this is a paper review on integration of IRS-II and WSPAB

1. Course Title: Distributed System
An integration of IRS-II(Internet Reasoning Service) on Web Service Personal Address Book
(WSPAB) for Classification and selection of web service
by:
Name:.......................................ID
MUBARIK NEJA ..........GSR/6929/10
Mahlet Awel ....................GSR/5293/10
Submitted to: - Dr. Ayalew Belay(PhD)
Monday, December 25, 2017

2. Addis Ababa University Computer science department Page 1
1. Introduction
Web Services are changing the way applications communicate with each other on the Web. They
promise to integrate business operations, reduce the time and cost of Web application
development and maintenance as well as promote reuse of code over the World Wide Web.
Figure 1 Web service usage scenario
From the figure 1 there are three phases; Publish, Find, and Bind; and three entities: the service
requester, which invokes services; the service provider which responds to requests; and the
registry where services can be published or advertised are linked.[1] The Semantic Web is a
vision of a Web of meaningful contents and services, which can be interpreted by computer
programs . It can also be seen as a vast source of information, which can be modeled with the
purpose of sharing and reusing knowledge. It will be able to do more accurate searches of the
information and the services they need from the users and it enabling interoperability of Web
Services through the identification (and mapping) of semantically similar concepts. The Three
main approaches have been driving the development of Semantic Web Ser-vice frameworks:
IRS-II , OWL-S and WSMF. OWL-S is an agent -oriented approach to SWS, WSMF (Web
Service modeling framework) is a business-oriented approach to SWS,IRS-II (Internet
Reasoning Service) is a knowledge-based approach to SWS, which evolved from research on
reusable knowledge components. [1]
2. Problems
Discovery and selection of Web Services have become a real challenging because of the large
number of Web Services that are advertised over public and private registries ,the approach they
use and the various users requirements on capabilities of the web services.[3].

3. Addis Ababa University Computer science department Page 2
Selection of a web service based on user requirements is an effortful and time consuming task.
But, because of there are many approaches and web service types that are available in the web
service registry, we can integrate the best features from them and makes them users attractive.
From the perspective of our integration of IRS-II (Internet Reasoning Service) and WSPAB
(Web Service Personal Address Book) is we went to solve the following problems:
 The WSPAB approach by itself is not solve or give the functionality of semantic web
service and it needs some other semantic approach combined with it to give the user
specific filtered information and additional Quality of service(QoS).
 IRS-II has no personal address book (detail of user information) to give its functionality to
users through web services.
3. Proposed Methodology
We propose a method of integration on WSPAB and IRS-II approaches to solve the above two
problems. WSPAB (Web Service Personal Address Book) is an approach to defining a complete
solution for facilitating the task of finding the most relevant web service. This includes two sub
tasks, discovering and selecting web services[2]. and the Internet Reasoning Service IRS-II is a
Semantic Web Services framework, which allows applications to semantically describe and
execute Web services based on which distinguishes between users. The following categories of
components are specified means of an appropriate system:
 Domain models. These describe the domain of an application and where users from(e.g.
Academic, a factory, medical ... etc).
 Task models. These provide a generic description of the task to be solved, specifying the
input and output types, the goal to be achieved and applicable.
 Problem Solving Methods (PSMs). These provide abstract, implementation-independent
descriptions of reasoning processes which can be applied to solve tasks in a specific
domain.
 Bridges. These specify mappings between the different model components within an
application.

4. Addis Ababa University Computer science department Page 3
The main components of the IRS-II architecture are the IRS-II Server, the IRS-II Publisher and
the IRS-II Client. The IRS-II server holds descriptions of Semantic Web. IRS-II has a special
purpose mapping mechanism to ground competence specifications to specific Web services. The
IRS-II Publisher plays two roles in the IRS-II architecture. Firstly, it links Web services to their
semantic descriptions within the IRS-II server. Secondly, the publisher automatically generates a
wrapper which turns the code into a Web service. A key feature of IRS-II is that Web service
invocation is capability driven. It supports this by providing a task centric invocation
mechanism. An IRS-II user simply asks for a task to be achieved and the IRS-II broker locates an
appropriate PSM and then invokes the corresponding Web service. Developers can interact with
IRS-II through the IRS-II browser, which facilitates navigation of knowledge models registered
in IRS-II as well as the editing of service descriptions, the publishing and the invocation of
individual services. Application programs can be integrated with IRS-II by using the Java API.
These programs can then combine tasks that can be achieved within an application scenario.[1]
The reason why we are going to choose the IRS from the others approaches of semantic web
services is it has the following features:
1. It automatically transforms programming code into a web service, by automatically
creating the appropriate wrappers.
2. Builds on knowledge modeling research on reusable components for knowledge-based
systems [4], and as a result, its architecture explicitly separates task specifications (the
problems which need to be solved), from the method specifications (ways to solve
problems).
3. IRS-II services are web service compatible.
The WSPAB accomplishes the automatic selection of a service by filtering web services
according to certain aspects of QoS and certain user requirements; then classifying these services
using the formal concept analysis (FCA) approach, enabling users to easily select their needed
service, identify its potential substitutes and keep trace of them either for future use, or to be
shared with others.

5. Addis Ababa University Computer science department Page 4
WSPAB in Action
Analysis of web services set: the set of web services is analyzed so to extract the URIs
(endpoints) of web services and stored in a new set.
Filtration of web services: all of the web services specified by their URIs are filtered
according to the filtration criterion.
Extraction of operation signatures: the service URIs listed in the last produced set are
used to obtain the service descriptions represented as WSDL files.
Identification of pertinent services: a comparison is carried out between the service
signatures and a user given signature of a potential pertinent operation.
Sorting of signatures: the signatures are sorted according to the number of input
parameters in each operation.
FCA-Classification and service lattice construction: the service lattice is constructed with
the help of a tool for formal concept analysis, called Galicia (Galois Lattice Interactive
Constructor).[5]
4. Problem Solved
The integration of WSPAB and IRS-II can solve the limitation of WSPAB by adding the features
of giving users specific information based on the personal address books data and the IRS-II use
the users address information to deliver user specific data.
5. Importance of Solution
The IRS-II approach has concentrated efforts in delivering an infrastructure that users can easily
use from the stage where they have some service code available, to the semantic markup and
publishing of this code, to the invocation of this code through task achievement. Because
services are considered atomic in IRS-II, there is no semantic description of composed services,
although a PSM can embody a control flow for subtasks. Also, a selection of services is
performed for finding which PSMs can solve the task requested. IRS-II has strong user and
application integration support and WSPAB has a detailed users specific personated information.

6. Addis Ababa University Computer science department Page 5
Reference
1. Approaches to Semantic Web Services: An Overview and Comparisons Liliana Cabral
1
, John Domingue
1
, Enrico
Motta
1
, Terry Payne
2
and Farshad Hakimpour
1
2. WSPAB: A Tool for Automatic Classification & Selection of Web Services Using Formal Concept Analysis
Zeina Azmeh, Marianne Huchard, Chouki Tibermacine
3. IRS-II: A Framework and Infrastructure for Semantic Web Services Enrico Motta1, John Domingue1, Liliana Cabral1, and
Mauro Gaspari2
4. A Knowledge Acquisition Language for Propose and Revise Systems. Marcus, S. and McDermott, J. (1989).
SALT: Journal of Artificial Intelligence, 39(1), pp. 1-37. 10.
5. an open platform for lattices. In A. d. M. B. Ganter, editor, Using Conceptual Structures: Contributions to
ICCS’03, P. Valtchev, D. Grosser, C. Roume, and M. R. Hacene. GALICIA: pages 241–254, Aachen (DE), 2003.
Shaker Verlag.
6. Structured Development of Problem Solving Methods. Fensel, D. and Motta, E. (2001). IEEE Transactions on Knowledge
and Data Engineering, 13(6), pp. 913-932.
7. A Knowledge Acquisition Language for Propose and Revise Systems. Marcus, S. and McDermott, J. (1989). SALT:
Journal of Artificial Intelligence, 39(1), pp. 1-37. 10.
8. Reusable Components for Knowledge Modelling. Motta E. (1999). IOS Press, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
9. Web Services: Principles and Technology. M. P. Papazoglou. Prentice Hall, 2008.