1. The document presents an approach called communication fingerprints to enable efficient service discovery by preselecting compatible services using abstract representations of service interactions. 2. Compatible services are identified by matching their communication fingerprints, which are generated by abstracting the services' terminating behavior, interaction behavior, and counts of interactions into boolean formulas. 3. An evaluation of the approach on an industrial case study found that applying communication fingerprints reduced verification time by 40-98% compared to state space verification alone, demonstrating significant speed gains.

1. Service discoveryusing communication fingerprints Karsten Wolf Olivia Oanea Jan Sürmeli

2. Service discovery R 2 given: requester service R task: find compatibleservice P service model

3. Service discovery given: requester service R task: find compatibleservice P repository R P pick 3

4. Service discovery given: requester service R task: find compatibleservice P verify P+R R P 4 ✓ pick ✗

5. Service discovery given: requester service R task: find compatibleservice P verify P+R R weak termination P ✓ pick 5 ✗

6. Service discovery given: requester service R task: find compatibleservice P verify P+R R P 6 ✓ pick ✗

7. Lossless preselection 7 initial situation: many services to verify to verify

8. Lossless preselection 8 initial situation: many services to verify idea: preselect a subset to verify to verify

9. Lossless preselection 9 initial situation: many services to verify idea: preselect a subset to verify requirement: no loss of compatible services ✓ to verify

10. Service discovery with communication fingerprints P verify P+R R 10 ✓ pick ✗

11. Service discovery with communication fingerprints communication fingerprint P verify P + P+R R pick 11 ✓ ✗

12. Service discovery with communication fingerprints P verify P + P+R R R R 12 ✓ pick ✗

13. Service discovery with communication fingerprints match P verify P P R + P+R R R R ✓ pick 13 ✗

14. Service discovery with communication fingerprints match P verify P P R + P+R R R R 14 ✓ ? pick ✗ ✗

15. Service discovery with communication fingerprints match P verify P P R + P+R R R R 15 ✓ ? pick ✗ ✗

16. Service discovery with communication fingerprints communication fingerprints match P verify P P R + P+R R 1 R R 16 ✓ ? pick ✗ ✗

17. Service discovery with communication fingerprints communication fingerprints matching match P verify P P R + P+R R 2 R R 17 ✓ ? pick ✗ ✗

18. Service discovery with communication fingerprints communication fingerprints matching computation match P verify P P R + P+R R 3 R R 18 ✓ ? pick ✗ ✗

19. Service discovery with communication fingerprints communication fingerprints matching computation case study match P verify P P R + P+R R 4 R R 19 ✓ ? pick ✗ ✗

20. Communication fingerprints P abstraction 1 P 20

21. Communication fingerprints 21 1

22. Communication fingerprints 22 abstraction steps: 1

23. ac ad abac abad ababac ababad abababac abababad ababababac ababababad … Communication fingerprints 23 abstraction steps: 1 terminatingbehavior 1

24. Communication fingerprints 24 abstraction steps: 1 terminatingbehavior 2 interactionbehavior ?document !reject ?document !accept ?document !feedback ?document !reject ?document !feedback ?document !accept … 1

25. Communication fingerprints 25 abstraction steps: 1 terminatingbehavior 3 countingvectors 2 interactionbehavior document = 1, reject = 1 document = 1, accept = 1 document = 2, feedback = 1, reject = 1 document = 3, feedback = 2, reject = 1 … 1

26. Communication fingerprints 26 abstraction steps: 1 terminatingbehavior 3 countingvectors 2 interactionbehavior 4 booleanformula 1 (reject = 1) ∨ (accept = 1) ∧ (document – feedback = 1)

27. Fingerprint matching semi-decide compatibility 27 2 P abstraction P R matching ✗ ? R abstraction

28. Fingerprint matching 2 P R 28

29. Fingerprint matching (reject = 1) ∨ (accept = 1) ∧ (document – feedback = 1) 2 P R 29

30. Fingerprint matching P R 30 (reject = 1) ∨ (accept = 1) ∧ (document – feedback = 1) 2 (reject + accept = 1) ∧ (document – feedback = 0)

31. Fingerprint matching 2 P R composite fingerprint 31

32. Fingerprint matching (reject = 1) ∨ (accept = 1) ∧ (document – feedback = 1) ∧ (reject + accept = 1) ∧ (document – feedback = 0) 2 P R composite fingerprint 32

33. Fingerprint matching 2 P R decoder systemsoflin. inequalities composite fingerprint 33

34. Fingerprint matching reject = 1 document – feedback = 1 reject + accept = 1 document – feedback = 0 2 P R decoder systemsoflin. inequalities composite fingerprint 34 accept = 1 document – feedback = 1 reject + accept = 1 document – feedback = 0

35. Fingerprint matching 2 ✗ P R decoder Feasabilitychecker ? systemsoflin. inequalities composite fingerprint 35

36. Fingerprint matching reject = 1 document – feedback = 1 reject + accept = 1 document – feedback = 0 ✗ 2 ✗ P R decoder Feasabilitychecker ? systemsoflin. inequalities composite fingerprint 36 accept = 1 document – feedback = 1 reject + accept = 1 document – feedback = 0 ✗

37. Fingerprint matching ✗ 2 ✗ P R decoder Feasabilitychecker ? systemsoflin. inequalities composite fingerprint 37

38. service-technology.org/tools Yasmina Fingerprint matching 2 ✗ P R decoder Feasabilitychecker ? systemsoflin. inequalities composite fingerprint 38

39. Linda Fingerprint computation (sketch) service-technology.org/tools petrinet structuretheory (integer) linear programming 3 P P 39

40. Case study howwecameupwithservices: 4 industrial bP models 40

41. Case study howwecameupwithservices: compile 4 petri net models industrial bP models 41

42. Case study howwecameupwithservices: compile decompose 4 petri net models open net models industrial bP models 42

43. Case study howwecameupwithservices: cases: (FEASIBLE)composites of services compile decompose 4 petri net models open net models industrial bP models 43

44. Case study 1st run: statespaceverificationonly 2nd run: applying communication fingerprints 44 4

45. Case study 1st run: statespaceverificationonly 2nd run: applying communication fingerprints 45 4

46. Case study 1st run: statespaceverificationonly 2nd run: applying communication fingerprints 46 4

47. Case study incompatibility detectionin the 2nd run 47 4

48. Conclusion fingerprint matching semi-decides compatibility ➟ lossless partner preselection 48

49. Conclusion fingerprint matching semi-decides compatibility ➟ lossless partner preselection 49 fingerprint Computation once per service ➟ minimal overhead

50. Conclusion fingerprint matching semi-decides compatibility ➟ lossless partner preselection 50 case study time reduction 40 – 98% ➟ significant speed gain fingerprint Computation once per service ➟ minimal overhead

51. Conclusion fingerprint matching semi-decides compatibility ➟ lossless partner preselection 51 case study time reduction 40 – 98% ➟ significant speed gain tool support service-technology.org/tools service-technology.org/live fingerprint Computation once per service ➟ minimal overhead

52. Conclusion fingerprint matching semi-decides compatibility ➟ lossless partner preselection 52 case study time reduction 40 – 98% ➟ significant speed gain tool support service-technology.org/tools service-technology.org/live fingerprint Computation once per service ➟ minimal overhead Thankyou!