.
[17] Dan Brickley and R.V. Guha. RDF vocabulary description language 1.0: RDF
Schema. Technical report, www.w3c.org, April 2002.
[18] Ian Horrocks, Frank V. Harmelen, Peter Patel-Schneider, Tim Berners-Lee, Dan
Brickley, Dan Connolly, Mike Dean, Stefan Decker, Dieter Fensel, Richard Fikes,
Pat Hayes, Jeff Heflin, Jim Hendler, Ora Lassila, Deb McGuinness, and Lynn A.
Stein. DAML+OIL. Technical report, www.daml.org, 2001.
[19] Brian McBride Frank Manola, Eric Miller. Rdf primer. Technical report,
www.w3c.org, February 2004.
[20] Ian Horrocks and Peter F. Patel-Schneider. A proposal for an OWL rules language.
In Proceddings of the Thirteenth International Conference on World Wide
Web (WWW), pages 723–731. ACM, 2004.
[21] Harold Boley Said Tabet Benjamin Grosof Mike Dean Ian Horrocks, Peter F. Patel-
Schneider. SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML.
W3C Member submission, May 2004.
[22] Natalya F. Noy Holger Knublauch, RayW. Fergerson and Mark A. Musen. The
Prot´eg´e OWL Plugin: An Open Development Environment for SemanticWeb Applications.
In Proceedings of the Third International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC),
2004.
[23] Harold Boley, Said Tabet, and Gerd Wagner. Design rationale of RuleML: A markup
language for Semantic Web rules. In Proceedings of the First Semantic Web Working
Symposium (SWWS), pages 381–402, 2001.
[24] Tran Cao Son Sheila A. McIlraith and Honglei Zeng. Semantic Web services. In
IEEE Intelligent Systems, volume 16(2), pages 46 – 53, 2001.
[25] Evren Sirin and Bijan Parsia. Planning for semantic web services. In Proceedings of
the ISWC 2004 Workshop on Semantic Web Services(SWS), 2004.
[26] Massimo Paolucci, Takahiro Kawamura, Terry R. Payne, and Katia 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.
[27] Javier Gonzalez-Castillo, David Trastour, and Claudio Bartolini. Description logics
for matchmaking of services. Technical report, Trusted E-Services Laboratory HP,
2001.
[28] Lei Li and Ian Horrocks. A software framework for matchmaking based on semantic
web technology. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on World
Wide Web (WWW), pages 331–339. ACM, 2003.
[29] Rob Lemmens and Helbert Arenas. Semantic matchmaking in geo service chains:
Reasoning with a location ontology. In Proceeding of 15th International Workshop on
Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA 2004), 30 August - 3 September
2004, Zaragoza, Spain, pages 797–802. IEEE Computer Society.
[30] Olga Caprotti, Mike Dewar, and Daniele Turi. Mathematical service matching using
description logic and owl. In Proceeding of third International Conference on Mathematical
Knowledge Management(MKM2004), volume 3119, pages 73–87. Springer,
September 2004.
[31] Lei Li and Ian Horrocks. Matchmarking Using an Instance Store: Some Preliminary
Results. In Proceedings of the 2003 International Workshop on Description Logics
(DL2003), 2003.
[32] Ian Horrocks, Lei Li, Daniele Turi, and Sean Bechhofer. The Instance Store: DL Reasoning
with Large Numbers of Individuals. In Proceedings of the 2004 International
Workshop on Description Logics (DL2004), 2004.
[33] Nenad Stojanovic, Rudi Studer, and Ljiljana Stojanovic. An Approach for the Ranking
of Query Results in the SemanticWeb. In Proceedings of the Second International
Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), volume 2870 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science,
pages 500–516. Springer-Verlag, 2003.
[34] Tommaso Di Noia, Eugenio Di Sciascio, Francesco M. Donini, and Marina 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.
[35] Tommaso Di Noia, Eugenio Di Sciascio, Francesco M. Donini, and Marina Mongiello.
A system for principled matchmaking in an electronic marketplace. In Proceedings of
the Twelfth International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), pages 321–330.
ACM Press, 2003.
[36] Tommaso Di Noia, Eugenio Di Sciascio, Francesco M. Donini, and Marina Mongiello.
A System for Principled Matchmaking in an Electronic Marketplace. In Proceedings
of the Twelfth International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), 2003.
[37] Simona Colucci, Tommaso Di Noia, Eugenio Di Sciascio, Francesco M. Donini, and
Marina Mongiello. Logic based approach to web services discovery and matchmaking.
In Proceedings of Modeling E-services Workshop at fifth International Conference on
Electronic Commerce (ICEC ’03), October 2003.
[38] Franz Baader, Ian Horrocks, and Ulrike Sattler. Description Logics as Ontology
Languages for the Semantic Web. In Dieter Hutter and Werner Stephan, editors,
Festschrift in honor of Jぴorg Siekmann, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence.
Springer, 2003.
[39] M. Schmidt-Schauss and G. Smolka. Attributive concept descriptions with complements.
Artificial Intelligence, 48:1–26, 1991.
[40] F. Baader and P. Hanschke. A scheme for integrating concrete domains into concept
languages. In Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence, IJCAI-91, pages 452–457, Sydney (Australia), 1991.
[41] Ian Horrocks, Peter F. Patel-Schneider, and Frank Van Harmelen. From SHIQ and
RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language. Journal of Web Semantics,
1(1):7–26, 2003.
[42] Deborah L. McGuinness Michael K. Smith, Chris Welty. OWL Web Ontology Language
Guide - W3C Recommendation 10 February. Technical report, www.w3c.org,
2004.
[43] Chen-Feng Huang. A Semantic-Based framework for Web Services Composition.
Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, 6 2005.
[44] Ian Horrocks. The fact system. In Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux
and Related Methods: International Conference Tableaux’98, volume 1397 of Lecture
Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 307–312. Springer-Verlag, 1998.
[45] Volker Haarslev and Ralf Moller. RACER system description. volume 2083 of Lecture
Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 701–705. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
[46] Volker Haarslev and Ralf Mぴoller. Practical Reasoning in RACER with a Concrete
Domain for Linear Inequations. In Proceedings of the 2002 International Workshop
on Description Logics (DL2002), pages 91–98, April 2002.
[47] Ray Reiter. Knowledge in Action. MIT Press, 2001.
[48] Sheila McIlraith and Tran Cao Son. Adapting golog for composition of semantic
web services. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Knowledge
Representation and Reasoning (KR2002), 2002.
[49] Hector J. Levesque, Raymond Reiter, Yves Lesperance, Fangzhen Lin, and
Richard B. Scherl. GOLOG: A logic programming language for dynamic domains.
The Journal of Logic Programming, 31(1-3):59–83, 1997.
[50] F. Baader, C. Lutz, M. Milicic, U. Sattler, and F. Wolter. A Description Logic
Based Approach to Reasoning about Web Services. In Proceedings of the WWW
2005 Workshop on Web Service Semantics (WSS2005), Chiba City, Japan, 2005.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 嚴奇峰、廖本哲(1995)。人際關係對本土個人交易行為影響之研究─社會交易潛在價值與經濟交易潛在價值之決策權衡模式。中原學報,23(2),35-42。
2. 鄭仁偉、黎士群(2001)。組織公平、信任與知識分享行為之關係性研究。人力資源管理學報,1(2):69-93。
3. 董玉娟(2004)。知識分享意願影響前因之研究:威脅之情境效果。人力資源管理學報,4(3),117-137。
4. 黃仁宏、沈聰益(2003)。人格五因素模式預測銷售績效的效度--NEO-PI-R量表的檢驗與應用。管理學報,20(3),457-481。
5. 張火燦(1990)。人力資源發展方案評鑑的觀念及模式。人力資源學報,1,17-26。
6. 張火燦、劉淑寧 (2002)。從社會網路理論探討員工知識分享。人力資源管理學報,2(3),101-113。
7. 林能白、丘宏昌(1999)。服務品質之研究-服務人員人格特質之影響分析與應用。管理學報,16(2):175-200。
8. 林宜旻(2004)。從利社會行為觀點探討組織成員知識分享意願的影響因素。東南學報,26,215-226。
9. 沈鵬飛、林志信(2003)。知識類型、人格特質與激勵制度對知識分享意願影響之研究--以壽險業為例。致理學報,17,89-110。
10. 4. 川出敏裕著、劉芳伶譯,日本檢察官之監控機制,月旦法學雜誌,第162期,2008年11月。
11. 6. 尤正才,我國現行法規中「國家安全」概念分析,國家發展研究,第九卷第二期,2010年6月。
12. 10. 余振華、康順興,中日檢警關係及偵查主體法制之比較考察,月旦法學雜誌,第56期,2000年1月。
13. 11. 何達仁,警察法有關檢警關係規範之商榷,軍法專刊,第52卷第3期,2006年4月。
14. 13. 何賴傑,論刑事訴訟法之傳承與變革-從我國與德國晚近刑事訴訟法修法談起,月旦法學教室,第100期,2011年2月。
15. 14. 吳巡龍,「相當理由」與「合理懷疑」之區別-兼評大法官會議釋字第535號解釋,刑事法雜誌,第46 卷第4 期,2002年8月。