语义网格环境中的服务匹配研究
|
摘要
服务作为一种自治的、开放的以及与平台无关的网络化构件,可以使分布式应用具有更好的复用性、灵活性和可增长性。作为现代服务科学的奠基石,服务计算已成为一项桥接商业服务与信息技术服务的跨学科的科学技术。一个IT支持的商业服务具有两个典型的特征:服务操作模型和服务费用模型。服务操作模型定义了服务如何被发现和调度的问题,包括服务建模、服务创建、服务发现、服务组合、服务提供,服务管理等,是服务计算研究中的重要课题;服务费用模型声明了被调度服务的费用如何的问题。
语义网格将语义Web为代表的语义技术和以网格计算为代表的体系架构技术结合起来,对信息和服务进行了较好的定义,可以更好地实现计算机与人的协作。语义网格作为一个分布式、异构的开放式系统,具有高度的自治性,用来提供灵活的协作和大规模的计算,为资源的有效共享和高效处理提供直接支持。
语义网格环境中的服务发现是一个重要的研究课题,它用来解决一个服务需求者如何发现解决特定问题的资源或服务,以及一个服务提供者如何使得服务需求者注意到他提供的服务。语义网格环境中的服务发现是在不同虚拟社区提供的异构的、分布的和共享的资源上进行的,服务发现的核心问题是服务匹配。服务匹配的最终目标是发现不同服务之间的相似性。两个服务越相似,则它们之间越匹配;反之,两个服务越不相似,则它们之间越不匹配。
服务匹配在服务发现及调度过程中具有举足轻重的作用,如果缺乏有效的服务匹配策略,就不能为用户提供满卷的服务。统一描述、发现和集成(UDDI)作为一个公共的服务注册中心,为服务的发布与发现提供了一种高效、灵活和可扩展的机制。但是,它只是基于关键字的匹配,这种匹配方式既不能区分语法不同但语义相同的信息,也不能区分语法相同但语义不同的信息,因此,很难提供基于语义的服务匹配。同时,基于关键字的匹配也导致了服务匹配的查准率较低,其中一个可能的原因是检索的关键字从服务描述上看只是语义相似而语法不同;另一个可能的原因是检索的关键字从服务描述上看只是语法等价而语义不同。并且,这类方法也不能完全获取用户检索的语义,因为它们没有考虑关键字之间的语义关联关系。对该问题的一种可行的解决方案是使用基于语义的服务匹配,如果能够从语义上解决服务匹配的问题,将会极大地提高服务匹配的成功率及信息共享的程度。因此,对服务语义匹配的研究具有重要的理论意义和一定的实用价值。
在服务匹配过程中,借助具有语义表述能力的知识表示模型,如本体及资源空间模型等,可以在一定程度上实现服务的语义匹配。语义匹配机制可以执行更加灵活的服务发现过程,允许在数值上进行推理而不仅仪是基于类型的推理。此外,他用语义还允许执行包含推理,这意味着服服务匹配过程不再是仪局限于服务名称的匹配。因此,执行服务的语义匹配可以发现基于关键字匹配方法不能发现的服务。
通过对国内外研究现状的分析,在已有研究工作的基础上,本论文结合语义网格、语义Web及Web服务本体语言OWL-S,基于本体和资源空间模型理论,对语义网格环境中的服务匹配进行了相关研究。
论文的主要研究工作和创新点体现在以下几个方面:
(1)基于本体层次结构和向量空间模型,提出了一种用于服务语义匹配的扩展的余弦相似度度量方法
发现服务实体之间的相似性从而更好地实现协同服务已成为服务匹配研究的一个热点问题。对服务实体相似性进行度量的传统方法主要是基于实体交集进行的,这种基于变集的度量方法不能准确地捕获特定领域的实体相似性。在当前研究的基础上,基于本体层次结构和向量空间模型,提出了一种用于服务语义匹配的扩展的余弦相似度度量方法。该方法能够在语义层次上获取更加符合人类直观认识的不同服务间的相似度,为实现基于语义的服务匹配提供了一种可供参考的方法。通过与传统相似度度量方法的对比,实验结果证实了该方法具有较高的精确度。以认知心理学的理论研究为依据,通过将该方法的计算结果与被调查人群的心理评价进行对比,验证了本文所提方法与人们直观认识的符合程度。
(2)提出了一种基于语义距离的服务相似度度量方法
为了实现服务请求与服务或者异构服务之间的语义匹配,关键问题是要找到服务实体之间的语义相似度。服务的语义相似度与服务实体间的语义距离以及服务实体所包含的子集等信息有关,此外,语义距离与语义相似度之间也存在着密切的联系。针对目前在解决服务匹配过程中对服务实体语义相似度度量研究的不足,以信息论的观点为基础,结合本体的特点,提出了一种基于语义距离的服务相似度度量方法。该方法综合考虑了概念之间的继承关系以及概念在本体层次结构中所处的位置对相似度的影响,有助于理准确地模拟客观世界的原貌,计算出的相似度更加合理。另外,针对概念集合组成的服务如何进行语义相似度度量的问题进行了深入研究,提出了概念集合匹配过程中的最大语义相似度度量方法、最小语义相似度度量方法、平均语义相似度度量方法和加权语义相似度度量方法,论证了概念集合加权语义相似度度量方法的合理性。最后,通过与不同相似度度量方法的对比,验证了本文方法的有效性。
(3)提出了一种基于IOPE描述的服务功能匹配方法
在OWL-S服务匹配中,不仅要考虑服务非功能描述信息的匹配,如服务名称、服务描述等,还应该研究服务功能描述信息的匹配,如服务的输入、输出、前提条件和预期的效果等。针对目前在解决服务匹配过程中对服务功能信息匹配研究的不足,结合描述逻辑,提出了一种基于IOPE描述的服务功能匹配方法。首先,对服务输入、输出、前提条件和效果等功能参数分别进行语义相似度匹配,然后,再计算出服务功能匹配的加权全局相似度,从而实现了服务功能的语义匹配。通过对权重的按需设置,使得该方法具有较高的灵活性。该方法是在服务匹配过程中对服务功能信息匹配研究的一个有益的尝试。通过对本文的方法进行定性分析和定量评价,论证了该方法的可行性。
(4)提出了一种基于资源空间模型的服务相似度度量方法
通过对资源内容进行分类,资源空间模型是一个规范、存储、管理和定位网络资源的语义数据模型,它采用多维资源空间的方式组织资源,支持有效的资源管理。随着资源空间模型研究和应用的不断深入,基于资源空间模型的服务匹配成为一个值得研究的课题。基于资源空间模型的服务匹配的实质是不同资源空间模型之间的相似度度量。根据资源空间模型的特点,提出了一种基于资源空间模型的服务相似度度量方法。通过对坐标相似度、轴相似度和资源空间相似度的计算,从而实现了基于资源空间模型的相似度度量。实验结果证明本文给出的方法在解决资源空间模型的匹配问题上是可行的。
论文最后对研究工作进行了总结,提出了今后进一步的研究方向。本论文在基于语义的服务匹配方面所做的工作虽然具有一定的理论意义和潜在的实用价值,但是这些研究工作只足整个服务计算研究中的一小部分,作者将在现有的研究基础上进一步做深入的研究。
Service as an autonomous, open and platform-independent network-based component, it makes the distributed application systems with better reusability, flexibility and growth. As the foundations of modern service science, service computing has become a cross-discipline subject that covers the science and technology of bridging the gap between Business Services and IT (Information Technology) Services. An IT-enabled business service is typically characterized by two features: its service operation model and its service charge model. A service operation model defines how the service is to be discovered and delivered, including services modeling, services creation, services discovery, services composition, service delivery, services management, et, al; a service charge model specifies how the delivered service is to be charged.
Semantic Grid combines semantic Web with Grid computing technologies, and it is an extension of the current Grid technique, in which information and services are given well-defined meaning, better enabling computer and people to work in cooperation. Semantic Grid is a distributed, heterogeneous and open system, with a high degree of automation, which supports flexible collaboration and computation on a global scale. Semantic Grid makes resources be effectively sharing and efficiently processing.
Service discovery in Semantic Grid environment is a fundamental research issues in answering the questions of how a service requester finds the services needed to solve its particular problem and how a service provider makes potential service requesters aware of the services it can offer. Service discovery defines a process for locating service providers and retrieving service descriptions. The problem of service discovery arises through the heterogeneity, distribution and sharing of the resources/services proposed by different virtual communities in Semantic Grid. At the heart of the service discovery is the concept of service matching. The ultimate goal of service matching is finding the similarity between different services, The more similar the two services, the more matching between them. Vice versa, the less similar the two services, the less matching between them.
Service matching is a key role in the processing of service discovery and delivery. It can not provide satisfied service to users if we can not implement service matching strategy effectively. UDDI (Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration) is a public registry of published services, and it provides an efficient, flexible and extensible mechanism for service publication and discovery. However, it is a keywords-based matching strategy, and it can not provide semantic-based service matching. This, in majority of the cases, leads to low precision of the retrieved services. The reason might be that the query keywords are semantically similar but syntactically different from the terms in service descriptions. Another reason is that the query keywords might be syntactically equivalent but semantically different from the terms in the service description. Another problem with keyword-based service matching is that they cannot completely capture the semantics of users' queries, because they do not consider the relationship between the keywords semantically. One feasible solution for this problem is to use semantic-based service matching method. If we can solve service matching problems semantically, it will greatly improve the success rate of service matching and advance the extent of information sharing. Therefore, the research on semantic matching of services has important theoretical significance and a certain degree of practical value.
For realizing semantic-based service matching, a more ideal approach is to use the knowledge representation model with semantic expressing capability, such as ontology, resource space model, in the processing of service matching. Semantic matching mechanism allows a powerful and flexible service discovery process as it uses semantic service descriptions. Using semantics allows to reason on values which is not only based on type reasoning, it furthermore allows subsumption reasoning. This means that the service matching is very powerful as not only a service name matching is performed. Services which would have never been found with the "keywords" service matching methods can get discovered.
On the basis of the state of the art of service matching at home and abroad, integrating with the features of Semantic Grid, Semantic Web, and Web Ontology Language for Service (OWL-S), we do some research on service matching problem in Semantic Grid environment based on ontology and resource space model.
The major research works and contributions of the dissertation arc as follows:
(1) An extensible cosine similarity measure for service matching semantically based on ontology hierarchical structure and vector space model.
Finding similarity between service entities for realizing better cooperative service is an important issue in service matching domin. Entities being compared often are modeled as sets, with their similarity traditionally determined based on set intersection. Intersection-based measures do not accurately capture similarity between entities in certain domains. On the basis of the current research, integrating with ontology hierarchical structure and vector space model, we propose an extensible cosine similarity measure for service matching. This method can capture semantic similarity among services, and the captured semantic similarity is more in line with people's intuition. The method provides a valuable reference for realizing the semantic-based service matching. In addition, we provide experimental comparison of our measure against traditional similarity measures. The results verify the better accuracy of our method. According to the theoretical research results of cognitive psychology, we also report on a user study that evaluate how well our method matches human intuition through comparing the results of our method with the psychological evaluation of investigated crowds.
(2) A service similarity measure based on semantic distance.
In order to accomplish semantic matching between service requests and services, or semantic matching among heterogeneous services, the important problem is that discovering the semantic similarity between service entities. The semantic similarity of services not only relate to the semantic distance between service entities, but also subsets of service entities. Another, the semantic distance and the semantic similarity have a close relationship. In order to resolve the shortage of the semantic similarity of service entities in service matching, we propose a service similarity measure method based on semantic distance on the basis of the view of information theory and the feature of ontology. The method synthetically considers the affects of inheritance relationship among concepts, as well as the position of concepts in ontology hierarchy. The acquired similarity is more reasonable, and it can more accurately simulate the original appearance of the real world. In addition, we study the semantic similarity of concept collections, and propose the maximum semantic similarity, minimum semantic similarity, average semantic similarity and weighted semantic similarity of concept collections, and demonstrate the rationality of the weighted semantic similarity measure of concept collections. At last, we provide some experimental comparison of our measure against other similarity measures. The results show how well our measure usefulness and feasibility.
(3) An IOPE-based service functional matching method.
In the processing of OWL-S based service matching, it is not only consider the matching of non-functional information of service, such as service name, service description, but also consider the matching of functional information of service, e.g. service inputs, service outputs, service preconditions and service effects. On the lack of the current research on the functional information matching in the processing of service matching, and combining with the Description Logic (DL), we propose an IOPE-based service functional matching method. In the method, firstly, we execute semantic matching of inputs, outputs, preconditions and effects separately. And then, we compute weighted overall similarity of service functional matching. This method can realize semantic matching based on service functional information. Through setting the weight on-demand, it makes the service matching process has high degree of flexibility. This method is a useful attempt of service functional matching in the service matching domain. At last, the evaluation of the method is done using a qualitative and a quantitative analysis, and the feasibility of this method is discussed.
(4) A service similarity measure based on resource space model.
A Resource Space Model (RSM) is a semantic data model for specifying, storing, managing and locating Web resources by appropriately classifying the contents of resources. Through multi-dimensional resource spaces, users can efficiently and effectively organize and manage Web resources. With the research and development of RSM, service matching based on RSM becomes a fundamental and valuable issue. The essence of RSM-based service matching is that the similarity measure between different RSMs. On the basis of the RSM's features, we propose a RSM-based service similarity measure. Through computing the similarity of coordinates, axes and resource space separately, we fulfill the similarity measure of RSM. We evaluate our method on experimental data sets, and report empirically the strength of our approach.
Finally, the research works in the dissertation are summarized and the future works are presented. Although the research works of semantic-based service matching in this dissertation have some theoretical significance and potential practical value, the research works are only a small part of the whole service computing research. We will do further study on the basis of the current researches.
语义网格将语义Web为代表的语义技术和以网格计算为代表的体系架构技术结合起来,对信息和服务进行了较好的定义,可以更好地实现计算机与人的协作。语义网格作为一个分布式、异构的开放式系统,具有高度的自治性,用来提供灵活的协作和大规模的计算,为资源的有效共享和高效处理提供直接支持。
语义网格环境中的服务发现是一个重要的研究课题,它用来解决一个服务需求者如何发现解决特定问题的资源或服务,以及一个服务提供者如何使得服务需求者注意到他提供的服务。语义网格环境中的服务发现是在不同虚拟社区提供的异构的、分布的和共享的资源上进行的,服务发现的核心问题是服务匹配。服务匹配的最终目标是发现不同服务之间的相似性。两个服务越相似,则它们之间越匹配;反之,两个服务越不相似,则它们之间越不匹配。
服务匹配在服务发现及调度过程中具有举足轻重的作用,如果缺乏有效的服务匹配策略,就不能为用户提供满卷的服务。统一描述、发现和集成(UDDI)作为一个公共的服务注册中心,为服务的发布与发现提供了一种高效、灵活和可扩展的机制。但是,它只是基于关键字的匹配,这种匹配方式既不能区分语法不同但语义相同的信息,也不能区分语法相同但语义不同的信息,因此,很难提供基于语义的服务匹配。同时,基于关键字的匹配也导致了服务匹配的查准率较低,其中一个可能的原因是检索的关键字从服务描述上看只是语义相似而语法不同;另一个可能的原因是检索的关键字从服务描述上看只是语法等价而语义不同。并且,这类方法也不能完全获取用户检索的语义,因为它们没有考虑关键字之间的语义关联关系。对该问题的一种可行的解决方案是使用基于语义的服务匹配,如果能够从语义上解决服务匹配的问题,将会极大地提高服务匹配的成功率及信息共享的程度。因此,对服务语义匹配的研究具有重要的理论意义和一定的实用价值。
在服务匹配过程中,借助具有语义表述能力的知识表示模型,如本体及资源空间模型等,可以在一定程度上实现服务的语义匹配。语义匹配机制可以执行更加灵活的服务发现过程,允许在数值上进行推理而不仅仪是基于类型的推理。此外,他用语义还允许执行包含推理,这意味着服服务匹配过程不再是仪局限于服务名称的匹配。因此,执行服务的语义匹配可以发现基于关键字匹配方法不能发现的服务。
通过对国内外研究现状的分析,在已有研究工作的基础上,本论文结合语义网格、语义Web及Web服务本体语言OWL-S,基于本体和资源空间模型理论,对语义网格环境中的服务匹配进行了相关研究。
论文的主要研究工作和创新点体现在以下几个方面:
(1)基于本体层次结构和向量空间模型,提出了一种用于服务语义匹配的扩展的余弦相似度度量方法
发现服务实体之间的相似性从而更好地实现协同服务已成为服务匹配研究的一个热点问题。对服务实体相似性进行度量的传统方法主要是基于实体交集进行的,这种基于变集的度量方法不能准确地捕获特定领域的实体相似性。在当前研究的基础上,基于本体层次结构和向量空间模型,提出了一种用于服务语义匹配的扩展的余弦相似度度量方法。该方法能够在语义层次上获取更加符合人类直观认识的不同服务间的相似度,为实现基于语义的服务匹配提供了一种可供参考的方法。通过与传统相似度度量方法的对比,实验结果证实了该方法具有较高的精确度。以认知心理学的理论研究为依据,通过将该方法的计算结果与被调查人群的心理评价进行对比,验证了本文所提方法与人们直观认识的符合程度。
(2)提出了一种基于语义距离的服务相似度度量方法
为了实现服务请求与服务或者异构服务之间的语义匹配,关键问题是要找到服务实体之间的语义相似度。服务的语义相似度与服务实体间的语义距离以及服务实体所包含的子集等信息有关,此外,语义距离与语义相似度之间也存在着密切的联系。针对目前在解决服务匹配过程中对服务实体语义相似度度量研究的不足,以信息论的观点为基础,结合本体的特点,提出了一种基于语义距离的服务相似度度量方法。该方法综合考虑了概念之间的继承关系以及概念在本体层次结构中所处的位置对相似度的影响,有助于理准确地模拟客观世界的原貌,计算出的相似度更加合理。另外,针对概念集合组成的服务如何进行语义相似度度量的问题进行了深入研究,提出了概念集合匹配过程中的最大语义相似度度量方法、最小语义相似度度量方法、平均语义相似度度量方法和加权语义相似度度量方法,论证了概念集合加权语义相似度度量方法的合理性。最后,通过与不同相似度度量方法的对比,验证了本文方法的有效性。
(3)提出了一种基于IOPE描述的服务功能匹配方法
在OWL-S服务匹配中,不仅要考虑服务非功能描述信息的匹配,如服务名称、服务描述等,还应该研究服务功能描述信息的匹配,如服务的输入、输出、前提条件和预期的效果等。针对目前在解决服务匹配过程中对服务功能信息匹配研究的不足,结合描述逻辑,提出了一种基于IOPE描述的服务功能匹配方法。首先,对服务输入、输出、前提条件和效果等功能参数分别进行语义相似度匹配,然后,再计算出服务功能匹配的加权全局相似度,从而实现了服务功能的语义匹配。通过对权重的按需设置,使得该方法具有较高的灵活性。该方法是在服务匹配过程中对服务功能信息匹配研究的一个有益的尝试。通过对本文的方法进行定性分析和定量评价,论证了该方法的可行性。
(4)提出了一种基于资源空间模型的服务相似度度量方法
通过对资源内容进行分类,资源空间模型是一个规范、存储、管理和定位网络资源的语义数据模型,它采用多维资源空间的方式组织资源,支持有效的资源管理。随着资源空间模型研究和应用的不断深入,基于资源空间模型的服务匹配成为一个值得研究的课题。基于资源空间模型的服务匹配的实质是不同资源空间模型之间的相似度度量。根据资源空间模型的特点,提出了一种基于资源空间模型的服务相似度度量方法。通过对坐标相似度、轴相似度和资源空间相似度的计算,从而实现了基于资源空间模型的相似度度量。实验结果证明本文给出的方法在解决资源空间模型的匹配问题上是可行的。
论文最后对研究工作进行了总结,提出了今后进一步的研究方向。本论文在基于语义的服务匹配方面所做的工作虽然具有一定的理论意义和潜在的实用价值,但是这些研究工作只足整个服务计算研究中的一小部分,作者将在现有的研究基础上进一步做深入的研究。
Service as an autonomous, open and platform-independent network-based component, it makes the distributed application systems with better reusability, flexibility and growth. As the foundations of modern service science, service computing has become a cross-discipline subject that covers the science and technology of bridging the gap between Business Services and IT (Information Technology) Services. An IT-enabled business service is typically characterized by two features: its service operation model and its service charge model. A service operation model defines how the service is to be discovered and delivered, including services modeling, services creation, services discovery, services composition, service delivery, services management, et, al; a service charge model specifies how the delivered service is to be charged.
Semantic Grid combines semantic Web with Grid computing technologies, and it is an extension of the current Grid technique, in which information and services are given well-defined meaning, better enabling computer and people to work in cooperation. Semantic Grid is a distributed, heterogeneous and open system, with a high degree of automation, which supports flexible collaboration and computation on a global scale. Semantic Grid makes resources be effectively sharing and efficiently processing.
Service discovery in Semantic Grid environment is a fundamental research issues in answering the questions of how a service requester finds the services needed to solve its particular problem and how a service provider makes potential service requesters aware of the services it can offer. Service discovery defines a process for locating service providers and retrieving service descriptions. The problem of service discovery arises through the heterogeneity, distribution and sharing of the resources/services proposed by different virtual communities in Semantic Grid. At the heart of the service discovery is the concept of service matching. The ultimate goal of service matching is finding the similarity between different services, The more similar the two services, the more matching between them. Vice versa, the less similar the two services, the less matching between them.
Service matching is a key role in the processing of service discovery and delivery. It can not provide satisfied service to users if we can not implement service matching strategy effectively. UDDI (Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration) is a public registry of published services, and it provides an efficient, flexible and extensible mechanism for service publication and discovery. However, it is a keywords-based matching strategy, and it can not provide semantic-based service matching. This, in majority of the cases, leads to low precision of the retrieved services. The reason might be that the query keywords are semantically similar but syntactically different from the terms in service descriptions. Another reason is that the query keywords might be syntactically equivalent but semantically different from the terms in the service description. Another problem with keyword-based service matching is that they cannot completely capture the semantics of users' queries, because they do not consider the relationship between the keywords semantically. One feasible solution for this problem is to use semantic-based service matching method. If we can solve service matching problems semantically, it will greatly improve the success rate of service matching and advance the extent of information sharing. Therefore, the research on semantic matching of services has important theoretical significance and a certain degree of practical value.
For realizing semantic-based service matching, a more ideal approach is to use the knowledge representation model with semantic expressing capability, such as ontology, resource space model, in the processing of service matching. Semantic matching mechanism allows a powerful and flexible service discovery process as it uses semantic service descriptions. Using semantics allows to reason on values which is not only based on type reasoning, it furthermore allows subsumption reasoning. This means that the service matching is very powerful as not only a service name matching is performed. Services which would have never been found with the "keywords" service matching methods can get discovered.
On the basis of the state of the art of service matching at home and abroad, integrating with the features of Semantic Grid, Semantic Web, and Web Ontology Language for Service (OWL-S), we do some research on service matching problem in Semantic Grid environment based on ontology and resource space model.
The major research works and contributions of the dissertation arc as follows:
(1) An extensible cosine similarity measure for service matching semantically based on ontology hierarchical structure and vector space model.
Finding similarity between service entities for realizing better cooperative service is an important issue in service matching domin. Entities being compared often are modeled as sets, with their similarity traditionally determined based on set intersection. Intersection-based measures do not accurately capture similarity between entities in certain domains. On the basis of the current research, integrating with ontology hierarchical structure and vector space model, we propose an extensible cosine similarity measure for service matching. This method can capture semantic similarity among services, and the captured semantic similarity is more in line with people's intuition. The method provides a valuable reference for realizing the semantic-based service matching. In addition, we provide experimental comparison of our measure against traditional similarity measures. The results verify the better accuracy of our method. According to the theoretical research results of cognitive psychology, we also report on a user study that evaluate how well our method matches human intuition through comparing the results of our method with the psychological evaluation of investigated crowds.
(2) A service similarity measure based on semantic distance.
In order to accomplish semantic matching between service requests and services, or semantic matching among heterogeneous services, the important problem is that discovering the semantic similarity between service entities. The semantic similarity of services not only relate to the semantic distance between service entities, but also subsets of service entities. Another, the semantic distance and the semantic similarity have a close relationship. In order to resolve the shortage of the semantic similarity of service entities in service matching, we propose a service similarity measure method based on semantic distance on the basis of the view of information theory and the feature of ontology. The method synthetically considers the affects of inheritance relationship among concepts, as well as the position of concepts in ontology hierarchy. The acquired similarity is more reasonable, and it can more accurately simulate the original appearance of the real world. In addition, we study the semantic similarity of concept collections, and propose the maximum semantic similarity, minimum semantic similarity, average semantic similarity and weighted semantic similarity of concept collections, and demonstrate the rationality of the weighted semantic similarity measure of concept collections. At last, we provide some experimental comparison of our measure against other similarity measures. The results show how well our measure usefulness and feasibility.
(3) An IOPE-based service functional matching method.
In the processing of OWL-S based service matching, it is not only consider the matching of non-functional information of service, such as service name, service description, but also consider the matching of functional information of service, e.g. service inputs, service outputs, service preconditions and service effects. On the lack of the current research on the functional information matching in the processing of service matching, and combining with the Description Logic (DL), we propose an IOPE-based service functional matching method. In the method, firstly, we execute semantic matching of inputs, outputs, preconditions and effects separately. And then, we compute weighted overall similarity of service functional matching. This method can realize semantic matching based on service functional information. Through setting the weight on-demand, it makes the service matching process has high degree of flexibility. This method is a useful attempt of service functional matching in the service matching domain. At last, the evaluation of the method is done using a qualitative and a quantitative analysis, and the feasibility of this method is discussed.
(4) A service similarity measure based on resource space model.
A Resource Space Model (RSM) is a semantic data model for specifying, storing, managing and locating Web resources by appropriately classifying the contents of resources. Through multi-dimensional resource spaces, users can efficiently and effectively organize and manage Web resources. With the research and development of RSM, service matching based on RSM becomes a fundamental and valuable issue. The essence of RSM-based service matching is that the similarity measure between different RSMs. On the basis of the RSM's features, we propose a RSM-based service similarity measure. Through computing the similarity of coordinates, axes and resource space separately, we fulfill the similarity measure of RSM. We evaluate our method on experimental data sets, and report empirically the strength of our approach.
Finally, the research works in the dissertation are summarized and the future works are presented. Although the research works of semantic-based service matching in this dissertation have some theoretical significance and potential practical value, the research works are only a small part of the whole service computing research. We will do further study on the basis of the current researches.
引文
[1]J.Heflin,J.Hendler.A Portraint of the Semantic Web in Action.IEEE Intelligent Systems,2001,16(2):54-59.
[2]S.Decker,S.Melnik,F.Van Harmelen,D.Fensel,et al.The Semantic Web:The Roles of XML and RDF.IEEE Internet Computing,2000,4(5):63-73.
[3]D.Fensel,F.Van Harmelen,I.Horrocks,D.L.Patel-Schneider,et al.OIL:An Ontology Infrastructure for the Semantic Web.IEEE Intelligent System,2001,16(2):38-45.
[4]I.Horrocks,P.F.Patel-Schneider,F.Harmelen.Reviewing the design of DAML+OIL:An ontology language for the semantic Web.Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence,AAAI-2002,Edmonton,Alberta,Canada:AAAI Press,2002,792-797.
[5]S.Bechhofer,F.van Harmelen,J.Hendler,I.Horrocks,et al.OWL Web Ontology Language Reference.W3C Recommendation,2004.
[6]B.Cuenca-Grau,I.Horrocks,B.Motik,B.Parsia,et al.OWL 2:The next step for OWL.Journal of Web Semantics,2008,6(4):309-322.
[7]I.Foster.Internet Computing and the Emerging Grid.Nature Web Matters,2000.
[8]D.De Route,N.R.Jennings,N.R.Shadbolt.The Semantic Grid:Past,Present,and Future.Proceedings of the IEEE,2005,93(3):669-681.
[9]C.Goble.Putting Semantics into e-Science and Grids.First International Conference on e-Science and Grid Technologies,Melbourne,Australia,2005,5-8.
[10]C.A.Goble,D.De Route.The Semantic Grid:Building Bridges and Busting Myths.Proceedings of the 16th European Conference in Artificial Intelligence,2004,1129-1134.
[11]张良杰,张嘉,蔡弘.服务计算.北京:清华大学出版社,2007.
[12]J.Cardoso,J.Miller,J.Su,J.Pollock.Academic and Industrial Research:Do Their Approaches Differ in Adding Semantics to Web Services? Semantic Web Services and Web Process Composition,LNCS 3387,2005,14-21.
[13]K.Verma,K.Sivashanmugam,A.Sheth,A.Patil,et al.METEOR-S WSDI:A scalable infrastructure of registries for semantic publication and discovery of Web services.Journal of Information Technology and Management,2004,6(1):17-40.
[14]C.Goble,C.Wroe,R.Stevens.The myGrid project:services,architecture and demonstrator.Proceedings UK OST e-Science 2nd All Hands Meeting,2003,595-603.
[15]Web Service Modeling Ontology(WSMO).Available at:http://www.wsmo.org/.
[16]H.Zhuge.Resource Space Grid:Model,Method and Platform.Concurrency and Computation:Practice and Experience,2004,16(14):1385-1413.
[17]H.Zhuge.Resource Space Model,Its Design Method and Applications.Journal of Systems and Software,2004,72(1):71-81.
[18]H.Zhuge.Fuzzy Resource Space Model and Platform.Journal of Systems and Software,2004,73(3):389-396.
[19]H.Zhuge.Semantic Grid:Scientific Issues,Infrastructure,and Methodology.Communications of the ACM,2005,48(4):117-119.
[20]Z.Wu,S.Tang,H.Chen.DartGrid Ⅱ:A Semantic Grid Platform for ITS.IEEE Intelligent Systems,2005,20(3):12-15.
[21]H.Chen,Z.Wu.DartGrid:A Semantic Infrastructure for Building Database Grid Applications.Journal of Concurrency and Computation,2006,18(14):1811-1828.
[22](美)Robert J.Sternberg著,杨炳钧,陈燕,邹枝玲 译,黄希庭 校.认知心理学(第三版).北京:中国轻工业出版社,2006.
[23]T.Berners-Lee,J.Hendler,O.Lassila.The Semantic Web.Scientific American,2001,284(5):34-43.
[24]T.Berners-Lee.Semantic Web.XML2000 Conference,2000.
[25]M.Paolucci,K.Sycara.Autonomous Semantic Web Services.IEEE Onternet Computing,2003,7:34-41.
[26]S.Mcllraith,D.Martin,Bringing Semantics to Web Services.IEEE Intelligent Systems,2003,18(1):90-93.
[27]杨楠,弓丹志,李忺,孟小峰.Web社区发现技术综述.计算机研究与发展,2005,42(3):439-447.
[28]张尧学,方存好.主动服务——概念、结构与实现.北京:科学出版社,2005.
[29]S.A.McIkaith,T.C.Son,H.Zeng.Semantic Web Services.IEEE Intelligent Systems,Special Issue on the Semantic Web,2001,16(2):46-53.
[30]T.Berners-Lee.Why RDF model is different from the XML model,W3C Design Issues.1998.
[31]E.Hyvonen,P.Harjula,K.Viljanen.Representing metadata about web resources.Semantic Web Kick-Off in Finland Vision,Technologies,Research,and Application.Helsinki:HIIT Publications,2002,47-76.
[32]T.Berners-Lee.The Semantic Web-LCS Seminar.Technical Report,MIT:MIT LCS.2002.
[33]T.R.Gruber.A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications.Knowledge Acquisition,1993,11(4):519-529.
[34]G.L.Zuniga.Ontology:Its Transformation from Philosophy to Information Systems.Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems.Ogunquit,Maine,USA,2001,187-197.
[35]冯志勇,李文杰,李晓红.本体论工程及其应用.北京:清华大学出版社.2007.
[36]R.Neches,R.E.Fikes,T.R.Gruber,R.Patil.Enabling Technology for Knowledge Sharing.AI Magazine,1991,12(3):36-56.
[37]N.Guarino,P.Giarretta.Ontology and Knowledge Bases:Towards a Terminological Clarification.Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Building and Sharing Very Large-Scale Knowledge Bases.The ISO Press,1995,25-32.
[38]王英林,张申生.基于本体影射规则的软件集成重构研究.计算机学报,2001,24(7):776-783.
[39]A.Hotho,A.Maedche,S.Staab.Ontology-based Text Document Clustering.Proceedings of the Conference on Intelligent Information Systems,2002,48-54.
[40]M.A.Rodr(?)guez,M.J.Egenhofer.Determining Semantic Similarity among Entity Classes from Different Ontologies.IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering,2003,15(2):442-456.
[41]宋炜,张铭.语义网简明教程.北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
[42]G.van Heijst,A.T.Schreiber,B.J.Wielinga.Using Explicit Ontologies in KBS Development.International journal of Human Computer Studies.1997,46(2):183-292.
[43]N.Guarino.Formal Ontology and Information Systems.Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems,Trento,Italy,1998,3-15.
[44]M.Uschold.Knowledge Level Modeling:Concepts and terminology.The Knowledge Engineering Review,1998,13(1):5-29.
[45]D.Soergel.The Rise of Ontologies or the Reinvention of Classification.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1999,50(12):1119-1120.
[46]D.Fensel,I.Horrocks,F.van Harmelen,S.Decker,et al.OIL in a Nutshell.Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition,Modeling and Management.Germany:Springer-Verlag,2000,1-16.
[47]R.Karp,V.Chaudhri,J.Thomere.XOL:an XML-based Ontology Exchange Language.Version 0.4.http://www.ai.sri.com/～pkarp/xol,2002.
[48]A.J.Duineveld,R.Stoter,M.R.Weiden,et al.WonderTools A comparative study of ontological engineering tools.International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,2000,52(6):1111-1133.
[49]F.Baader,D.Calvanese,D.L.McGuinness,D.Nardi,et al.The description logic handbook:theory,implementation,and applications.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003.
[50IF.Baader,I.Horrocks,U.Sattler.Description Logics.In Frank van Harmelen,Vladimir Lifschitz,and Bruce Porter,editors,Handbook of Knowledge Representation.Elsevier,2007.
[51]I.Horrocks.Using an expressive description logic:FaCT or fiction? The 6th International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning,Trento,Italy,1998.
[52]V.Haarslev,R.Moller.RACER system description.Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning.Siena,Italy:Springer-Verlag,2001.
[53]D.Martin,M.Burstein,J.Hobbs,O.Lassila,et al.OWL-S:Semantic Markup for Web Services.http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/overview,2004.
[54]I.Foster.The Grid:A New Infrastructure for 21st Century Science.Physics Today,2002,55(2):42-47.
[55]I.Foster,C.Kesselman,J.M.Nick,S.Tuecke.Grid Services for Distributed System Integration.Computer,2002,35(6):43-81.
[56]吴朝晖,陈华钧.语义网格:模型、方法与应用,杭州:浙江大学出版社,2008.
[57]H.Zhuge.The Web Resource Space Model.Springer,2007.
[58]H.Zhuge,E.Yao,Y.Xing,J.Liu.Extended Normal Form Theory of Resource Space Model.Future Generation Computer Systems,2005,21(1):189-198.
[59]H.Zhuge,The Knowledge Grid.World Scientific,Singapore,2004.
[60]H.Zhuge.China's E-Science Knowledge Grid Environment.IEEE Intelligent Systems,2004,19(1):13-17.
[61]P.Shi.Automation Creation of Resource Space Model,System Implementation and Application:[Ph.D.Thesis].Chinese Academy of Sciences,2006.
[62]E.Yao.Operations,Normal Forms and Searching Complexity of Resource Space Model:[Ph.D.thesis].Chinese Academy of Sciences,2007.
[63]星芸鹏.资源空间模型的代数、演算及其概率模型:[博士学位论文].中国科学院研究生院博士学位论文,2008.
[64]H.Zhuge,Y.Xing,P.Shi.Resource space model,OWL and database:Mapping and integration.ACM Transactions on Internet Technology,2008,8(4),article 20.
[65]M.Paolucci,T.Kawamura,K.Sycara.Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities.Proceedings of International Semantic Web Conference,2002,333-347.
[66]A.Naumenko,S.Nikitin,V.Terziyan.Service matching in agent systems.Applied Intelligence,2006,223-237.
[67]N.F.Noy.Semantic Integration:A survey of ontology-based approaches.SIGMOD Record,2004,33(4):65-70.
[68]A.Budanitsky;G.Hirst.Evaluating wordnet-based measures of lexical semantic relatedness.Computational Linguistics,2006,32(1):13-47.
[69]P.Shvaiko,J.Euzenat.A survey of schema-based matching approaches.Journal on Data Semantics Ⅳ,2005,146-171.
[70]S.M.Falconer,N.F.Noy,M.A.Storey.Towards understanding the needs of cognitive support for ontology mapping.Ontology Matching Workshop,2006,25-36.
[71]Z.Huang,Y.Qiu.Measuring semantic similarity between resource spaces.Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Semantics,Knowledge,and Grid,2008,255-262.
[72]J.Euzenat,P.Valtchev.Similarity-based ontology alignment in OWL-lite.Proceedings of European Coordinating Committee for Artificial Intelligence,2004,333-337.
[73]J.Madhavan,P.Bernstein,A.Doan,A.Halevy.Corpus-based schema matching.Proceedings of 21st International Conference on Data Engineering,2005,57-68.
[74]S.Melnik,H.Garcia-Molina,E.Rahm.Similarity Flooding:A versatile graph matching algorithm and its application to schema matching.Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Data Engineering,2002,117-128.
[75]裘江南,仲秋雁,崔彦.服务匹配模型中综合语义匹配方法研究.大连理工大学学报,2007,47(6):914-919.
[76]何娟,高志强,陆青健,瞿裕忠.基于词汇相似度的元素级本体匹配.计算机工程,2006,32(16):185-187.
[77]彭晖,史忠植,邱莉榕,常亮.基于本体概念相似度的语义Web服务匹配算法.计算机工程,2008,34(15):51-53.
[78]F.Giunchiglia,M.Yatskevich,P.Shvaiko.Semantic matching:Algorithms and implementation.Journal on Data Semantics Ⅸ.Springer Berlin/Heidelberg,2007,1-38.
[79]刘群,李素建.基于《知网》的词汇语义相似度计算.第三届汉语词汇语义学研讨会,台北,2002,59-76.
[80]吕庆聪,曹奇英.一种普适计算环境下基于语义的服务匹配算法.计算机应用,2008,28(6):1578-1581.
[81]L.Li,1.Horrocks.A software framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology.International Journal of Electronic Commerce,2004,8(4):39-60.
[82]J.Euzenat,P.Shvaiko.Ontology Matching.Springer-Verlag,Berlin/Heidelberg,2007.
[83]黄希庭.心理学导论(第二版).北京:人民教育出版社,2007.
[84]A.Parasuraman,V.A.Zeithaml,L.L.Berry.A conceptuall model of service quality and its implications for future research.Journal of Marketing,1985,49:41-50.
[85](美)A.Anastasi,S.Urbina著,缪小春,竺培梁 译.心理测验.杭州:浙江教育出版社,2001.
[86]K.Heinonen.Reconceptualizing customer perceived value:the value of time and place.Managing Service Quality,2004,14(2/3):205-215.
[87]R.N.Bolton,J.H.Drew.A Iongitudeinal analysis of the impact of service changes on customer attitudes.Journal of Marketing,1991,55(1):1-9.
[88]C.Gronroos.Service Management and Marketing:A Customer Relationship Management Approach(2nd ed.).WILEY,2000.
[89]F.Giunchiglia,M.Yatskevich.Element level semantic matching.Proceedings of Meaning Coordination and Negotiation Workshop in conjunction with International Semantic Web Conference,2004,37-48.
[90]N.F.Noy.Semantic integration:a survey of ontology-based approaches.ACM SIGMOD Record,2004,33(4):65-70.
[91]S.A.Ludwig,S.M.S.Reyhani.Semantic approach to service discovery in a Grid environrnent.Web Semantics:Science,Services and Agents on the World Wide Web,2006,4(1):1-13.
[92]G.Salton,M.J.McGill.Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval.McGraw-Hill,New York,1986.
[93]G.Salton,C.Buckley.Term Weighting Approaches in Automatic Text Retrieval.Information Processing and Management,1988,24(5):513-523.
[94]A.Tverski.Features of similarity.Psychological Review,1977,84(2):327-352.
[95]P.Mitra,G.Wiederhold.An ontology-composition algebra.Technical report,Stanford University,Stanford,California,USA,2001.
[96]童名文,杨宗凯,张景中.面向服务的内容适配框架研究.计算机应用研究,2008,25(3):749-751.
[97]F.Cerbah,J.Euzenat.Traceability between models and texts through terminology.Data and Knowledge Engineering,2001,38(1):31-43.
[98]吴健,吴朝晖,李莹,邓水光.基于本体论和词汇语义相似度的Web服务发现.计算机学报,2005,28(4):2054-2062.
[99]R.Rada,H.Mili,E.Bicknell,M.Blettner.Development and application of a metric on semantic nets.IEEE Transactions on Systems,Man,and Cybernetics,1989,19(1):17-30.
[100]F.Giunchiglia,P.Shvaiko,M.Yatskevich.Discovering Missing Background Knowledge in Ontology Matching.Proceedings of 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence,2006,382-386.
[101]史忠植,蒋运承,张海俊,董明楷.基于描述逻辑的主体服务匹配.计算机学报,2004,27(5):50-60.
[102]J.Ge;Y.Qiu;S.Yin;z.Chen.Semantic Similarity Measure Based on Ontology Hierarchical Tree.Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Wireless Communications,Networking and Mobile Computing,2008.
[103]S.Scott,S.Matwin.Text classification using WordNet hypernyms.Proceedings of the Use of WordNet in Natural Language Processing Systems,1998,38-44.
[104]O.Nasraoui,H.Frigui,A.Joshi,R.Krishnapuram.Mining Web Access Logs Using Relational Competitive Fuzzy Clustering.Proceedings of the Eight International Fuzzy Systems Association World Congress,1999.
[105]G.A.Miller.WordNet:a lexical database for English.Communications of the ACM,1995, 38(11):39-41.
[106]韩经纶,董军.顾客感知服务质量评价与管理.天津:南开大学出版社,2006.
[107]吴翊,李永乐,胡庆军.应用数理统计.长沙:国防科技大学出版社,2003.
[108]J.Ge;Y.Qiu;Z.Chert.Cooperative Recommendation System Based on Ontology Construction.Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Grid and Cooperative Computing,2008,691-694.
[109]梁敏,郭新涛,阮备军,朱扬勇.X—Dist——一个柔性语义距离函数.计算机研究与发展,2004,41(10):1728-1736.
[110]徐德智,王怀民.基于本体的概念间语义相似度计算方法研究.计算机工程与应用,2007,43(8):154-156.
[111]杨哲.基于启发式规则的本体概念语义相似度匹配.计算机应用,2007,27(12):2919-2921.
[112]A.Bramantoro,S.Krishnaswamy,M.Indrawan.A Semantic Distance Measure for Matching Web Services.Web Information Systems Engineering Workshops,2005:217-226.
[113]葛继科,邱玉辉.一种基于本体概念语义距离的服务相似度度量方法,计算机科学.(已录用,拟定于2009年第6期刊出)
[114]S.Li,J.Zhang,X.Huang,S.Bai.Semantic Computation in Chinese Question-Answering System.Journal of Computer Science and Technology,2002,17(6):933-939.
[115]杨立,左春,王裕国.基于语义距离的K-最近邻分类方法.软件学报,2005,16(12):2054-2062.
[116]P.Bernstein,S.Melnik,M.Petropoulos,C.Quix.Industrial-strength schema matching.SIGMOD Record,2004,33(4):38-43.
[117](美)Thomas M.Cover,Joy A.Thomas著,阮吉寿,张华 译.信息论基础(第2版).北京:机械工业出版社,2008.
[118]F.Giunchiglia,P.Shvaiko,M.Yatskevich.S-Match:an algorithm and an implementation of semantic matching.Proceedings of 1st European Semantic Web Symposium,2004,61-75
[119]M.Lesk.Automatic sense disambiguation using machine readable dictionaries:how to tell a pine cone from an ice cream cone.Proceedings of 5th Annual International Conference on Systems Documentation,1986,24-26
[120]A.Madche,V.Zacharias.Clustering ontology-based metadata in the semantic web.Proceedings of 6th European Conference on Principles and Practice of Knowledge Discovery in Databases,2002,348-360
[121]E.Agirre,G.Rigau.Word sense disambiguation using conceptual density.Proceedings of the 16th conference on Computational Linguistic,1996,16-22.
[122]E.Agirre,G.Rigau.A proposal for word sense disambiguation using conceptual distance. International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing,1995.
[123]朱礼军.万维网环境下基于领域知识的信息资源管理模式研究:[博士学位论文].中国农业大学博士学位论文,2004.
[124]R.Guo,J.Le,X.Xia.Capability Matching of Web Services Based on OWL-S.Proceedings of 16th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications,2005:653-657.
[125]S.T.Selvi,R.A.Balachandar,K.Vijayakumar,N.Mohanram,et al.Semantic Discovery of Grid Services Using Functionality based Matchmaking Algorithm.Proceedings of the 2006IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence,2006,170-173.
[126]石莲,孙吉贵.描述逻辑.计算机科学,2006,33(1):194-198.
[127]R.Baeza-Yates,B.R ibeiro-Neto.Modem Information Retricval.Addison-Weslcy Publishing Company,1999.
[128]K.E.Haouam,F.Marir.A Dynamic Weight Assignment Approach for Index Terms.Journal of Computer Science,2006,2(3):261-268.
[129]R.M.Valdovinos,J.S.Sanchez,R.Barandela.Dynamic and static weighting in classifier fusion.Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3523,2005,59-66.
[130]D.L.Medin,M.M.Schaffer.Context theory of classification learning.Psychological review,1978,85:207-238.
[131]V.I.Levenshtein.Binary Codes Capable of Correcting Deletions,Insertions and Reversals.Soviet Physics Doklady,1966,10(8):707-710.
[132]D.Gale,L.Shapley.College admissions and the stability of marriage.American Mathematical Monthly,1962,69(1):9-14.
[133]K.Zhang,R.Statman,D.Shasha.On the editing distance between unordered labeled trees.Information Processing Letters,1992,42(3):133-139.
[134]P.Bille.A survey on tree edit distance and related problems.Theoretical Computer Science,2005,337:217-239.
[135]K.C.Tai.The Tree-to-Tree Correction Problem.Journal of the ACM,1979,26(3):422-433.
[136]W.Chen.New algorithm for ordered tree-to-tree correction problem.Journal of Algorithms,2001,40:135-158.
[137]W.Hu,Y.Zhao,D.Li,et al.Falcon-AO:Results for OAEI 2007.http://www.dit.unitn.it/～p2p/OM-2007/5-o-H u.OAEI.2007.pdf.
[2]S.Decker,S.Melnik,F.Van Harmelen,D.Fensel,et al.The Semantic Web:The Roles of XML and RDF.IEEE Internet Computing,2000,4(5):63-73.
[3]D.Fensel,F.Van Harmelen,I.Horrocks,D.L.Patel-Schneider,et al.OIL:An Ontology Infrastructure for the Semantic Web.IEEE Intelligent System,2001,16(2):38-45.
[4]I.Horrocks,P.F.Patel-Schneider,F.Harmelen.Reviewing the design of DAML+OIL:An ontology language for the semantic Web.Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence,AAAI-2002,Edmonton,Alberta,Canada:AAAI Press,2002,792-797.
[5]S.Bechhofer,F.van Harmelen,J.Hendler,I.Horrocks,et al.OWL Web Ontology Language Reference.W3C Recommendation,2004.
[6]B.Cuenca-Grau,I.Horrocks,B.Motik,B.Parsia,et al.OWL 2:The next step for OWL.Journal of Web Semantics,2008,6(4):309-322.
[7]I.Foster.Internet Computing and the Emerging Grid.Nature Web Matters,2000.
[8]D.De Route,N.R.Jennings,N.R.Shadbolt.The Semantic Grid:Past,Present,and Future.Proceedings of the IEEE,2005,93(3):669-681.
[9]C.Goble.Putting Semantics into e-Science and Grids.First International Conference on e-Science and Grid Technologies,Melbourne,Australia,2005,5-8.
[10]C.A.Goble,D.De Route.The Semantic Grid:Building Bridges and Busting Myths.Proceedings of the 16th European Conference in Artificial Intelligence,2004,1129-1134.
[11]张良杰,张嘉,蔡弘.服务计算.北京:清华大学出版社,2007.
[12]J.Cardoso,J.Miller,J.Su,J.Pollock.Academic and Industrial Research:Do Their Approaches Differ in Adding Semantics to Web Services? Semantic Web Services and Web Process Composition,LNCS 3387,2005,14-21.
[13]K.Verma,K.Sivashanmugam,A.Sheth,A.Patil,et al.METEOR-S WSDI:A scalable infrastructure of registries for semantic publication and discovery of Web services.Journal of Information Technology and Management,2004,6(1):17-40.
[14]C.Goble,C.Wroe,R.Stevens.The myGrid project:services,architecture and demonstrator.Proceedings UK OST e-Science 2nd All Hands Meeting,2003,595-603.
[15]Web Service Modeling Ontology(WSMO).Available at:http://www.wsmo.org/.
[16]H.Zhuge.Resource Space Grid:Model,Method and Platform.Concurrency and Computation:Practice and Experience,2004,16(14):1385-1413.
[17]H.Zhuge.Resource Space Model,Its Design Method and Applications.Journal of Systems and Software,2004,72(1):71-81.
[18]H.Zhuge.Fuzzy Resource Space Model and Platform.Journal of Systems and Software,2004,73(3):389-396.
[19]H.Zhuge.Semantic Grid:Scientific Issues,Infrastructure,and Methodology.Communications of the ACM,2005,48(4):117-119.
[20]Z.Wu,S.Tang,H.Chen.DartGrid Ⅱ:A Semantic Grid Platform for ITS.IEEE Intelligent Systems,2005,20(3):12-15.
[21]H.Chen,Z.Wu.DartGrid:A Semantic Infrastructure for Building Database Grid Applications.Journal of Concurrency and Computation,2006,18(14):1811-1828.
[22](美)Robert J.Sternberg著,杨炳钧,陈燕,邹枝玲 译,黄希庭 校.认知心理学(第三版).北京:中国轻工业出版社,2006.
[23]T.Berners-Lee,J.Hendler,O.Lassila.The Semantic Web.Scientific American,2001,284(5):34-43.
[24]T.Berners-Lee.Semantic Web.XML2000 Conference,2000.
[25]M.Paolucci,K.Sycara.Autonomous Semantic Web Services.IEEE Onternet Computing,2003,7:34-41.
[26]S.Mcllraith,D.Martin,Bringing Semantics to Web Services.IEEE Intelligent Systems,2003,18(1):90-93.
[27]杨楠,弓丹志,李忺,孟小峰.Web社区发现技术综述.计算机研究与发展,2005,42(3):439-447.
[28]张尧学,方存好.主动服务——概念、结构与实现.北京:科学出版社,2005.
[29]S.A.McIkaith,T.C.Son,H.Zeng.Semantic Web Services.IEEE Intelligent Systems,Special Issue on the Semantic Web,2001,16(2):46-53.
[30]T.Berners-Lee.Why RDF model is different from the XML model,W3C Design Issues.1998.
[31]E.Hyvonen,P.Harjula,K.Viljanen.Representing metadata about web resources.Semantic Web Kick-Off in Finland Vision,Technologies,Research,and Application.Helsinki:HIIT Publications,2002,47-76.
[32]T.Berners-Lee.The Semantic Web-LCS Seminar.Technical Report,MIT:MIT LCS.2002.
[33]T.R.Gruber.A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications.Knowledge Acquisition,1993,11(4):519-529.
[34]G.L.Zuniga.Ontology:Its Transformation from Philosophy to Information Systems.Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems.Ogunquit,Maine,USA,2001,187-197.
[35]冯志勇,李文杰,李晓红.本体论工程及其应用.北京:清华大学出版社.2007.
[36]R.Neches,R.E.Fikes,T.R.Gruber,R.Patil.Enabling Technology for Knowledge Sharing.AI Magazine,1991,12(3):36-56.
[37]N.Guarino,P.Giarretta.Ontology and Knowledge Bases:Towards a Terminological Clarification.Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Building and Sharing Very Large-Scale Knowledge Bases.The ISO Press,1995,25-32.
[38]王英林,张申生.基于本体影射规则的软件集成重构研究.计算机学报,2001,24(7):776-783.
[39]A.Hotho,A.Maedche,S.Staab.Ontology-based Text Document Clustering.Proceedings of the Conference on Intelligent Information Systems,2002,48-54.
[40]M.A.Rodr(?)guez,M.J.Egenhofer.Determining Semantic Similarity among Entity Classes from Different Ontologies.IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering,2003,15(2):442-456.
[41]宋炜,张铭.语义网简明教程.北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
[42]G.van Heijst,A.T.Schreiber,B.J.Wielinga.Using Explicit Ontologies in KBS Development.International journal of Human Computer Studies.1997,46(2):183-292.
[43]N.Guarino.Formal Ontology and Information Systems.Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems,Trento,Italy,1998,3-15.
[44]M.Uschold.Knowledge Level Modeling:Concepts and terminology.The Knowledge Engineering Review,1998,13(1):5-29.
[45]D.Soergel.The Rise of Ontologies or the Reinvention of Classification.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1999,50(12):1119-1120.
[46]D.Fensel,I.Horrocks,F.van Harmelen,S.Decker,et al.OIL in a Nutshell.Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition,Modeling and Management.Germany:Springer-Verlag,2000,1-16.
[47]R.Karp,V.Chaudhri,J.Thomere.XOL:an XML-based Ontology Exchange Language.Version 0.4.http://www.ai.sri.com/～pkarp/xol,2002.
[48]A.J.Duineveld,R.Stoter,M.R.Weiden,et al.WonderTools A comparative study of ontological engineering tools.International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,2000,52(6):1111-1133.
[49]F.Baader,D.Calvanese,D.L.McGuinness,D.Nardi,et al.The description logic handbook:theory,implementation,and applications.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003.
[50IF.Baader,I.Horrocks,U.Sattler.Description Logics.In Frank van Harmelen,Vladimir Lifschitz,and Bruce Porter,editors,Handbook of Knowledge Representation.Elsevier,2007.
[51]I.Horrocks.Using an expressive description logic:FaCT or fiction? The 6th International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning,Trento,Italy,1998.
[52]V.Haarslev,R.Moller.RACER system description.Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning.Siena,Italy:Springer-Verlag,2001.
[53]D.Martin,M.Burstein,J.Hobbs,O.Lassila,et al.OWL-S:Semantic Markup for Web Services.http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/overview,2004.
[54]I.Foster.The Grid:A New Infrastructure for 21st Century Science.Physics Today,2002,55(2):42-47.
[55]I.Foster,C.Kesselman,J.M.Nick,S.Tuecke.Grid Services for Distributed System Integration.Computer,2002,35(6):43-81.
[56]吴朝晖,陈华钧.语义网格:模型、方法与应用,杭州:浙江大学出版社,2008.
[57]H.Zhuge.The Web Resource Space Model.Springer,2007.
[58]H.Zhuge,E.Yao,Y.Xing,J.Liu.Extended Normal Form Theory of Resource Space Model.Future Generation Computer Systems,2005,21(1):189-198.
[59]H.Zhuge,The Knowledge Grid.World Scientific,Singapore,2004.
[60]H.Zhuge.China's E-Science Knowledge Grid Environment.IEEE Intelligent Systems,2004,19(1):13-17.
[61]P.Shi.Automation Creation of Resource Space Model,System Implementation and Application:[Ph.D.Thesis].Chinese Academy of Sciences,2006.
[62]E.Yao.Operations,Normal Forms and Searching Complexity of Resource Space Model:[Ph.D.thesis].Chinese Academy of Sciences,2007.
[63]星芸鹏.资源空间模型的代数、演算及其概率模型:[博士学位论文].中国科学院研究生院博士学位论文,2008.
[64]H.Zhuge,Y.Xing,P.Shi.Resource space model,OWL and database:Mapping and integration.ACM Transactions on Internet Technology,2008,8(4),article 20.
[65]M.Paolucci,T.Kawamura,K.Sycara.Semantic Matching of Web Services Capabilities.Proceedings of International Semantic Web Conference,2002,333-347.
[66]A.Naumenko,S.Nikitin,V.Terziyan.Service matching in agent systems.Applied Intelligence,2006,223-237.
[67]N.F.Noy.Semantic Integration:A survey of ontology-based approaches.SIGMOD Record,2004,33(4):65-70.
[68]A.Budanitsky;G.Hirst.Evaluating wordnet-based measures of lexical semantic relatedness.Computational Linguistics,2006,32(1):13-47.
[69]P.Shvaiko,J.Euzenat.A survey of schema-based matching approaches.Journal on Data Semantics Ⅳ,2005,146-171.
[70]S.M.Falconer,N.F.Noy,M.A.Storey.Towards understanding the needs of cognitive support for ontology mapping.Ontology Matching Workshop,2006,25-36.
[71]Z.Huang,Y.Qiu.Measuring semantic similarity between resource spaces.Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Semantics,Knowledge,and Grid,2008,255-262.
[72]J.Euzenat,P.Valtchev.Similarity-based ontology alignment in OWL-lite.Proceedings of European Coordinating Committee for Artificial Intelligence,2004,333-337.
[73]J.Madhavan,P.Bernstein,A.Doan,A.Halevy.Corpus-based schema matching.Proceedings of 21st International Conference on Data Engineering,2005,57-68.
[74]S.Melnik,H.Garcia-Molina,E.Rahm.Similarity Flooding:A versatile graph matching algorithm and its application to schema matching.Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Data Engineering,2002,117-128.
[75]裘江南,仲秋雁,崔彦.服务匹配模型中综合语义匹配方法研究.大连理工大学学报,2007,47(6):914-919.
[76]何娟,高志强,陆青健,瞿裕忠.基于词汇相似度的元素级本体匹配.计算机工程,2006,32(16):185-187.
[77]彭晖,史忠植,邱莉榕,常亮.基于本体概念相似度的语义Web服务匹配算法.计算机工程,2008,34(15):51-53.
[78]F.Giunchiglia,M.Yatskevich,P.Shvaiko.Semantic matching:Algorithms and implementation.Journal on Data Semantics Ⅸ.Springer Berlin/Heidelberg,2007,1-38.
[79]刘群,李素建.基于《知网》的词汇语义相似度计算.第三届汉语词汇语义学研讨会,台北,2002,59-76.
[80]吕庆聪,曹奇英.一种普适计算环境下基于语义的服务匹配算法.计算机应用,2008,28(6):1578-1581.
[81]L.Li,1.Horrocks.A software framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology.International Journal of Electronic Commerce,2004,8(4):39-60.
[82]J.Euzenat,P.Shvaiko.Ontology Matching.Springer-Verlag,Berlin/Heidelberg,2007.
[83]黄希庭.心理学导论(第二版).北京:人民教育出版社,2007.
[84]A.Parasuraman,V.A.Zeithaml,L.L.Berry.A conceptuall model of service quality and its implications for future research.Journal of Marketing,1985,49:41-50.
[85](美)A.Anastasi,S.Urbina著,缪小春,竺培梁 译.心理测验.杭州:浙江教育出版社,2001.
[86]K.Heinonen.Reconceptualizing customer perceived value:the value of time and place.Managing Service Quality,2004,14(2/3):205-215.
[87]R.N.Bolton,J.H.Drew.A Iongitudeinal analysis of the impact of service changes on customer attitudes.Journal of Marketing,1991,55(1):1-9.
[88]C.Gronroos.Service Management and Marketing:A Customer Relationship Management Approach(2nd ed.).WILEY,2000.
[89]F.Giunchiglia,M.Yatskevich.Element level semantic matching.Proceedings of Meaning Coordination and Negotiation Workshop in conjunction with International Semantic Web Conference,2004,37-48.
[90]N.F.Noy.Semantic integration:a survey of ontology-based approaches.ACM SIGMOD Record,2004,33(4):65-70.
[91]S.A.Ludwig,S.M.S.Reyhani.Semantic approach to service discovery in a Grid environrnent.Web Semantics:Science,Services and Agents on the World Wide Web,2006,4(1):1-13.
[92]G.Salton,M.J.McGill.Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval.McGraw-Hill,New York,1986.
[93]G.Salton,C.Buckley.Term Weighting Approaches in Automatic Text Retrieval.Information Processing and Management,1988,24(5):513-523.
[94]A.Tverski.Features of similarity.Psychological Review,1977,84(2):327-352.
[95]P.Mitra,G.Wiederhold.An ontology-composition algebra.Technical report,Stanford University,Stanford,California,USA,2001.
[96]童名文,杨宗凯,张景中.面向服务的内容适配框架研究.计算机应用研究,2008,25(3):749-751.
[97]F.Cerbah,J.Euzenat.Traceability between models and texts through terminology.Data and Knowledge Engineering,2001,38(1):31-43.
[98]吴健,吴朝晖,李莹,邓水光.基于本体论和词汇语义相似度的Web服务发现.计算机学报,2005,28(4):2054-2062.
[99]R.Rada,H.Mili,E.Bicknell,M.Blettner.Development and application of a metric on semantic nets.IEEE Transactions on Systems,Man,and Cybernetics,1989,19(1):17-30.
[100]F.Giunchiglia,P.Shvaiko,M.Yatskevich.Discovering Missing Background Knowledge in Ontology Matching.Proceedings of 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence,2006,382-386.
[101]史忠植,蒋运承,张海俊,董明楷.基于描述逻辑的主体服务匹配.计算机学报,2004,27(5):50-60.
[102]J.Ge;Y.Qiu;S.Yin;z.Chen.Semantic Similarity Measure Based on Ontology Hierarchical Tree.Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Wireless Communications,Networking and Mobile Computing,2008.
[103]S.Scott,S.Matwin.Text classification using WordNet hypernyms.Proceedings of the Use of WordNet in Natural Language Processing Systems,1998,38-44.
[104]O.Nasraoui,H.Frigui,A.Joshi,R.Krishnapuram.Mining Web Access Logs Using Relational Competitive Fuzzy Clustering.Proceedings of the Eight International Fuzzy Systems Association World Congress,1999.
[105]G.A.Miller.WordNet:a lexical database for English.Communications of the ACM,1995, 38(11):39-41.
[106]韩经纶,董军.顾客感知服务质量评价与管理.天津:南开大学出版社,2006.
[107]吴翊,李永乐,胡庆军.应用数理统计.长沙:国防科技大学出版社,2003.
[108]J.Ge;Y.Qiu;Z.Chert.Cooperative Recommendation System Based on Ontology Construction.Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Grid and Cooperative Computing,2008,691-694.
[109]梁敏,郭新涛,阮备军,朱扬勇.X—Dist——一个柔性语义距离函数.计算机研究与发展,2004,41(10):1728-1736.
[110]徐德智,王怀民.基于本体的概念间语义相似度计算方法研究.计算机工程与应用,2007,43(8):154-156.
[111]杨哲.基于启发式规则的本体概念语义相似度匹配.计算机应用,2007,27(12):2919-2921.
[112]A.Bramantoro,S.Krishnaswamy,M.Indrawan.A Semantic Distance Measure for Matching Web Services.Web Information Systems Engineering Workshops,2005:217-226.
[113]葛继科,邱玉辉.一种基于本体概念语义距离的服务相似度度量方法,计算机科学.(已录用,拟定于2009年第6期刊出)
[114]S.Li,J.Zhang,X.Huang,S.Bai.Semantic Computation in Chinese Question-Answering System.Journal of Computer Science and Technology,2002,17(6):933-939.
[115]杨立,左春,王裕国.基于语义距离的K-最近邻分类方法.软件学报,2005,16(12):2054-2062.
[116]P.Bernstein,S.Melnik,M.Petropoulos,C.Quix.Industrial-strength schema matching.SIGMOD Record,2004,33(4):38-43.
[117](美)Thomas M.Cover,Joy A.Thomas著,阮吉寿,张华 译.信息论基础(第2版).北京:机械工业出版社,2008.
[118]F.Giunchiglia,P.Shvaiko,M.Yatskevich.S-Match:an algorithm and an implementation of semantic matching.Proceedings of 1st European Semantic Web Symposium,2004,61-75
[119]M.Lesk.Automatic sense disambiguation using machine readable dictionaries:how to tell a pine cone from an ice cream cone.Proceedings of 5th Annual International Conference on Systems Documentation,1986,24-26
[120]A.Madche,V.Zacharias.Clustering ontology-based metadata in the semantic web.Proceedings of 6th European Conference on Principles and Practice of Knowledge Discovery in Databases,2002,348-360
[121]E.Agirre,G.Rigau.Word sense disambiguation using conceptual density.Proceedings of the 16th conference on Computational Linguistic,1996,16-22.
[122]E.Agirre,G.Rigau.A proposal for word sense disambiguation using conceptual distance. International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing,1995.
[123]朱礼军.万维网环境下基于领域知识的信息资源管理模式研究:[博士学位论文].中国农业大学博士学位论文,2004.
[124]R.Guo,J.Le,X.Xia.Capability Matching of Web Services Based on OWL-S.Proceedings of 16th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications,2005:653-657.
[125]S.T.Selvi,R.A.Balachandar,K.Vijayakumar,N.Mohanram,et al.Semantic Discovery of Grid Services Using Functionality based Matchmaking Algorithm.Proceedings of the 2006IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence,2006,170-173.
[126]石莲,孙吉贵.描述逻辑.计算机科学,2006,33(1):194-198.
[127]R.Baeza-Yates,B.R ibeiro-Neto.Modem Information Retricval.Addison-Weslcy Publishing Company,1999.
[128]K.E.Haouam,F.Marir.A Dynamic Weight Assignment Approach for Index Terms.Journal of Computer Science,2006,2(3):261-268.
[129]R.M.Valdovinos,J.S.Sanchez,R.Barandela.Dynamic and static weighting in classifier fusion.Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3523,2005,59-66.
[130]D.L.Medin,M.M.Schaffer.Context theory of classification learning.Psychological review,1978,85:207-238.
[131]V.I.Levenshtein.Binary Codes Capable of Correcting Deletions,Insertions and Reversals.Soviet Physics Doklady,1966,10(8):707-710.
[132]D.Gale,L.Shapley.College admissions and the stability of marriage.American Mathematical Monthly,1962,69(1):9-14.
[133]K.Zhang,R.Statman,D.Shasha.On the editing distance between unordered labeled trees.Information Processing Letters,1992,42(3):133-139.
[134]P.Bille.A survey on tree edit distance and related problems.Theoretical Computer Science,2005,337:217-239.
[135]K.C.Tai.The Tree-to-Tree Correction Problem.Journal of the ACM,1979,26(3):422-433.
[136]W.Chen.New algorithm for ordered tree-to-tree correction problem.Journal of Algorithms,2001,40:135-158.
[137]W.Hu,Y.Zhao,D.Li,et al.Falcon-AO:Results for OAEI 2007.http://www.dit.unitn.it/～p2p/OM-2007/5-o-H u.OAEI.2007.pdf.