Download - CiteSeerX

sti.innsbruck.at

Download - CiteSeerX

DERI INNSBRUCK

Leopold-Franzens

Universität Innsbruck


DERI – Digital Enterprise Research Institute

A Research Plan for DERI Innsbruck:

Moving from software to serviceware

and from syntax to semantics

Jos de Bruijn,

Alice Carpentier,

Ying Ding,

Dieter Fensel,

Martin Hepp,

Stijn Heymans,

Holger Lausen,

Birgit Leiter,

Christian Mayer,

Melanie Plattner,

Thomas Strang,

Michal Zaremba

DERI Galway

National University of Ireland

Galway

Ireland

www.deri.ie

DERI Innsbruck

University of Innsbruck

Technikerstrasse 21a

Innsbruck

Austria

www.deri.at

DERI Korea

267 Deokil Bldg (Saltlux),

Daechi-dong, Gangnam-gu,

Seoul 135-848

Korea

www.deri-korea.org

DERI Stanford

Stanford University

Serra Mall

Stanford

USA

www.deri.us

September 20, 2006


Abstract. A large research body needs a structure to facilitate the potential

strength implicitly present in its size. This report is about releasing the full

potential that DERI Innsbruck has in this respect. We derive objectives from the

overall vision of DERI and align them with researchers and research projects

through the means of research cluster.


1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 6

2. SURVEY.................................................................................................................................................... 8

2.1. OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................................ 8

2.2. CLUSTERS..........................................................................................................................................14

2.3. PROJECTS ..........................................................................................................................................15

2.4. RESEARCH BODY...............................................................................................................................17

2.4.1. Student researchers...................................................................................................................17

2.4.2. Junior researchers ....................................................................................................................17

2.4.3. Senior researchers.....................................................................................................................24

3. REASONABLE SEMANTIC WEB SERVICES CLUSTER (RSWS) ...............................................25

3.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION....................................................................................................................25

3.2. OBJECTIVES.......................................................................................................................................27

3.2.1. Discovery ...................................................................................................................................27

3.2.2. Choreography............................................................................................................................29

3.2.3 Formal Languages.....................................................................................................................32

3.2.4 Reasoning...................................................................................................................................38

3.3. PROJECTS ..........................................................................................................................................42

3.3.1. Infrawebs...................................................................................................................................42

3.3.2. Knowledge Web.........................................................................................................................44

3.3.3. RW²............................................................................................................................................45

3.3.4. Salero.........................................................................................................................................47

3.3.5. Sekt ............................................................................................................................................48

3.3.6. SemNetMan...............................................................................................................................49

3.3.7. SenSE ........................................................................................................................................50

3.4. STAFF.................................................................................................................................................51

3.4.1. Student Researchers..................................................................................................................52

3.4.2. Junior Researchers ...................................................................................................................52

3.4.2.1. Darko Anicic..................................................................................................................................... 53

3.4.2.2. Jos de Bruijn..................................................................................................................................... 56

3.4.2.3. Dimitrij Denissenko.......................................................................................................................... 63

3.4.2.4. Cristina Feier.................................................................................................................................... 64

3.4.2.5. Uwe Keller ........................................................................................................................................ 68

3.4.2.6. Holger Lausen................................................................................................................................... 73

3.4.2.7. Ruzica Piskac.................................................................................................................................... 78

3.4.2.8. Richard Pöttler................................................................................................................................. 80

3.4.2.9. James Scicluna.................................................................................................................................. 81

3.4.2.10. Alexander Wahler .......................................................................................................................... 85

3.4.3. Senior Researchers....................................................................................................................87

3.4.3.1. Stijn Heymans................................................................................................................................... 87

4. SEMANTICS IN BUSINESS INFORMATION SYSTEMS CLUSTER (SEBIS).............................92

4.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION....................................................................................................................92

4.2. OBJECTIVES.......................................................................................................................................94

4.2.1. Ontologies..................................................................................................................................94

4.3. PROJECTS ..........................................................................................................................................99

4.3.1. DIP.............................................................................................................................................99

4.3.2. EASAIER ................................................................................................................................101

4.3.3. EastWeb...................................................................................................................................102

4.3.4. EnIRaf.....................................................................................................................................103

4.3.5. etPlanner .................................................................................................................................104

4.3.6. MUSING .................................................................................................................................105

4.3.7. myOntology..............................................................................................................................106

4.3.8. OnTourism ..............................................................................................................................108

3


4.3.9. SUPER Martin .............................................................................................................................110

4.4. STAFF...............................................................................................................................................112

4.4.1. Student Researchers................................................................................................................112

4.4.2. Junior Researchers .................................................................................................................112

4.4.2.1. Tobias Bürger................................................................................................................................. 113

4.4.2.2. Jan Henke ....................................................................................................................................... 116

4.4.2.4. Dumitru Roman ............................................................................................................................. 117

4.4.2.5. Francois Scharffe............................................................................................................................ 122

4.4.2.6. Katharina Siorpaes ........................................................................................................................ 125

4.4.2.7. Michael Stollberg ........................................................................................................................... 126

4.4.3. Senior Researchers..................................................................................................................131

4.4.3.1. Ying Ding ........................................................................................................................................ 131

4.4.3.2. Martin Hepp ................................................................................................................................... 137

5. SEMANTIC EXECUTION ENVIRONMENT CLUSTER (SEE)....................................................144

5.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................................144

5.2. OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................................................147

5.2.1. Applications.............................................................................................................................147

5.2.2. Developer tools ........................................................................................................................149

5.2.3. Mediation.................................................................................................................................153

5.2.4. Execution management ..........................................................................................................156

5.3. PROJECTS ........................................................................................................................................159

5.3.1. Adaptive Service Grid..............................................................................................................159

5.3.3. SEEMP....................................................................................................................................160

5.3.4. SemanticGov............................................................................................................................161

5.3.5 SemBiz......................................................................................................................................162

5.3.6. SUPER Michal .............................................................................................................................163

5.3.7. TSC ..........................................................................................................................................165

5.4. STAFF...............................................................................................................................................167

5.4.1. Student Researchers................................................................................................................167

5.4.2. Junior Researchers .................................................................................................................167

5.4.2.1. Emilia Cimpian............................................................................................................................... 168

5.4.2.2. Graham Hench ............................................................................................................................... 171

5.4.2.3. Zhou Jingtao................................................................................................................................... 173

5.4.2.4. Mick Kerrigan ................................................................................................................................ 180

5.4.2.5. Adrian Mocan................................................................................................................................. 185

5.4.2.6. Omair Shafiq .................................................................................................................................. 190

5.4.2.7. Adina Sirbu..................................................................................................................................... 196

5.4.2.8. Zhixian Yan .................................................................................................................................... 198

5.4.3. Senior Researchers..................................................................................................................199

5.4.3.1. Michal Zaremba ............................................................................................................................. 199

6. UBIQUITOUS SERVICES CLUSTER (UBISERV)..........................................................................206

6.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................................206

6.2. OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................................................207

6.2.1. Adaptation ...............................................................................................................................207

6.2.2. Grounding ...............................................................................................................................209

6.2.3. Storage & Communication .....................................................................................................210

6.3. PROJECTS ........................................................................................................................................215

6.3.1. GRISINO.................................................................................................................................215

6.3.2. SWING ....................................................................................................................................217

6.3.3. TripCom...................................................................................................................................218

6.4. STAFF...............................................................................................................................................220

6.4.1. Student Researchers................................................................................................................220

6.4.2. Junior Researchers .................................................................................................................220

6.4.2.1. Jacek Kopecky................................................................................................................................ 220

6.4.2.2. Reto Krummenacher...................................................................................................................... 223

6.4.2.3. Ioan Toma....................................................................................................................................... 228

4


6.4.3. Senior Researcher ...................................................................................................................236

6.4.3.1. Michael Jäger ................................................................................................................................. 236

6.4.3.2. Axel Polleres ................................................................................................................................... 236

6.4.3.3. Thomas Strang ............................................................................................................................... 238

7. BEYOND RESEARCH: TEACHING, BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, AND GENERAL

MANGEMENT..........................................................................................................................................246

7.1 TEACHING ........................................................................................................................................246

7.2 BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................251

7.2.1. General Description ................................................................................................................251

7.2.2. Projects ....................................................................................................................................252

7.2.2.1. DERI BusinessDevelopment ....................................................................................................................... 253

7.3. CENTRAL MANAGEMENT UNIT ......................................................................................................255

7.3.1. DERI Exchange .............................................................................................................................255

7.3.2. DERI Sustainability .........................................................................................................................255

7.3.3. Knowledge Web Network ........................................................................................................256

REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................................257

APPENDIX................................................................................................................................................262

5


1. Introduction

In general, a research institutes based on external funding has three major challenges to

meet:

• It needs to provide excellent research results to justify its existence.

• It needs to provide excellent education for its researchers to mature its outcomes.

• It needs to provide excellent performance in research projects to ensure its

funding.

Unfortunately, these three dimensions may define conflicting requirements. In

consequence it is essential to align them properly. We have chosen a top-down approach

where an overall vision and mission is used to align these dimensions properly. In [1], the

vision of serviceware as the next natural step beyond hardware and software is

introduced: “After four decades of rapid advances in computing, we are embarking on the

greatest leap forward in computing that includes revolutionary changes at all levels of

computing from the hardware through the middleware and infrastructure to applications

and more importantly in intelligence. This paper outlines a comprehensive framework

that ingtegrates two complimentary and revolutionary technical advances, Service-

Oriented Architectures (SOA) and Semantic Web, into a single computing architecture,

that we call Semantically Enabled Service-Oriented Architecture (SESA). While SOA is

widely acknowledged for its potential to revolutionize the world of computing, that

success depends on resolving two fundamental challenges that SOA does not address,

integration, and search or mediation. In a services-oriented world, billions of services

must be discovered and selected based on requirements, then orchestrated and adapted or

integrated. SOA depends on but does not address either search or integration. The

contribution of this paper is to provide the semantics-based solution to search and

integration that will enable the SOA revolution. The paper provides a vision of the future

enabled by our framework that places computing and programming at the services layer

and places the real goal of computing, problem solving, in the hands of end users.” Based

on this SESA vision, a top down approach for organizing the research body in Innsbruck

is developed. This implies the following:

• Objectives are derived from the mission to realize the SESA vision.

• Projects must contribute to one or several of the components of SESA, probably

on a 80% rule, i.e., 20% can be about different or related topics. This reflects the

need for opportunisms since we are cooperating in this process with funding

agencies and external partners that both have their own agendas.

• Researcher and their research topics follow from sub aspects of some of the

objectives. Again, this should hold for at least 80% of these topics.

Finally, DERI Innsbruck has clusters as a means to decompose research, the large

number of researchers, and project responsibility. Each cluster is responsible for a

number of objectives, a number of researchers, and a number of projects.

6


In the following section, namely Section 2, we provide a general summary on goal,

project, and research staff distribution over clusters. The subsequent sections, Section 3

to Section 6, introduce the four research clusters of DERI. Each of these sections is

divided into the following subsections, general description, objectives, projects and staff.

Section 7 adds further activities of DERI beyond its focus on research. These activities

are related to teaching, business development, and general management.

7


2. Survey

We will survey objectives, clusters, projects and research staff

2.1. Objectives

A objective usually combines a research area, i.e., a major research challenges in SW(S)

and SESA together with an implementation effort related to it. 1 A objective typically has

a corresponding architectural component, and vice versa. A tight coupling between

objectives and architectural components is desirable. The WSMX platform [2] provides a

SESA environment which facilitates prototype development. The major outcome of each

of the objectives consists of peer-reviewed conference and journal publications. The

prototypes associated with the papers are the major outcome of the architectural

components which are associated with the research components.

We distinguish 4 different types of elements of an overall SESA where each element type

is composed by some sub functionalities:

• The problem-solving layer which consists of (1) Ontologies, (2) Applications

(e.g., e-tourism, e-government) and (3) Developer tools (GUI tools such as

ontology/web service description engineering tools; generic developer tools such

as language APIs, parsers/serializers, converters, etc.).

• The broker layer which consists of (4) Discovery, (5) Adaptation (including

selection and negotiation), (6) Composition (web service composition techniques

such as planning), (7) Choreography, (8) Mediation ((a) Ontology mediation:

techniques for combining Ontologies and for overcoming differences between

Ontologies; (b) Process mediation: overcoming differences in message ordering,

etc.), (9) Grounding, (10) Fault Handling (Transactionality, Compensation,

etc.), and (11) Monitoring.

• The base layer that is providing the exchange formalism used by the architecture,

i.e., (12) Formal languages (static ontology and behavioral, i.e.,

capability/choreography/orchestration languages, connection between higherlevel

descriptions, e.g., WSML), (13) Reasoning (techniques for reasoning over

formal descriptions; LP, DL, FOL, behavioral languages, etc.) and (14) Storage

and Communication.

• Finally, vertical services such as (15) Execution management and (16) Security

(authentication/authorization, encryption, trust/certification).

1 Existing working group such as WSML will become a working group of a certain objective.

8


The following image presents the current status of WSMX architecture.

Hereby, the overall roadmap is as following:

Figure 2.1.1 SESA Architecture

• Currently, DERI Innsbruck focuses on the following essential components to

boot-strap the overall approach: (1) Ontologies, (2) Applications, (3) Developer

tools, (4) Discovery, (5) Adaptation, (6) Composition, (7) Choreography, (8)

Mediation, (9) Grounding, (12) Formal languages, (13) Reasoning, (14)

Storage and Communication, (15) Execution management.

• There are no concrete plans yet for (10) Fault Handling, (11) Monitoring, and

(16) Security. Some of this work may be provided by external DERI cooperation

partners.

The following table summarizes these objectives and their leaders.

Objectives

No Objective Cluster Leader

1 Ontologies

In this research topic, we want to advance the state of

the art in the creation and the use of ontologies for the

automation of business processes. Ontologies in our

understanding are community contracts about a

representation of a domain of discourse. Representation

in here includes (1) formal parts that can be used for

machine reasoning, and (2) informal parts like natural

language descriptions and multimedia elements that

help humans establish, maintain, and renew consensus

about the meaning of concepts. Our research output will

SEBIS Martin Hepp

9


e mainly (1) actual ontologies and ontology

frameworks for typical application domains, (2)

methodologies for the semi-automatic creation of

ontologies from informal specifications and standards,

(3) process models and infrastructure for collaborative

ontology engineering, (4) showcase of ontology usage

in typical enterprise scenarios, and (5) economic models

for ontology creation and usage.

2 Applications

Mission of the application research topic is to develop a

common understanding of the various technologies

intended to facilitate the use of other services of SESA.

This working group will develop (1) use case scenarios

that help validate the real-world fitness of SESA

components and (2) domain-specific implementations

which will be used for testing of SESA services.

3 Developer tools

The mission of the developer tools working group is to

produce high quality tools related to Semantic Web

Services that can be used by users of all competency

levels. To this end we provide a large number of tools

that can be used by users with different skill sets.

Members of the working group are working on tools for

managing WSMO ontologies, web services, goals and

mediators, for creating mappings between WSMO

ontologies for runtime mediation, for executing WSDL

web services and managing WSMO execution

environments.

4 Discovery

The goal of the discovery working group is to define a

methodology that allows to model services at a suitable

level of granularity. Furthermore we will provide

different discovery implementations that are compatible

with WSMO, WSML and specifically WSMX. The

discovery group will use the languages developed in the

formal languages group and make use of the reasoner

support provided by the reasoner group.

5 Adaptation

After discovering a set of potentially useful services, the

Semantic Execution Environment (SEE) needs to check

whether the services can actually fulfill the user's

SEE,

(SEBIS) 2

SEE

RSWS,

(SEE) 2

UbiServ

Michal

Zaremba

Mick Kerrigan

Holger Lausen,

Mick Kerrigan

Ioan Toma

2 Goals are distributed over clusters. Some goals may require the cooperation of several clusters. In this

case there is a lead cluster and an assisting cluster (indicated by brackets).

10


concrete goal and under what conditions. Those that

cannot fulfill the goal are removed from the list of

discovered services. This step is required as it is not

feasible for a service to provide an exhaustive semantic

description. Giving the Amazon bookstore service as an

example, it is not feasible for Amazon to update the

semantic description of their Web service every time a

new book is available or the status of an existing book is

changed, therefore we must check that Amazon actually

currently has a copy of the book requested by the user,

and at an acceptable price. The process of checking

whether and under what conditions a service can fulfill a

concrete Goal is part of what we call negotiation in SEE,

and it also encompasses so-called filtering.

6 Composition

Develop methods to do web service composition (WSC),

starting from web service descriptions at various levels

of abstraction, specifically, the functional level and

process level components of WSMO. Implement such

methods as tools in the relevant contexts, in particular

WSMX. Find potential applications of WSC technology,

model them using WSMO/WSML, and run case studies

with the developed tools, ultimately resulting in

technology export.

7 Choreography

The Choreography part of SEE is meant to provide a

process language which should allow for formal

specifications of interactions and processes between the

service modeling and clients, define reasoning tasks that

should be performed using this language, and implement

an engine to support the execution of interactions, as

well as to support reasoning in this language.

8 Mediation

Mediation in SESA aims at providing flexible mediation

service at both data and process level. The min focus on

Data Mediation provides automatic transformation of

data used in conversation between various parties based

on ontology mappings. Additionally, techniques for

ontology mappings optimization and global schema

generation are investigated, together with their potential

in query rewriting. As a support for all these mediation

scenarios a uniform mapping language is developed,

with strong links and support towards automatic

mappings generation. The Process Mediator component

has the task of solving the communication (behavioral)

mismatches that may occur during the communication

RSWS,

(SEBIS,

SEE) 2

SEE

Jörg Hoffmann

James Scicluna

Adrian Mocan

11


etween a requestor and a provider of a service. As in

WSMO, the requestor is a WSMO Goal, while the

provider is a Semantic Web Service, the Process

Mediator’s task is be to accommodate the mismatches

between the goal’s requested Choreography and the

SWS’s choreography.

9 Grounding

Apart from discovering Web services and composing

them, the Semantic Execution Environment (SEE) also

needs to communicate with the Web services — send the

necessary request messages and receive the responses.

Because internal communication within the SEE uses

semantic data and practically all currently deployed Web

services use their specific XML formats, the External

Communication component needs to translate between

the involved data forms. This translation is also known

as data grounding. Above that, this component also

needs to support concrete network protocols (HTTP,

SOAP, other bindings) to be able to exchange messages

with the Web service. As grounding has to be based on

the Web Services Description Language (WSDL), the

work on this component also contains W3C efforts

towards Semantic Web Services. In particular, this

means the WSDL RDF mapping from Web Service

Description WG, and the Semantic Annotations for

WSDL in the SA-WSDL WG.

12 Formal languages

Descriptions in a Semantically-Enabled Service Oriented

Architecture (SESA) need different formal languages for

the specification of different aspects of knowledge and

services. The descriptions in a SESA can be decomposed

into four dimensions:

• Static knowledge (Ontologies)

• Functional description (capabilities)

• Behavioural description (choreography and

orchestration)

• Non-functional Properties

It is our mission to develop and combine languages for

these dimensions of description in a SESA. In the

process we will relate these modelings to current and

upcoming Semantic Web and Web Service modelings.

13 Reasoning

We will develop an efficient and extensible reasoning

engine for expressive rule-based languages (WSML

Core/Flight/Rule), as well as description logic based

languages (WSML-DL). The reasoner will be based on

UbiServ

RSWS

RSWS

Jacek Kopecky

Jos de Bruijn

Darko Anicic

and Stijn

Heymans

12


state-of-the-art reasoning algorithms (for query

answering, logical entailment, etc.). The Semantic

Execution Environment (SEE) needs the reasoning

component for service discovery as well as both process

and data mediation. Mission critical features of the

Reasoning component are: hybrid reasoning based on

DLs and logic programming, reasoning with very large

instance bases, reasoning with heterogeneous and

conflicting information, and reasoning in distributed

environments. Also one of our major objectives is the

implementation of Rule Interchange Format (RIF). RIF

aims to specify a common format for rules in order to

allow rule interchange between diverse rule systems.

This format (or language) will function as an interlingua

into which rule languages can be mapped, allowing rules

written in different languages to be executed in the same

reasoner engine. The RIF layer our reasoner engine will

be capable of handling rules from diverse rule systems

and will make WSML rule sets interchangeable with rule

sets written in other languages that are also supported by

RIF.

14 Storage & Communication

The storage components, plural on purpose, shall

provide repositories to store “objects” needed to ensure

successful processing of user request to SESA. There

might be a need for different storages tailored to the

particular needs: web service descriptions, goals,

mediation rules, workflows, and execution semantics. It

is already known that the Execution Management

component requires repositories for ontologies and data

instances (service descriptions in particular). The idea is

to use a Triple Space infrastructure to do so. The

objective of the Storage Component team is thus to

determine which means of storage are required and in

what way these requirements can be fulfilled in the

simplest way to still provide optimal service to the

application layer components and the vertical services.

15 Execution Management

The execution management component is responsible for

the management of WSMX as a platform and for the

coordination of the individual components. As the kernel

of the system it enables and realizes the overall

operational semantics of WSMX that let the system

achieve the promised functional semantics of its clientside

interface. It takes the functionality offered by the

individual components of the framework and

UbiServ

SEE

Reto

Krummenacher

Thomas

Haselwanter

13


orchestrates these atomic pieces into a coherent whole in

an orderly and consistent fashion. These properties are

guaranteed by the execution semantics, which are

executed over the set of services that are available to the

execution management component

Goals distribution

Cluster Goals Lead Assis.

RSWS Discovery, Choreography, Formal Language, 4

Reasoning,

SEBIS Ontologies, (Applications), (Choreography) 1 2

SEE Applications, Developer Tools, (Discovery), 4 3

Mediation, (Choreography), Execution Management,

(Storage & Communication)

UbiServ Adaptation, Grounding, Storage & Communication 3

A detailed description for each particular component is provided as part of the cluster

descriptions.

2.2. Clusters

DERI Innsbruck decomposes its research body via four clusters arranged around senior

researchers.

Reasonable Semantic Web Services (RSWS)

Dr. Stijn Heymans (Deputy: Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen)

Besides the largest source of information ever, the Web is moving towards becoming a

source for reusable software components and applications by globally accessible services

published on the Web. Both static data and services available on the Web still lack of

machine-understandable semantics to be usable in an automated way. It is the mission of

the RSWS cluster to define reasonable methods and languages to effectively describe and

reason about the Data on the Web and Web Services to make the vision of the Semantic

Web come true.

Semantics in Business Information Systems (SEBIS)

Dr. Ying Ding and Dr. Martin Hepp

In our research group, we work at transferring Semantic Web and Semantic Web Services

technology to research problems in Business Information Systems, in order to bridge the

gap between the fundamental work yielded by the Formal Ontology and Semantic Web

communities on one hand, and the application-oriented challenges of BIS/MIS as a

discipline. This includes the following two dimensions: (1) Maturing Semantic Web

foundations, so that they become compatible with the real world complexity and scale.

14


(2) Applying Semantic Web technology to core challenges of Information Systems in

order to realize and evaluate the business benefit, and to identify the open research

challenges. We currently focus on various application domains.

Semantic Execution Environment (SEE)

Dr. Michal Zaremba (Deputy: Mick Kerrigan)

It is mission of the Semantic Execution Environment (SEE) cluster to create an execution

environment for the dynamic discovery, selection, mediation, invocation and interoperation

of Semantic Web Services. Enterprises’ information systems were subject of

great changes during the last years. In order to adjust to more and more dynamic business

demands, a new concept/paradigm has come to replace the traditional applications: the

service. By this (and by some other auxiliary changes) the information system as a whole

becomes a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). Such an approach offers a set of

advantages that comes with SOA but it doesn’t solve all the interoperability problems

that existed for classical applications too. Inside of a particular SOA, independent

services offering the same functionality should be seamlessly interchangeable with each

other. Different such services can have different vendors, and as a consequence, different

peculiarities. Our platform is going to be a sample implementation of the Web Services

Modelling Ontology (WSMO) which describes all aspects of Semantic Web Services.

Ubiquitous Services (UbiServ)

Univ.-Prof. Dr. Thomas Strang

Ubiquitous Computing is the most recent evolution step in an evolution chain

characterizing different eras of internetworked computer systems. Building on the

properties of Mobile Computing and Distributed Computing systems, Ubiquitous

Computing systems are further characterized by at least three salient properties: contextawareness,

ad-hoc networking as well as smart sensors and devices. From a service

perspective, enhancements in the three respective research areas should enable a

transition from the mobile services paradigm which is “any service for any person at any

time and anywhere (at any cost)” to the more desirable ubiquitous services paradigm

which is “the right service for the right person at the right time and at the right place (and

with the right price)”. In our cluster we elaborate on the challenges of services in the

emerging field of Ubiquitous Computing. This includes research on service description,

discovery, distribution, deployment, composition and execution in Ubiquitous Computing

environments. An important aspect is the area of ontology-based context modeling and

retrieval as a key enabler of context-aware service discovery and execution technology in

Ubiquitous Computing environments.

2.3. Projects

This section surveys the current projects DERI Innsbruck is working on. It should ideally

be the case that project deliverables written by researchers correspond to papers

submitted to, and ideally accepted at, relevant workshops/conferences/journals. These

papers should be written in line with the research components, as well as the researcher’s

line of research, such that the material can later be used as part of a thesis/habilitation. In

15


addition, all efforts in projects should clearly be aligned with the overall SESA

architecture and some of its components.

We will group the discussion of the projects in accordance to the cluster they belong to.

Projects are always aligned with a cluster. If this is not possible, they are split in several

virtual projects (like SUPER) where each belongs to a definite cluster. The distribution of

projects to cluster is as following.

Projects distribution

Cluster Projects Number MM p.m.

RSWS • Infrawebs

6.5 10.5

• Knowledge Web (0.5)

• RW²

• Salero

• SEKT

• SemNetMan

• SenSE

SEBIS • DERI eTourism (0.25)

8.75 13

• dip

• EASAIER

• EastWeb

• enIRaF

• etPlanner

• Musing

• OnTourism

• myOntology

• SUPER Martin (0.5)

SEE • ASG

5.5 12.5

• SEEMP

• SemanticGov

• SemBiz

• SUPER Michal (0.5)

• TSC

UbiServ • GRISINO

3 6

• SWING

• TripCom

Non research • DERI BusinessDevelopment (0.25)

1.25 1,5

units

• DERI Exchange (0.25)

• DERI Sustanability (0.25)

• Knowledge Web Network (0.5)

Total 25 43,5

16


2.4. Research Body

Research outcome of students, junior researchers, and senior researchers consists of

papers, published at relevant workshops/conferences/journals, with a specific topic,

which falls in one of the research components. Prototypes which are used to validate the

various claims made in the submitted papers should be developed as part of the

corresponding architectural component, using the WSMX platform. A thesis or

habilitation is typically a collection of peer-reviewed papers and is thus associated with a

collection of prototypes. If the thesis proposes one coherent approach to some problem,

one coherent prototype is typically required.

In the following, we discuss students, junior researchers, and senior researchers.

2.4.1. Student researchers

Students are assigned to a cluster and are usually supervised by a junior or senior

researcher.

Student researchers

Nr Name Cluster Supervisor

1 Daniel Bachlechner SEBIS Martin Hepp

2 Thomas Haselwanter SEE Michal Zaremba

3 Andreas Klotz SEBIS Martin Hepp

4 Bernhard Leschinger SEBIS Martin Hepp

5 Michael Luger SEBIS Ying Ding

6 Mark Mattern SEE Holger Lausen

7 Kathrin Prantner SEBIS Martin Hepp

8 Joachim Adi Schütz RSWS Darko Anicic

9 Nathalie Steinmetz RSWS Holger Lausen

10 Martin Tanler RSWS Holger Lausen

2.4.2. Junior researchers

High-quality PhD research is widely recognized as one of the key success factors in every

academic institution. While doing a PhD necessarily implies a high amount of individual

research work, the role of supervision is essential for the systematic operation of the

process and its successful finalization.

In this section we elaborate a potential supervision schema for DERI Innsbruck. The

schema is divided into several components: the main phases of the PhD and their

characteristics, the advisors and the methods employed for regularly monitoring the

progresses made in the process.

17


PhD Process: The process can be roughly divided into three phases:

Phase I: Find and formulate the research problem

The PhD student is introduced to the different directions of research approached

within the institute. Once the broad domain of research of the prospected thesis

has been roughly defined, the student should intensively survey the current state

of the art in this field with the purpose of getting familiar with the research done

so far, identifying unsolved problems and motivating the necessity for further

exploring these areas. The result of this endeavor should be a preliminary

formulation of the research problem and the associated research questions he

intends to address in his thesis. Ideally the research focus should satisfy the

following features:

• It should be narrow instead of broad-based.

• It should lead to the formulation of first research hypothesis which form

the basis for the prospected solution.

• It should be interesting for the target community.

Outcomes:

First research report - Problem statement

The student should submit a document summarizing the research done so far and

the core research questions of the thesis and outlining the prospected research

approach and the methods employed to design and evaluate the solution.

Dissemination

Further on, the PhD student should contribute to project deliverables and first

research publications. Preliminary thesis-relevant ideas should be published on a

workshop in order to receive feedback on the feasibility of the general approach.

Phase II: Elaborate and evaluate the solution

In this phase the student should provide answers to the major research questions

of the thesis. He should find solutions to the formulated research questions,

implement these ideas, evaluate them and analyze the results.

Outcomes:

Second research report - Outline of the thesis

The PhD student should provide an outline of the thesis, which includes a

definition of the problem statement, a description of the research approach and of

the methods applied to conduct this research and a report and analysis of the

evaluation results.

Dissemination

During this period the student will actively contribute to project deliverables and

will publish the first papers around the topic of the thesis. The student should aim

for at least two conference publications on high-quality scientific events. The

student is also encouraged to submit a PhD proposal to a doctoral consortium in

order to receive feedback from experts in the community and to collaborate with

major players in his field of research, and in order to get in contact with potential

external reviewers for his thesis.

18


Phase III: Write up the thesis

This phase is primarily dedicated to the finalization of the PhD research in form

of a dissertation.

Outcomes:

Third research report - Dissertation

Dissemination

The PhD student should aim for at least two publications, which lie at the core of

the thesis topic, at major scientific conferences and two journal articles.

Further on the student should aim at a broader dissemination of his results in the

community, e.g., by contributing to the organization of scientific events in his

field of research.

Ideally the process should be finalized within a period of 3 to 4 years. The table below

defines the 3 main phases of the process in terms of their duration.

Table 1: Duration of the PhD

Process phase

Duration

Find and formulate research problem 12 months

Elaborate and evaluate solution 12 months

Write up thesis

12 months

Supervision: Every PhD student has one main supervisor at DERI Innsbruck who is

either a PostDoc or professor. Ideally, this would be the cluster leader of the student. PhD

students are furthermore encouraged to seek additional external supervision from experts

in the field.

Monitoring progress: In order to monitor the progress and to enable effective guidance

and supervision of PhD students, there should be regular meetings between the PhD

students and the supervisors. It is up to the supervisor and the student to agree on the

frequency of these meetings. Besides the regular meetings between students and

supervisors, there will be a biannual research seminar mandatory for all PhD students.

Further on, PhD students are encouraged to give trial presentations for the papers which

are presented at workshops and conferences.

Research reports: According to the schema introduced above students should document

their PhD work in two research reports concluded by the dissertation thesis. In the

following we provide some general guidelines for organizing the content of these reports.

1. Problem statement: this part should clearly provide answers to the following

questions:

a. What are the core dimensions of the field of research in which the thesis is

situated?

19


. Which problems are still unsolved to date? Why do these areas need

further exploration?

c. How could this gap be filled? Is the problem solvable at all?

d. Are these problems addressed in many previous approaches? Is it feasible

to think that my thesis would greatly contribute to solving these problems?

Is there room for improvement?

e. What are the critical success factors? How can these risks be minimized?

What are the worst case strategies; the worst expectable outcome?

f. Are these problems addressed (possibly under a different name) in other

communities and what are the results achieved in this context?

g. Is it a hot topic or is it becoming already obsolete?

h. What is the impact of a potential solution on the community?

i. Which are the application scenarios in which this problem is relevant?

2. Main questions of the thesis: this part should clearly formulate the research

questions the PhD aims to provide answers to, while positioning the work in a

broader context and delimiting it from similar or related approaches.

3. General approach: this part should give an overview of the work done (or

planned to be done) in the thesis. It should define the research methods supporting

the PhD research, sketch the path towards the achievement of the objectives and

specify the expected results. With respect to the last point the paper could refer to

the design research methodology by Hevner and March, who differentiate

between four types of research outcomes:

a. Constructs: provide the language, the terminology in which a

problem/solution space is defined and explained.

b. Models: cover the most important facts and concepts within a domain of

interest or class of situations. They use constructs as a description

language for the problem/solution space.

c. Methods: describe processes and guide their users in how to identify

solutions to a given research question. They can range from rigorous

mathematical algorithms to descriptions how to perform a process, best

practices, guidelines etc. From a terminological perspective, methods—as

understood by Hevner and March —can be considered synonymous to

“methodology”, “technique” or “algorithm” in computer science.

d. Implementations: implement constructs, models and methods, thus

demonstrating their feasibility.

Examples of research outcomes could be:

a. Open up a new area of research

b. Provide a unifying framework

c. Resolve a long-standing question

d. Thoroughly explore an area

e. Contradict existing knowledge

20


f. Experimentally validate a theory

g. Derive superior algorithms

h. Develop new methodology

i. Produce a negative result

4. Proposed solution: this part describes the approach to the research problem

previously stated, outlining the results achieved so far and the things which still

need to be realized.

5. Evaluation: in this section the paper should provide details on the evaluation

methods, report on the evaluation results and discuss the implications of these

results within and beyond the scope of this work. In order to determine which

evaluation methods are appropriate to validate a research approach the paper

could again resort to the previously mentioned research framework. For each of

the four types of research outcomes Table 2 below summarizes the recommended

content and structure, as well as proved and tested evaluation methods and quality

criteria. The structure of each research artefact includes the information sources

which are required to give full particulars on the actual solution, and thus enable a

feasible evaluation procedure.

6. Future work: issues which remain to be approached in the context of the thesis

or beyond.

Table 2: Evaluation Approaches

Constructs

Structure Evaluation method Evaluation criteria

-Meta-model of the

vocabulary

-Ontological analysis

-Construct deficit

-Construct overload

-Construct redundancy

-Construct excess

Models

Structure Evaluation method Evaluation criteria

-Domain

-Terminology

-Scope and purpose

-Syntactic validation

-Semantic consistency

-Integrity checking

-Correctness

-Completeness

-Clarity and simplicity

-Syntax and semantics -Sampling using selective -Usage flexibility

-Intended applications and matching of data to actual -Extendability

use cases

external phenomena or -Applicability

-Reference to constructs trusted surrogate

-Implementability

and methods

-Integration tests

-Risk and cost analysis

-User surveys

21


Methods

Structure Evaluation method Evaluation criteria

-Process-based meta-model -Laboratory research -Appropriateness

-Intended applications and -Field inquiries

-Completeness

use cases

-Conditions of applicability

-Products and results of the

method application

-Surveys

-Case studies

-Action research

-Practice descriptions

-Consistency

-Implementability

-Reference to constructs -Interpretative research

and

Models

Instantiations

Structure Evaluation method Evaluation criteria

-Implementation

-Reference to design model

-Reference to requirements

specification

-Reference to

documentation

-Reference to quality

assurance documents

-Reference to user guides

-Code inspection

-Testing

-Code analysis

-Verification

-Functionality

-Usability

-Performance

-Reliability

Depending on whether the report is the outcome of the first or the second phase of the

PhD it necessarily concentrates on different aspects of the schema above.

The first research report has a clear focus on the definition of the problem statement. This

implies that it should elaborate on bullets 1 and 2, while clarifying the research

methodology as part of bullet 3 and sketching some preliminary ideas the prospected

thesis will build upon. Further on, it is important that the student timely specifies the

expected outcome of his PhD work (e.g. in terms of the framework presented in this

section or a similar framework) and how the resulting artifact could be evaluated. The

first research report should be between 6 and 15 pages (standard typed, single column,

single spaced).

The second research report elaborates on the 4 th and 5 th bullets while refining and

revising the previous ones. At this point it is essential that the student designs a suitable

evaluation framework for the validation of his PhD research, critically analyzes the

achieved results and compares them to related approaches. It is recommended that this

report has an amount of 20-30 pages (standard typed, single column, single spaced).

22


Junior Researchers

No Name Objective Cluster

1 Darko Anicic Reasoning RSWS

2 Jos de Bruijn Formal language RSWS

3 Tobias Bürger SEBIS

4 Emilia Cimpian Mediation SEE

5 Dimitrij Denissenko RSWS

6 Cristina Feier Reasoning RSWS

7 Graham Hench Reasoning SEE

8 Jan Henke SEBIS

9 Zhou Jingtao SEE

10 Uwe Keller Reasoning RSWS

11 Mick Kerrigan Developer Tools SEE

12 Jacek Kopecky Grounding UbiServ

13 Reto Krummennacher Storage & Communication UbiServ

14 Holger Lausen Discovery RSWS

15 Adrian Mocan Mediation SEE

16 Ruzica Piskac Reasoning RSWS

17 Richard Pöttler Reasoning RSWS

18 Dumitru Roman Choreography SEBIS

19 Francois Scharffe Mediation SEBIS

20 James Scicluna Choreography RSWS

21 Omair Shafiq Storage & Communication SEE

22 Katharina Siorpaes Ontologies SEBIS

23 Adina Sirbu Discovery SEE

24 Michael Stollberg SEBIS

25 Ioan Toma Adaptation UbiServ

26 Alexander Wahler RSWS

27 Zhixian Yan SEE

23


4.3. Senior researchers

Senior Researchers lead objectives and their attached working groups, provide senior

leadership in projects, provide supervision to junior researchers, and are included in the

leadership team of a cluster.

Senior Researchers

No Name Topic Cluster

1 Dr. Ying Ding Application SEBIS

2 Dr. Martin Hepp Ontologies SEBIS

3 Dr. Stijn Heymans Reasoning RSWS

4 Dr. Jörg Hoffmann Composition

5 Dr. Michael Jäger UbiServ

6 Dr. Axel Polleres Storage UbiServ

7 Univ.-Prof. Dr. Thomas Strang UbiServ

8 Dr. Michal Zaremba Application SEE


3. Reasonable Semantic Web Services Cluster (RSWS)

In the following we describe the RSWS cluster in general terms, in terms of the

objectives it takes care, in terms of the project it takes care, and in terms of its members.

3.1. General Description

Name

Acronym

Web site

Leader

Team

Reasonable Semantic Web Services

RSWS

http://rsws.deri.org/

Stijn Heymans (Deputy: Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen)

Senior Researchers:

Stijn Heymans

Junior Researchers:

Darko Anicic

Jos de Bruijn

Dimitrij Denissenko

Cristina Feier

Uwe Keller

Holger Lausen

Ruzica Piskac

Richard Pöttler

James Scicluna

Alexander Wahler

Students:

Joachim Adi Schütz

Nathalie Steinmetz

Martin Tanler

Objectives Discovery (4), Choreography (7), Formal Languages (12), Reasoning (13)

Projects

Mission

Major

tasks and

deliverables

Infrawebs, Knowledge Web, RW2, Salero, SEKT, SemNetMan, SenSE

Besides the largest source of information ever, the Web is moving towards

becoming a source for reusable software components and applications by

globally accessible services published on the Web. Both static data and

services available on the Web still lack of machine-understandable

semantics to be usable in an automated way. It is the mission of the RSWS

cluster to define reasonable methods and languages to effectively describe

and reason about the Data on the Web and Web Services to make the

vision of the Semantic Web come true.

As research in the RSWS cluster is aligned with the objective components

(Formal Languages, Discovery, Choreography, Reasoning) the major

tasks and deliverables of the cluster coincide with the objective

components. We will summarize those here:

25


The Formal Languages component will develop formal languages for the

descriptions in a Semantically-Enabled Service Oriented Architecture

(SESOA). The descriptions in a SESOA can be decomposed into four

dimensions: static knowledge (ontologies), functional descriptions

(capabilities), behavioral description (choreography/orchestration), nonfunctional

properties. Tasks include the integration of FOL-based and

nonmonotonic LP-based languages, the explicitization of context for use

with scoped negation, and the development of rules for the, Semantic Web

(RIF). Furthermore, requirements on the functional descriptions of

services and as well as a semantics for web service functionality need to

be devised. Requirements need to be gathered on the description of

choreography and an orchestration and semantics needs to be devised.

Finally, purpose and usage of non-functional requirements will be

investigated.

The Discovery component will develop different discovery

implementations that are compatible with WSMO, WSML and

specifically WSMX. The scope of the working group is to develop

solutions based on existing descriptions (WSDL, UDDI, text) as well as

on more advanced descriptions based on semantic annotations using

WSML. Some tasks in this component are the development of a discovery

engine based on keywords and existing annotations (WSDL), extend

beyond for example WSDL description to related documentation,

interpretation of, the semantic descriptions.

The Choreography component is meant to provide a process language

which should allow for formal specifications of interactions and processes

between the service providers and clients, define reasoning tasks that

should be performed using this language, and implement an engine to

support the execution of interactions, as well as to support reasoning in

this language.

The Reasoning component will initially develop, from scratch, an efficient

and extensible reasoning engine for expressive rule-based languages, e.g.

WSML Core/Flight/Rule, as well as description logic based languages,

e.g., WSML-DL. The reasoner will be based on state-of-the-art reasoning

algorithms (for query answering, logical entailment). Later on this

component will develop the formal reasoning tasks and implement

algorithms for those tasks, for languages developed in the Formal

Languages component.

26


3.2. Objectives

• Discovery (4),

• Choreography (7),

• Formal Languages (12), and

• Reasoning (13)

3.2.1. Discovery

Nr 4

Title Discovery

Mission Develop different discovery implementations that are compatible with

statement WSMO, WSML and specifically WSMX. The scope of the working

group is to develop solutions based on existing descriptions (WSDL,

UDDI, text) as well as on more advanced descriptions based on semantic

annotations using WSML.

Web site http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Discovery

Leader Holger Lausen, Co-chair Mick Kerrigan

Cluster

Team

RSWS, (SEE)

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Kashif Iqbal

Mick Kerrigan

Jacek Kopecký

Holger Lausen

Brahmananda Sapkota

Adina Sirbu

Michael Stollberg

Ioan Toma

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Students:

-

RW2, ASG, DIP

The group has finished the setup of the basic infrastructure, which is a

discovery framework within the WSMX framework. This framework is

able to manage different discovery components capable of processing

different kinds of requests. At present two engines are completely

integrated in this framework: keyword based discovery and lightweight

discovery. Additionally together with the WSMT group a GUI for

editing goals and Web services is in progress.

Key word based discovery

The keyword based discovery is able to compare WSML descriptions on

27


Future Steps

Publications

different levels, such as match somewhere in the description or on

specific fields. Furthermore members of the group have developed an

advanced prototype of a keyword based discovery which is not yet

integrated in WSMX. This keyword search operates on the WSDL of

publicly available services and leverages advanced concepts such as

stemming.

Lightweight discovery

The lightweight discovery component currently uses logical expressions

and background knowledge formulated using WSML Flight and WSML

Rule. The component can use either KAON or MINS as underlying

reasoner to detect intersection and plug-in matches for a limited set of

conjunctive queries. The extension of this component to WSML DL is

currently in progress.

ASG Discovery

The ASG discovery component was finished. It is based on an approach

that leverages transaction logic. The ASG component has not been

integrated into WSMX but finalized according to the requirements of the

ASG project.

Use cases

The group currently uses input from 2 DIP use cases and the SWS

Challenge discovery scenario. The Use cases are currently partially

solved; one of the main problems is the lacking support for data types in

the lightweight discovery component.

The SWS Challenge and DIP Use cases need to be completely modeled.

The lightweight discovery will be extended to also support DL

reasoning.

Further Uses Cases need to be gathered to get requirements more heavy

weight discovery.

The integration of a suitable GUI for designing Web services and goals

need to be finished.

Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen and Michael Stollberg. On the Semantics of

Functional Descriptions of Web Services In Proceedings of the 3 rd

European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2006). Budva,

Montenegro, June 2006.

Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Ioan

Toma: What is wrong with Web services Discovery. In W3C Workshop

on Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services, Innsbruck, Austria, June

2005. Position Paper.

Uwe Keller, Ruben Lara, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter

Fensel: Automatic Location of Services, In Proceedings of the 2 nd

European Semantic Web Symposium (ESWS2005), Heraklion, Crete,

29 th May – 1 st June, 2005.

28


Daniel Olmedilla, Rubén Lara, Axel Polleres, and Holger Lausen: Trust

negotiation for semantic web services. In Lecture Notes in Computer

Science, volume 3387, pages 81-95, 2005.

Michael Kifer, Rubén Lara, Axel Polleres, Chang Zhao, Uwe Keller,

Holger Lausen, and Dieter Fensel. A logical framework for web service

discovery. In ISWC 2004 Workshop on Semantic Web Services:

Preparing to Meet the World of Business Applications, volume 119,

Hiroshima, Japan, 2004. CEUR Workshop Proceedings.

Brahmananda Sapkota, Laurentiu Vasiliu, Ioan Toma, Dumitru Roman,

Chris Bussler: Peer-to-Peer Technology Usage in Web Service

Discovery and Matchmaking. In Proceedings of the 6 th International

Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering, New York City,

USA, November 2005. Short paper.

Ioan Toma, Kashif Iqbal, Matthew Moran, Dumitru Roman, Thomas

Strang and Dieter Fensel: An Evaluation of Discovery approaches in

Grid and Web services Environments. In Proceedings of the 2 nd

International Conference on Grid Services Engineering and

Management, Erfurt, Germany, September 2005.

Software

releases

Michael Stollberg, Dumitru Roman, Ioan Toma, Uwe Keller, Reinhold

Herzog, Peter Zugmann, and Dieter Fensel: Semantic Web Fred –

Automated Goal Resolution on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the

38 th Hawaii International Conference on System Science, January 2005.

key word based discovery, prototype available at:

http://192.168.65.151/discovery/

3.2.2. Choreography

Nr 7

Title Choreography

Mission The Choreography part of SEE is meant to provide a process language

statement which should allow for formal specifications of interactions and

processes between the service providers and clients, define reasoning

tasks that should be performed using this language, and implement an

engine to support the execution of interactions, as well as to support

reasoning in this language.

On a short term, the Choreography Component in the SEE architecture

has three main responsibilities:

1. Evaluating the transition rules defined in the Choreography

Interface descriptions in WSMO Web Service descriptions

29


2. Determines the legal instances for the last choreography step

3. Appropriately managing invocation requests to and from the

Communication Manager

Web site

Leader

Cluster

Team

During the first step, the interface descriptions are either fetched from

the Resource Manager Service or appropriately parsed from the

description (this depending on whether the requester sends her/his own

descriptions). Once the choreographies of both parties are initialized, the

start of the conversation is triggered by the instance data sent by the

requester. This leads to the second step where the conversation is

handled. During the interaction between the two choreographies, the

data being exchanged is appropriately checked for conformance with

respect to the choreography description and is always sent through the

Process Mediation which determines which kind of data should be sent

(if any) to the other party. Furthermore, during the evaluation of the

rules, the choreography engine sets up the data required for invocation

from the choreography description. The Choreography Engine does not

perform the invocation itself but it rather forwards the invocation data to

the Communication Manager which then processes this information

appropriately and performs the invocation. The interaction between the

two parties stops when either a choreography fails or all the required

input data from the requester is consumed.

http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Choreography

James Scicluna

RSWS, (UBISERV)

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Dumitru Roman

James Scicluna

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Students:

Thomas Haselwanter

• DIP

• Infrawebs

• Super (eventually)

This section outlines the work related to this component that has been

already carried out. We will first describe the status of the model, the

language related tasks and then carry on with the design and

implementation of the component itself.

Model

The model for WSMO Choreographies is currently stable. It is inspired

by the ASM methodology and inherits the core principles such as the

state, transition rules and flexibility to model any kind of behavior.

30


Language

The syntax of the choreography language has been defined as a result of

the model. It is similar to the ASM language with some obvious

constructs that have been introduced in order for it to fit with the WSML

language. The semantics are defined using a set-based approach and

describe the operational behavior of choreographies on the same lines as

for ASMs.

WSMO4J Choreography API

The work of the Choreography API has been divided in different parts,

namely, the API (i.e. the interfaces), the implementation, the parser and

the serializer. The API defines the interfaces and methods (with no

implementation) for the objects within the language constructs. The

implementation part implements the interfaces so that a user can easily

create and manage the language constructs. The parser loads up an

object model representation in the memory from a choreography

description in a WSML file. The serializer, performs the reverse

operation, that is, it saves the memory representation of the language to

the equivalent syntax representation in a WSML file. All of these

modules have been completed.

Future Steps

Choreography Engine

The main steps involved in the implementation of the choreography

engine are the design – with particular emphasis on the interaction with

other WSMX components – and the actual programming. Both of these

aspects are in a stable condition but eventually they evolve as WSMX

gets better and as requirements change.

The future steps consist of three core tasks that will run in parallel, and

will follow an iterative approach:

Task 1: define reasoning tasks for interactions/process descriptions

Since Semantic Web Services are about providing a higher degree of

automation when dealing with services, the tasks that need automation

in this context need to be identified and clearly defined before

conceptual models and languages are provided to support automation of

such tasks. Since choreography is related to interactions and processes,

this task will identify and define what reasoning tasks are needed when

dealing with interactions and processes as far as services are concerned.

Particular focus will be on already well known tasks (like property

verifications of different specifications, scheduling under constraints,

consistency checking, bi-simulation, etc) from the area of process

modeling.

Task 2: define higher level languages to directly support the tasks

31


identified in task 1

The current language for representing WSMO Choreography is based on

ASMs – a very general model for describing computations. Because of

its generality, the model was not designed with the focus to support

automation of specific tasks related to interactions and processes. Thus,

the current model (and language) will need to be constrained in some

ways in order to allow for efficient reasoning and direct support for the

identified tasks. This will result in the definition of higher language(s)

designed to directly support different reasoning tasks in a more efficient

way.

Task 3: implement an execution tool for interactions/processes

The choreography engine will have to incorporate and implement

integrated support for both executions of processes, as well as for

reasoning about the processes. Thus, the choreography implementation

will consist of a tool that will actually run the processes, and a tool that

will actually provide support for verification of different reasoning tasks.

Publications

Software

releases

Timeline: There will be several iterations and the above tasks will run in

parallel within these iterations. A first iteration is expected to take place

mid of 2006.

José-Manuel López-Cobo, Alejandro López-Pérez and James Scicluna:

A Semantic Choreography-driven Frequent Flyer Program in

Proceedings of the Future Research Challenges of Software and Services

Workshop, Vienna (Austria), April, 2006

James Scicluna and Axel Polleres: Semantic Web Service Execution for

WSMO Based Choreographies in Proceedings of the Semantic Web

Applications Workshop, EuroMedia ’2005, Toulouse (France), April,

2005

Syntax Specification

Choreography API for WSMO4J

Choreography Engine (ongoing)

3.2.3 Formal Languages

Nr 12

Title Formal Languages

Mission Descriptions in a Semantically-Enabled Service Oriented Architecture

statement (SESOA) need different formal languages for the specification of

different aspects of knowledge and services. The descriptions in a

SESOA can be decomposed into four dimensions:

32


Static knowledge (ontologies)

Ontologies are the core of the Semantic Web and of any Semantic

Service Oriented Architecture. They can be used to formally describe

any kind of knowledge on the Semantic Web and they form the

vocabulary for the other dimensions for description in a SESOA.

ii. Functional description (capabilities)

With capabilities, services are viewed as functions which provide a

certain output, given a particular input. This simplified view of services

is useful for such tasks as discovery and composition.

iii. Behavioral description (choreography/orchestration)

Choreographies describe the interface of a service in terms of possible

interactions with a service. Orchestrations describe compositions of

services. Choreographies and Orchestrations can both be viewed as

decompositions of capabilities.

iv. Non-functional Properties

Besides a functional description, services also have a non-functional

description, with things as author, natural language description, QoS,

pricing, service-level agreements, etc.

Web site

Leader

Cluster

Team

It is our mission to develop and combine languages for these dimensions

of description in a SESOA. In the process we will relate these languages

to current and upcoming Semantic Web and Web Service languages.

http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Languages

Jos de Bruijn

RSWS

Senior Researchers:

Stijn Heymans

Axel Polleres (Oberserver)

Junior Researchers:

Jos de Bruijn

Cristina Feier

Uwe Keller (Observer)

Jacek Kopecky (Observer)

Reto Krummenacher (Observer)

33


Students:

-

Holger Lausen

Livia Predoiu (Observer)

James Scicluna

Ioan Toma

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

() = to be confirmed (might move to observer)

DIP, Knowledge Web

The most important achievement so far is the specification of the Web

Service Modeling Language v0.21, which is a language for the

specification of different aspects of a SESOA. There are, however, some

aspects lacking in the specification. The aspects which are lacking are

mentioned in the following subsections.

Documents related to WSML can be found online at:

http://www.wsmo.org/wsml/wsml-syntax [edit]

i. Static knowledge (ontologies)

The ontology component of WSML consists of five variants:

- WSML-Core – intersection of DL and LP

- WSML-Flight – based on the Datalog subset of F-Logic with negation

under the perfect model semantics

- WSML-Rule – based on the Horn subset of F-Logic with negation

under the well-founded semantics

- WSML-DL – based on the expressive Description Logic SHIQ

- WSML-Full – a full first-order language with nonmonotonic

extensions, which is a superset of WSML-DL and WSML-Rule

Two main aspects are lacking in the ontology component of WSML:

- Semantics of WSML-Full. There is a preliminary proposal to use firstorder

autoepistemic logic as the language underlying WSML-Full, but

this requires more investigation:

http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d28/d28.3/v0.1/

- Layering of WSML variants. A formal theorem stating the proper

34


layering of WSML languages is lacking. Especially the layering

between variants with ontology modeling based on predicates

(WSML-Core, WSML-DL) and variants with ontology modeling

based on frames (WSML-Flight, WSML-Rule, WSML-Full) has not

been proven.

Other work which has been done by the participants of this research

component:

- Development of a rule language for the semantic web: initial work has

been done on scoped default negation, and members of this research

component participate in the W3C RIF working group.

Conceptual logic programs can be used to reason over expressive

description logics, as well as certain combinations of description

logic ontologies and rules

ii. Functional description (capabilities)

There is an initial proposal for functional description of services, based

on abstract state spaces: http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d28/d28.1/v0.1/.

This model can be used in combination with different logical languages.

Requirements are generally lacking.

iii. Behavioural description (choreography/orchestration)

There exist several formal languages which are suitable for behavioural

description. Examples are transaction logic, situation calculus, and

action languages. There is an initial comparison of these languages:

http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d28/d28.2/v0.1/.

Furthermore, there is a initial proposed specification language for

choreographies: http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d14/v0.3/

iv. Non-functional Properties

Future Steps

i. Static knowledge (ontologies)

Research on the representation of static knowledge will proceed along

the following lines:

- Integrating knowledge based on classical first-order logic and

nonmonotonic logic programming. Important issues are the

35


epresentational adequacy of the integration, as well as decidable subsets

and a proof theory, so that reasoning becomes possible.

- Scoped default negation. When doing context-dependent reasoning,

such as in nonmonotonic logic programming, the context is usually

implicit. We aim to make to context explicit.

- Rules for the Semantic Web – RIF working group

Connection between Semantic Web languages RDF, OWL

ii. Functional description (capabilities)

Requirements need to be gathered on the functional specification of

services and a semantics needs to be devised which can be combined

with the language for the description of ontologies, in order to enable the

use of ontologies for the description of web service functionality. An

important use case for the functional description of services is discovery.

Therefore, it is expected that many requirements on the functional

description of services will come from the discovery objective.

iii. Behavioural description (choreography/orchestration)

There exist several formal languages which are suitable for behavioural

description. Examples are transaction logic, situation calculus, and

action languages. Requirements need to be gathered on the description

of a choreography and an orchestration and semantics needs to be

devised. A key challenge is the combination of this language with

ontology languages in order to enable the reuse of ontology vocabulary

in the choreography and orchestration descriptions. Finally, this

language needs to be connected to the language for capability

description in order to prove certain correspondences between the

functional and behavioural description of services.

iv. Non-functional Properties

Non-functional properties can at least be divided into two categories: (1)

meta-data, e.g., author, description, etc., of the WSML statements in a

description and (2) actual non-functional properties, i.e., actual

properties of services (e.g. pricing, QoS, transactions). NFPs require a

deeper investigation into their purpose and their usage.

36


Publications

Conferences

Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen and Michael Stollberg. On the Semantics of

Functional Descriptions of Web Services In Proceedings of the 3 rd

European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2006). Budva,

Montenegro, June 2006.

Axel Polleres, Cristina Feier, and Andreas Harth. Rules with

contextually scoped negation. In Proceedings of the 3 rd European

Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2006), volume 4011 of Lecture Notes

in Computer Science (LNCS), Budva, Montenegro, June 2006. Springer.

Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel. The web

service modeling language: An overview. In Proceedings of the 3 rd

European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2006), Budva, Montenegro,

June 2006. Springer-Verlag.

Stijn Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh, Dirk Vermeir: Nonmonotonic

Ontological and Rule-Based Reasoning with Extended Conceptual

Logic Programs. ESWC 2005: 392-407

Stijn Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh, Dirk Vermeir: Guarded Open

Answer Set Programming. LPNMR 2005: 92-104

Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, Ruben Lara, and Dieter Fensel. OWL DL

vs. OWL Flight: Conceptual modeling and reasoning on the se- mantic

web. In Proceedings of the 14 th International World Wide Web

Conference (WWW2005), Chiba, Japan, 2005. ACM.

Michael Kifer, Jos de Bruijn, Harold Boley, and Dieter Fensel. A

realistic architecture for the semantic web. In Proceedings of the

International Conference on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the

Semantic Web (RuleML-2005), Ireland, Galway, November 2005.

Workshops

Stijn Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh, Dirk Vermeir: Guarded Open

Answer Set Programming with Generalized Literals. FoIKS 2006: 179-

200

Jos de Bruijn, Enrico Franconi, and Sergio Tessaris. Logical reconstruction

of RDF and ontology languages. In Third Workshop on

Principles and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning, Dagstuhl, Germany,

September 2005.

37


Jos de Bruijn, Enrico Franconi, and Sergio Tessaris. Logical reconstruction

of normative RDF. In OWL: Experiences and Directions

Workshop (OWLED-2005), Galway, Ireland, November 2005.

Standards Submissions

Jürgen Angele, Harold Boley, Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Pascal

Hitzler, Michael Kifer, Reto Krummenacher, Holger Lausen, Axel

Polleres, and Rudi Studer. Web rule language (WRL). W3C Member

Submission 09 September 2005, 2005.

Software

releases

Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Michael Kifer Holger Lausen,

Reto Krummenacher, Axel Polleres, and Livia Predoiu. Web service

modeling language (WSML). W3C Member Submission 3 June 2005,

2005.

WSML v0.21 validator

A syntactical validator for WSML v0.21, which validates a WSML

specification against the WSML grammar and can validate and

determine the WSML variant, can be found at:

http://tools.deri.org/wsml/validator/.

WSMO4J

WSMO4J is an API and reference implementation for WSML v0.21.

http://wsmo4j.sourceforge.net/

3.2.4 Reasoning

Nr 13

Title Reasoning

Mission We will develop an efficient and extensible reasoning engine for

statement expressive rule-based languages (WSML Core/Flight/Rule), as well as

description logic based languages (WSML-DL). The reasoner will be

based on state-of-the-art reasoning algorithms (for query answering,

logical entailment, etc.). The Semantic Execution Environment (SEE)

needs the reasoning component for service discovery as well as both

process and data mediation. Mission critical features of the Reasoning

component are: hybrid reasoning based on DLs and logic programming,

reasoning with very large instance bases, reasoning with heterogeneous

and conflicting information, and reasoning in distributed environments.

Also one of our major objectives is the implementation of Rule

Interchange Format (RIF). RIF aims to specify a common format for

38


Web site

Leader

Cluster

Team

rules in order to allow rule interchange between diverse rule systems.

This format (or language) will function as an interlingua into which rule

languages can be mapped, allowing rules written in different languages

to be executed in the same reasoner engine. The RIF layer our reasoner

engine will be capable of handling rules from diverse rule systems and

will make WSML rule sets interchangeable with rule sets written in

other languages that are also supported by RIF.

http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Reasoning

Darko Anicic & Stijn Heymans

RSWS

Senior Researchers:

Stijn Heymans

Junior Researchers:

Darko Anicic

Jos de Bruijn

Cristina Feier

Graham Hench

Uwe Keller

Ruzica Piskac

Richard Pöttler

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Students:

Joachim Adi Schütz

Nathalie Steinmetz

DIP (http://dip.semanticweb.org/),

SenSE (http://www.semantic-engineering.info/),

SUPER (http://super.semanticweb.org/),

RW 2 (rw2.deri.at).

The group is developing an inference engine called IRIS (short for

Integrated Rule Inference System). IRIS aims to be a framework

consisting of a collection of components which cover various aspects of

reasoning with formally represented knowledge. Thus we have first

developed the main architecture of IRIS (see IRIS System Architecture).

At present, it is a layered approach consisting of a top API layer

encapsulating the core reasoner, a layer that will implement different

evaluation algorithms, a layer that will allow encapsulated access to the

lower storage layer and provided common procedures to the algorithms

(the middle API layer), and the storage layer itself which will integrate

different storage approaches as well. The middle layer API has been

fully defined, and the top layer API is partially defined. For the

evaluation algorithm layer, we have identified the following evaluation

strategies with corresponding initial algorithms that will be

implemented:

• Bottom-Up: Semi-Naive evaluation enhanced by Magic Set

algorithm;

39


• Top-Down: QsQ evaluation;

• Mixture of Bottom-Up and Top-Down technique: Dynamic

Filtering;

Also, for the storage we have identified an initial approach, where we

will use red-black trees for a basis of the relation implementation.

Currently, IRIS is an engine for Datalog programs with negation and

built-ins, although in the future the reasoner will be extended beyond

pure Datalog capabilities.

The group also provides the MINS Datalog engine. MINS is an

inference engine, which together with the WSML2Reasoner component,

support query answering for WSML-Core and WSML-Flight under the

well-founded semantics with stratified negation, function symbols and it

is extendable by built-ins. Its reasoning mechanism is based on

deductive database algorithms like semi-naive algorithms, dynamic

filtering, and well-founded evaluation with alternating fixed point

computation. Moreover, it is a main memory system in the sense that it

does not use a database for storing its data. The implementation is based

on the programming language Java. The WSML2Reasoner framework

can translate ontology description in WSML to predicates and rules.

Additionally, it provides a Facade for easy integration for different

reasoners. WSML2Reasoner and MINS thus can be used as a framework

for reasoning capability of WSML-based languages.

However, MINS is based on the SiLRI inference engine which is

licensed under the GPL. Since the GPL is not inline with DERI’s

approach to software licensing, we are currently developing IRIS as a reimplementation

of MINS. IRIS is built under the LGPL license.

Note that the already existing WSML2Reasoner framework for

translating ontology descriptions to Datalog will be used in as an

interface to IRIS as well.

Future Steps Iteration 1 (finish: October 31 st , 2006)

Iteration 1

In Iteration 1, the goal is to develop a first version of IRIS. This first

version will be a Datalog engine with functionality that corresponds to

the functionality provided by the WSML-Core and WSML-Flight

languages. In particular, after this first iteration, IRIS will support:

• Full Datalog

• Built-in predicates

• Support for stratified default negation

40


The first iteration will implement three evaluation techniques for query

answering: Semi-Naive evaluation enhanced by Magic Set algorithm,

QsQ evaluation and Dynamic Filtering. Additionally, on the storage

layer we will implement the middle API layer, based on red-black trees.

Those three tasks are basically independent and will thus be

implemented in parallel.

Task Responsible Persons Due Date

Built-ins Richard September 30 th , 2006

Semi-naive with Cristina, Uwe, October 31 st , 2006

negation

Richard, Adi

Relational operations Darko October 31 st , 2006

Tuple operations Darko October 31 st , 2006

QsQ without Cristina, Darko October 31 st , 2006

negation

Iteration 2

In Iteration 2, we will add support for function symbols and mechanisms

identifying unsafe rules, thus enabling reasoning with WSML-Rule.

Furthermore, we will improve the prototype implementation from

Iteration 1 by implementing additional evaluation algorithm (dynamic

filtering) and storage layer facilities (database integration).

Finally, we will write a paper describing the prototype resulting from

Iteration 2.

Task Responsible Persons Due Date

Function symbols Stijn, Richard December 31 st , 2006

Database integration Uwe, Adi December 31 st , 2006

Dynamic Filtering Uwe, Darko December 31 st , 2006

Iteration 3

In Iteration 3, we will thoroughly test the complete prototype.

Furthermore, we will enhance the evaluation techniques such that IRIS

is capable of handling programs with unstratified negation. Apart from

that we will build a layer that will support the RIF specification. This

means that we will be able to reason with rule sets that are compatible

with RIF. We will support the translation from RIF to WSML and vice

versa, making WSML amenable for reasoning with other inference

engines that support the RIF specification.

We will also look into other reasoning tasks, like for example logical

entailment and we will adapt the reasoner for this.

Finally, we will also compile the results form Iteration 3 in a paper.

41


Publications

Software

releases

Since the Reasoner component has just started to work on a new

reasoner, there are no accepted publications yet. As described in the

Future Steps section we will write papers after Iterations 2 and 3.

The current implementation of MINS is available at

http://dev1.deri.at/mins/ and WSML2Reasoner information can be found

at http://dev1.deri.at/wsml2reasoner/. Further releases are scheduled as

in the above Roadmap section.

3.3. Projects

Here we have the following projects:

• Infrawebs

• Knowledge Web

• RW²

• Salero

• SEKT

• SemNetMan

• SenSE

3.3.1. Infrawebs

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Intelligent Framework for Generating open Development Platforms for

Web-Service Enabled Applications Using Semantic Web Technologies,

Distributed Decisions Support Units and Multi-Agent-Systems

Infrawebs

IST-FP6

RSWS

James Scicluna

Developer tools, Discovery, Composition, Choreography, Monitoring,

Storage, Execution Management, Security

42


Website

Team

http://www.infrawebs-eu.org/

Senior Reseacrhers:

-

Junior Researchers:

James Scicluna

Students:

Thomas Haselwanter

Mission The mission is to develop an application-oriented software toolset for

creating, maintaining and executing open and extensible development

platforms for Semantic Web services.

Person*mon Total 38 Per month 1

ths budget

Duration 30 months 08/04 – 12/06

Major tasks • Semantic Web Service Execution (related to choreography,

orchestration and grounding aspects)

• Quality of Service Monitoring (tightly coupled with the

Executor

• Contributing in the Use Case Implementation

• Contributing in the Integration of Components

• Contributing in the Project’s Advisory Board

• Contributing in Dissemination

Deliverables • Realization of SWS-E, Error Handling and QoS Monitor (lead)

• Final SWS-E and Running P2P-Agent and Demonstrator Prep

(lead)

• Dissemination & Innovation Report & Exploitation Concept &

Preliminary TIP (contribute)

• Revised Requirement Profile & Know.-Objects & GD II & Test

Bed 2 & Evaluation 1 & Milestone Awareness (contribute)

• Infrawebs Architecture and Evolution Plan (contribute)

43


3.3.2. Knowledge Web

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Knowledge Web: Realizing the Semantic Web

Knowledge Web

IST-FP6

RSWS

Stijn Heymans

Ontologies, Discovery, Composition, Mediation, Formal languages

http://knowledgeweb.semanticweb.org/

Senior Researchers:

Ying Ding

Stijn Heymans

Junior Researchers:

Jos de Bruijn

Holger Lausen

Adrian Mocan

Francois Scharffe

Students:

-

Mission The mission is to realize the Semantic Web; to support the transition

process of Ontology technology from Academia to Industry; to promote

and generate educational activities on the Semantic Web and to

coordinate the research on Semantic Web and Semantic Web Services.

person*mont Total: 133,5 per month: 3

hs budget

Duration 48 months 01/04 – 12/07

Major tasks • WP1.4 Promotion of ontology technologies

• WP1.5 Cross-network cooperation

• WP2.2 Heterogeneity

• WP2.4 Semantic Web Services

• WP2.5 Semantic Web language extension

44


Deliverables • 1.4.1v5 Technology roadmap (contribute; 1 p*m Ying Ding)

• 1.5.5 Report on organized event progress (lead; 1,5 p*m Ying

Ding)

• 1.5.6 Report on cooperation between Kweb and REWERSE

regarding industrial events (lead; 1,5 p*m Ying Ding)

• 2.2.9 Description of alignment implementation and

benchmarking results (contribute; 3 p*m Francois)

• 2.4.8.2 Semantic tuplespace Computing (lead; 6 p*m)

• 2.4.13.1 Data Mediation in Semantic Web Services (lead; 6 p*m

Adrian)

• KW – D2.4.14.1 Semantic Web Services Challenge

• 2.5.7 Integration of additional semantic layers (contribute; 8

p*m Jos)

• D2.4.14.1 Semantic Web Services Challenge (contribute; 6 p*m

Holger and SEE Cluster)

Total: 33 p*m

3.3.3. RW²

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Reasoning with Web Services

RW²

FIT-IT

RSWS

Holger Lausen

Discovery, Reasoning

http://rw2.deri.at/

Senior Researchers:

(Ying Ding)

Junior Reserachers:

Cristina Feier

Uwe Keller

Holger Lausen

45


Mission

Students:

Nathalie Steinmetz

Martin Tanler

The mission is to develop WSML reasoning support and apply it to Web

services with the aim of offering a higher support for the automation of

a number of tasks specifically Web service discovery.

Person*mon Total 94 Per month 3

ths budget

Duration 30 months 01/05 – 06/07

Major tasks • Reasoning support for all WSML variants

• Discovery Engine

• Tool support: integrate editing, reasoning and discovery

• Semantic Web Services Challenge

Deliverables • D1.2 Report on reasoning techniques and prototype

implementation for the WSML-Core and WSMO-DL languages

(Uwe, Cristina)

• D1.3 Report on reasoning techniques and prototype

implementation for the WSML-RL and WSML-FOL languages

(Uwe, Cristina)

• D1.4 Evaluation of the reasoning procedures and techniques

(Uwe, Cristina)

• D2.2 Discovery Framework Specification (Holger, Uwe)

• D2.3 Prototype Implementation of the Discovery Component

(Holger, Martin)

• D3.2 First prototype of the base framework for the WSMO-

Studio including the WSMO-API (Martin, Nathalie, Holger)

• D4.2 Revision of D4.1 (State-of-the-art in Semantic Web

Service Description and Usage) (Holger, Uwe)

• D5.2Report on and Evaluation of the dissemination strategy

(Holger, Uwe)

• D6.2Report on standardization activities and achieved results

(Holger, Uwe)

• D7.3c Periodic Progress Reports (Holger, Ying, Leo)

• D7.4d Periodic Progress Reports (Holger, Ying, Leo)

• D7.2 Final Project Report (Holger, Ying, Leo)

46


3.3.4. Salero

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Semantic Audiovisual Entertainment Reusable Objects

Salero

IST-FP6

RSWS

Alexander Wahler

Ontologies, Formal Languages, Developer tools

http://www.salero.info/

Senior Reserachers:

Alexander Wahler

Mission

Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Junior Researchers:

Tobias Bürger

Dimitrij Denissenko

Students:

-

SALERO’s goal is to define and develop “intelligent content” objects

with context-aware behaviours for self-adaptive use and delivery across

different platforms, building on and extending research in media

technologies, web semantics, and context based image retrieval, to

reverse the trend toward ever-increasing cost of creating media.

SALERO aims to advance the state of the art in digital media to the

point where it becomes possible to create audiovisual content for crossplatform

delivery using intelligent content tools, with greater quality at

lower cost, to provide audiences with more engaging entertainment and

information at home or on the move.

Total: 48 per month: 1

Duration 48 months 01/06 – 12/09

Major tasks • WP3 Media Semantics and Ontologies

• WP10 Exploitation, Standardisation, Dissemination

• WP12 Demonstration and Testbeds

• WP11 Training for Researchers and Professionals

47


Deliverables • D3.1.1 Representation techniques for multimedia objects, Report

T6 -> Denissenko, Bürger

• D3.1.2 Ontology Language for multimedia objects and API,

Report T12 (lead) -> Denissenko, Bürger

• D3.1.3 Ontologies for multimedia objects and workbench, initial

version, T18 (lead) -> Denissenko, Bürger

3.3.5. Sekt

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Semantically enabled Knowledge technologies

SEKT

IST-FP6

RSWS/WSML

Jos de Bruijn

Mediation

http://www.sekt-project.com/

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Jos de Bruijn

Cristina Feier

Richard Pöttler

Francois Scharffe

Students:

-

Mission Knowledge Management

person*mon Total 101 Per month 3

ths budget

Duration 36 01/04 – 12/06

Major tasks Ontology Mediation

48


Deliverables • D4.4.2: Report on Ontology mediation management V)

R/PU/Month 36 (lead) – Francois, Livia, Cristina

• D4.6.2: Report on Ontology mediation for case studies V2.

R/PU/Month 36 (lead) – Cristina, Francois

• D4.5.2: Report on Ontology mediation tools V2. R/PU/Month 30

(contribute) – Francois

• D4.5.4: Prototype of the Ontology mediation software V2.

P/PU/Month 36 (contribute) – Francois, Richard

3.3.6. SemNetMan

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Semantisch basiertes Netzwerkmanagement

SemNetMan

protecNETplus

RSWS/WSML

Stijn Heymans

Ontologies

http://www.punkt.at/index.php?main=2&sub=1&id=71

Senior Researchers:

Stijn Heymans

Junior Researchers:

-

Students:

Michael Luger

Mission The mission is to enable better network management between entities

(information and persons) mainly by means of

• an ontological description of the network and

• the computation of the proximity between the

entities

• visualization of search results

Implementation of software that can be used as plugin/web service and

can be reused with different already existing network management

tools.

Budget (in Total 7 per month 0.5

49


terms of

m*m)

Duration 18 months 20/05/05 – 20/11/06

Major tasks • A2 method: computation of proximity between entities

(information & persons) within a network (done by all

members)

• A3 platform: Implementation of the algorithms of A2 as a plugin

and testing with the network platform of the SWS. (DERI, i.e.

Michael and me will take over the development of

ontological descriptions)

• A4 Survey of Semantic Web SW: Aim: adjust the

implementation to standards/interfaces/formats/ …already

existing identify useful software and integrate it into the

software developed. (done by all project members)

• A5 Symposium: present results of project and network with

potential partners in the industry (DERI)

• A6 Case Studies: Evaluation of the plugin with 2 case studies

(not started yet, has to be clarified who will work on this, but

DERI will contribute)

• A7 Generic evaluation: Generic evaluation of all 3 case studies

(not started yet, has to be clarified who will work on this, but

DERI will contribute)

• A8 Dissemination (ongoing, every member contributes)

Deliverables DERI contributes to all WP mentioned above. There are no explicit

deliverables; work being done in the WPs can be viewed as

“deliverable”.

3.3.7. SenSE

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Semantic Engineering Support Environment

SenSE

FFG, FIT-IT

RSWS

Uwe Keller

50


Objective

Website

Team

Ontologies, Applications, Reasoning, Storage

http://www.semantic-engineering.info/

Senior Researchers:

Stijn Heymans

Mission

Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Junior Researchers:

Uwe Keller

Graham Hench

Students:

-

Development on an Engineering Support Environment which improves

communication in complex product development processes (Semantic

enrichment of engineering documents, Automated learning of

engineering rationales through observation of user interactions,

Proactive support for users involved in complex engineering tasks)

Total: 40 per month: 1,5

Duration 24 months 01/06 – 12/07

Major tasks • WP 2 Ontology & Reasoner Design

• WP 3 Multi-agent System Design

• WP 4 Semantic Facades

• WP 5 System Integration

• WP 6 Verification & Testing

• WP 7 Dissemination

Deliverables • D0.1 v1 Project Report (contribute) Uwe

• D0.1 v2 Project Report (contribute) Uwe

• D2.1 Upper-level Ontology (lead) Stijn, Uwe

• D2.2 Design of Reasoning System (lead) Stijn, Uwe

• D2.3 Reasoning Infrastructure (lead) Stijn, Uwe

• D3.1 Agent System Design (contribute) Graham

• D3.2 SenSE Multi-agent Infrastructure (lead) Graham

• D4.1 Semantic Façade Design (lead) Uwe

• D4.2 Semantic Façade Framework (contribute) Uwe

• D5.1 Software Prototype: SenSE Environment (contribute) Uwe,

Stijn, Graham

• D6.1 Test and Verification Report (lead) Uwe, Stijn, Graham

• D7.1 List of Publications (contribute) Uwe

3.4. Staff

Here we discuss student, junior, and senior researchers of the RSWS cluster.

51


3.4.1. Student Researchers

Student Researchers

Nr Name Supervisor

8 Joachim Adi Schütz Darko Anicic

9 Nathalie Steinmetz Holger Lausen

10 Martin Tanler Holger Lausen

3.4.2. Junior Researchers

Junior Researchers

No Name Objective

1 Darko Anicic Reasoning

2 Jos de Bruijn Formal language

5 Dimitrij Denissenko

6 Cristina Feier Reasoning

10 Uwe Keller Reasoning

14 Holger Lausen Discovery

16 Ruzica Piskac Reasoning

17 Richard Pöttler Reasoning

20 James Scicluna Choreography

26 Alexander Wahler

52


3.4.2.1. Darko Anicic

Name

Darko Anicic

Entry date July 2005

Cluster Reasonable Semantic Web Services – RSWS

Objective Reasoning

Projects Project name: MINS

tasks: implementation of MINS and work on new reasoner engine

(research and implementation)

deliverables: -

For this year I am committed also to work on following projects:

SEnSE

tasks: reasoner development

Triple Space tasks: YARS binding implementation

SESA (if approved) tasks: reasoner development

Research topic The Semantic Web Technology and Semantically Enabled Service-

Oriented Architectures need the reasoning component for deferent

tasks such as service discovery, process and data mediation and

integration etc. To enable processing of these tasks in an automated

manner, machines need to have access to structured knowledge.

Knowledge described formally using logical languages can be

interpreted and reasoned about by machines.

Research work at DERI concerning reasoning about formal

knowledge is conducted by the Reasoning component as a part of the

Semantic Execution Environment. My responsibility is to lead this

component mainly through the implementation of a fully-functional

reasoner engine that will support WSML and RIF specification.

Apart from the implementation I am focused on conducting research

regarding novel deductive database algorithms and optimization

techniques.

Mission critical features of the Reasoning component are: hybrid

reasoning based on DLs and logic programming, reasoning with very

large instance bases, reasoning with heterogeneous and conflicting

information, and reasoning in distributed environments.

Also one of our major objectives is the implementation of Rule

Interchange Format (RIF). RIF aims to specify a common format for


Progress

towards PhD

rules in order to allow rule interchange between diverse rule systems.

This format (or language) will function as an interlingua into which

rule languages can be mapped, allowing rules written in different

languages to be executed in the same reasoner engine. Apart from

this functionality provided by RIF Core, we will develop a set of

extensions to fulfill the import/export functionality. Set of extensions

will serve as a “To-RIF Translator” and a “From-RIF Translator”. In

this way we will be able to translate an appropriate input rule

specification into a RIF-specification and apply an appropriate From-

Rif Translator for translation from the RIF-specification into a rulespecification

in the desired target rule-language.

Implementing the RIF layer our reasoner engine will be capable of

handling rules from diverse rule systems and will make WSML rule

sets interchangeable with rule sets written in other languages that are

supported by RIF.

If I start PhD studies my thesis will be focused on:

- New reasoning evaluation algorithms and optimization techniques

- Further research work on WSML Full decidability

- Reasoning in a distributed environment

- Reasoning with incomplete information

- New architecture for reasoning in the Semantic Web and

Semantically Enabled Service-Oriented environment

Implementations My major responsibility at DERI is to work on prototype

implementation and organization of software development activities

in the Reasoner component. My focus is on implementation of an

inference engine. Thus my work, so far, was conducted through

projects: MINS and WSML2Reasoner. The current implementation

of MINS is available at http://dev1.deri.at/mins/ and

WSML2Reasoner information can be found at

http://dev1.deri.at/wsml2reasoner/.

However, recently together with the Reasoner component team, I

have started to build a new reasoner from scratch. This new reasoner

will be an efficient and extensible inference engine for expressive

rule-based languages, e.g. WSML Core/Flight/Rule, as well as

description logic based languages, e.g., WSML-DL. The reasoner

will be capable of handling very large instance bases as well as to

conduct reasoning with heterogeneous and conflicting information,

and reasoning in distributed environments. Also one of my major

objectives is the implementation of Rule Interchange Format (RIF)

specification. RIF aims to define a common format for rules in order

to allow rule interchange between diverse rule systems.

More information on the current effort regarding the new reasoner

implementation can be found at:

http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Reasoning and in the Extended

Roadmap for Reasoner Component.

54


Publications

In short my responsibility is to work on delivering a completely new

reasoner engine. This engine will implement novel efficient

deductive database algorithms and optimization techniques. Apart

from that, the new reasoner will be extensible to meet different needs

of many ongoing projects at DERI which require the reasoner

functionality and will be deployable in various options (e.g. as a

stand alone application, library for further integration, server

applications etc.).

Currently I do not have accepted publications. However I will

contribute in two publications. These publications will present the

work conducted by the Reasoner component team explaining our

approaches and innovations in this field of the Semantic Web

research. The publications are planned after the phase 2 (December

1 st , 2006) and the phase 3 (2007.) of the project. For more details

about the activities timetable, see the Extended Roadmap for

Reasoner Component.

55


3.4.2.2. Jos de Bruijn

Name

Jos the Bruijn

Entry date March 2003

Cluster RSWS

Objective Formal Languages

Projects DIP, T1.7, D1.7: next version of WSML with proper specification of

WSML-Full semantics; due December 2006

KWeb, WP2.5 (don't know task/del. name): using first-order

autoepistemic logic for unifying nonmonotonic logic programming

and classical first-order logic with equality

W3C RIF WG: principal representative for DERI Innsbruck

Research topic Investigations around properties of current web languages around

Description Logics and nonmonotonic logic programming;

integration of classical first-order based languages and nonmonotonic

logic programming using first-order nonmonotonic logics;

application of classical logic and logic programming to the Semantic

Web and Semantic Web Services.

Progress

towards PhD

Preliminary outline of the PhD:

1. Introduction

2. Preliminaries

3. Analysis of current ontology languages, mainly OWL content

based on [1]

4. Analysis of issues which arise when combining rules and

ontologies content in preparation; expect a paper submission

within a few months

5. Using First-Order Autoepistemic logic for integrating rules and

ontologies content in preparation; expect a paper submission

within a few months; further refinement to be expected during

the course of this year (hopefully resulting eventually in a journal

submission and publication, possibly together with the content of

the next chapter)


6. Decidable subsets / Proof theory this chapter should either

discuss interesting decidable subsets of the work in chapter 5

(e.g. through relationships with fixed-point logic) or a (probably

incomplete) proof theory for the first-order autoepistemic logic

or an interesting subset; the main point is that this chapter shows

a good application of the work of chapter 5- hopefully work in

this chapter will be done in the summer and beginning of the fall

7. Relation between frame-based and predicate-based ontology

modeling WSML-Core currently interprets concepts as unary

predicates, whereas WSML-Flight interprets them as terms.

There is currently no justification of this layering although it is

expected that it will pose no problems.

In this chapter I try to show how frame-based ontology modeling

(as in F-Logic) and predicate-based ontology modeling (as in

Description Logics) relate to each other and under which

conditions they may be considered equivalent and to what extent.

Work is still in very early stages. Expect to have results in the

form of a paper submission somewhere in the summer.

8. WSML application of logics to the Semantic Web (Services)

according to the idea of the common subset, DL and rules

extensions, and a common superset some of the content for this

chapter has been presented earlier [2, 3, 4]

9. Conclusions

Apart from the mentioned work, I have been doing a bit of work on

RDF [5] and plan to continue this. This might in the end be

integrated in the WSML chapter to some extent to show how WSML

is layered on top of RDF.

[1] Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, Ruben Lara, and Dieter Fensel.

OWL DL vs. OWL Flight: Conceptual modeling and reasoning

on the semantic web. In Proceedings of the 14th International

World Wide Web Conference (WWW2005), Chiba, Japan, 2005.

ACM.

[2] Holger Lausen, Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel.

WSML - a language framework for semantic web services. In

Proceedings of the W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for

Interoperability, Washington DC, USA, April 2005. Position

paper.

57


[3] Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel.

The WSML rule languages for the semantic web. In Proceedings

of the W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for Interoperability,

Washington DC, USA, April 2005. Position paper.

[4] Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel.

The web service modeling language: An overview. In

Proceedings of the 3rd European Semantic Web Conference

(ESWC2006), Budva, Montenegro, June 2006. Springer-Verlag.

Implementations

Publications

[5] Jos de Bruijn, Enrico Franconi, and Sergio Tessaris. Logical

reconstruction of normative RDF. In OWL: Experiences and

Directions Workshop (OWLED-2005), Galway, Ireland,

November 2005.

Journal Articles

1. Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Rubén Lara, and Uwe

Keller. Using the web service modelling ontology to enable

Semantic eBusiness. Communications of the ACM, special issue

on the semantic e-business vision, 48(12):43–47, December

2005. This is the author’s version of the work. It is posted here

by permission of ACM for your personal use. Not for

redistribution. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1101779.1101807.

2. Jos de Bruijn, Rubén Lara, Sinuhé Arroyo, Juan Miguel Gomez,

Sung-Kook Han, and Dieter Fensel. A unified semantic web

services architecture based on WSMF and UPML. International

Journal on Web Engineering Technology, 2(2–3):148–180, 2005.

3. Dumitru Roman, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Rubén Lara Jos de

Bruijn, Michael Stollberg, Axel Polleres, Cristina Feier,

Christoph Bussler, and Dieter Fensel. Web service modeling

ontology. Applied Ontology, 1(1):77–106, 2005.

Books

4. Vladimir Alexiev, Michael Breu, Jos de Bruijn, Rubén Lara,

Holger Lausen, and Dieter Fensel. Information Integration with

Ontologies. Wiley, West Sussex, UK, 2005.

58


Papers in Collections

5. Jos de Bruijn, Marc Ehrig, Cristina Feier, Francisco Martín-

Recuerda, François Scharffe, and Moritz Weiten. Ontology

mediation, merging and aligning. In Semantic Web

Technologies. Wiley, UK, 2006. To appear.

6. Jos de Bruijn and Dieter Fensel. Ontology definitions. In

Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science. Marcel

Dekker, inc., 2005.

http://www.dekker.com/sdek/issues~content=t713172967.

Papers in Proceedings

7. Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel.

The web service modeling language: An overview. In

Proceedings of the 3rd European Semantic Web Conference

(ESWC2006), Budva, Montenegro, June 2006. Springer-Verlag.

8. Jos de Bruijn, Enrico Franconi, and Sergio Tessaris. Logical

reconstruction of RDF and ontology languages. In Third

Workshop on Principles and Practice of Semantic Web

Reasoning, Dagstuhl, Germany, September 2005.

9. Jos de Bruijn, Enrico Franconi, and Sergio Tessaris. Logical

reconstruction of normative RDF. In OWL: Experiences and

Directions Workshop (OWLED-2005), Galway, Ireland,

November 2005.

10. Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, Rubén Lara, and Dieter Fensel.

OWL DL vs. OWL Flight: Conceptual modeling and reasoning

on the semantic web. In Proceedings of the 14th International

World Wide Web Conference (WWW2005), Chiba, Japan, 2005.

ACM.

11. Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel.

The WSML rule languages for the semantic web. In Proceedings

of the W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for Interoperability,

Washington DC, USA, April 2005. Position paper.

12. Michael Kifer, Jos de Bruijn, Harold Boley, and Dieter Fensel. A

realistic architecture for the semantic web. In Proceedings of the

International Conference on Rules and Rule Markup Languages

for the Semantic Web (RuleML-2005), Ireland, Galway,

November 2005.

59


13. Holger Lausen, Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel.

WSML - a language framework for semantic web services. In

Proceedings of the W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for

Interoperability, Washington DC, USA, April 2005. Position

paper.

14. François Scharffe and Jos de Bruijn. A language to specify

mappings between ontologies. In Proceedings of the Internet

Based Systems IEEE Conference (SITIS05), Yandoué,

Cameroon, November 2005.

15. Jos de Bruijn. Semantic integration of disparate data sources in

the cog project. In Proceedings of the 6th International

Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS2004),

Porto, Portugal, 2004.

16. Jos de Bruijn and Holger Lausen. Active ontologies for data

source queries. In Proceedings of the first European Semantic

Web Symposium (ESWS2004), number 3053 in LNCS,

Heidelberg, 2004. Springer-Verlag.

17. Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Sinuhé Arroyo, Jos de Bruijn, and

Dieter Fensel. Semantic web services: description requirements

and current technologies. In International Workshop on

Electronic Commerce, Agents, and Semantic Web Services,

Pittsburg, PA, USA, September 2003.

Selected Technical Reports

18. Jos de Bruijn, Cristina Feier, Uwe Keller, Rubén Lara, Axel

Polleres, and Livia Predoiu. WSML reasoner survey. Final Draft

D16.2v0.2, WSML, 2005.

19. Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen, Reto Krummenacher, Axel

Polleres, Livia Predoiu, Michael Kifer, and Dieter Fensel. The

web service modeling language WSML. WSML Final Draft

D16.1v0.21, WSML, 2005.

20. Jos de Bruijn, Francisco Martín-Recuerda, Axel Polleres, Livia

Predoiu, and Marc Ehrig. Ontology mediation management v1.

Deliverable D4.4.1, SEKT, 2004.

21. Jos de Bruijn, Douglas Foxvog, and Kerstin Zimmerman.

Ontology mediation patterns library v1. Deliverable D4.3.1,

SEKT, 2004.

60


22. Jos de Bruijn, Francisco Martín-Recuerda, Dimitar Manov, and

Marc Ehrig. State-of-the-art survey on ontology merging and

aligning v1. Deliverable D4.2.1, SEKT, 2004.

23. Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, Rubén Lara, and Dieter Fensel.

OWL - . Final draft d20.1v0.2, WSML, 2004.

24. Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, Rubén Lara, and Dieter Fensel.

OWL flight. Working draft d20.3v0.1, WSML, 2004.

25. Jos de Bruijn and Axel Polleres. Towards and ontology mapping

specification language for the semantic web. Technical Report

DERI-2004-06-30, DERI, 2004.

26. Rubén Lara, Axel Polleres, Holger Lausen, Dumitru Roman, Jos

de Bruijn, and Dieter Fensel. A conceptual comparison between

WSMO and OWL-S. Final draft D4.1v0.1, WSMO, 2004.

27. Jos de Bruijn. Using ontologies - enabling knowledge sharing

and reuse on the semantic web. Technical Report DERI-2003-10-

29, DERI, 2003.

Other Publications

28. Jürgen Angele, Harold Boley, Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel,

Pascal Hitzler, Michael Kifer, Reto Krummenacher, Holger

Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Rudi Studer. Web rule language

(WRL). W3C Member Submission 09 September 2005, 2005.

29. Harold Boley, Jos de Bruijn, and Reto Krummenacher. WRL

XML schemas. W3C Member Submission 09 September 2005,

2005.

30. Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Pascal Hitzler, Michael Kifer, and

Axel Polleres. Relationship of WRL to relevant other

technologies. W3C Member Submission 09 September 2005,

2005.

31. Jos de Bruijn, Christoph Bussler, John Domingue, Dieter Fensel,

Martin Hepp, Uwe Keller, Michael Kifer, Birgitta König-Ries,

Jacek Kopecky, Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Eyal Oren, Axel

Polleres, Dumitru Roman, James Scicluna, and Michael

Stollberg. Web service modeling ontology (WSMO). W3C

Member Submission 3 June 2005, 2005.

61


32. Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Michael Kifer Holger

Lausen, Reto Krummenacher, Axel Polleres, and Livia Predoiu.

Web service modeling language (WSML). W3C Member

Submission 3 June 2005, 2005.

33. Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Michael Kifer, Jacek Kopecky,

Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, Dumitru Roman,

James Scicluna, and Ioan Toma. Relationship of WSMO to other

relevant technologies. W3C Member Submission 3 June 2005,

2005.

Master’s Thesis

34. Jos de Bruijn. Semantic information integration within and across

organizational boundaries. Master’s thesis, Delft University of

Technology, Delft, The Netherlands, November 2003.

62


3.4.2.3. Dimitrij Denissenko

Name

Dimitrij Denissenko

Entry date February 2006

Cluster SEBIS

Objective Multimedia Ontologies

Projects My main project is SALERO which develops “intelligent

content” objects with context-aware behaviors for self-adaptive

use and delivery across different platforms, building on and

extending research in media technologies, web semantics, and

context based image retrieval, to reverse the trend toward everincreasing

cost of creating media. My main contribution is in

developing of representation techniques for multimedia objects,

ontology language for multimedia objects and API and

appropriate development tools.

Research topic The focus of my research is in lifting of MPEG-7 metadata to the

ontological level and to develop mappings with standard

ontological languages as OWL and WSML.

Progress The concrete topic needs still to be defined.

towards PhD

Implementations Workbench for multimedia ontologies

Publications


3.4.2.4. Cristina Feier

Name

Cristina Feier

Entry date September 2004

Cluster

Objective

Projects

Reasonable Semantic Web Services – RSWS

Reasoning

RW2:

tasks:

- investigating/comparing Datalog (with negation)/LP evaluation

techniques

- semantics for scoped negation as failure

- reasoning in a distributed setting - infrastructure (context

representation) and reasoning peculliarities - defining a local

model semantics for interconnected LP programs and devising an

appropriate evaluation technique

deliverables:

D1.2 Report on reasoning techniques and prototype implementation

for the WSML-Core and WSMO-DL languages

D1.3 Report on reasoning techniques and prototype implementation

for the WSML-RL and WSML-FOL languages

SEKT

tasks:

- local model semantics for reasoning with WSML and particular

grounding(s) (most probably, WSML Flight) of the mapping

language;

- reasoning with WSML programs interconnected by such mappings

- further analysing the status of the SEKT case studies and provide

guidance in how mediation can be used for the scenarios identified

by this case studies and possibly suggest new scenarios which

involve mediation.

Research topic

deliverables:

D4.4.2 Report on Ontology mediation management V2

D4.6.2 Report on ontology mediation for case studies V2

My research interests can be placed in the general category of

reasoning for the Semantic Web. The peculiarity of this task is the


presence of ontologies located at different places on the Web,

interconnected by so-called mappings. I decided to focus on the

setting where ontologies and mappings are expressed using

formalisms from the LP family.

Several issues related with distributed reasoning that i am currently

investigating are:

1) semantics and evaluation: most of the approaches in the literature

assume the existence of a global model into which all the local

models are mapped for defining the semantics of reasoning with a

network of ontologies; also, in these cases, there is a global domain

of interpretation into which all the local domains are embedded.

This kind of semantics is called “global model semantics”. It gives

rise to global inconsistency, in the sense that if one of the

knowledge bases/peers is inconsistent, the inconsistency is

propagated to the whole system. On the web, where one cannot talk

about the whole system, this amounts to propagating the

inconsistency to the strongly connected component of the graph of

ontologies from which makes part the ontology to which a query is

addressed.

An approach that seems to be more realistic is the local semantics

approach, which considers that for each context/ontology/peer

there exists a local set of models and a local domain of

interpretation. Some domain relations are defined for establishing

the correspondences between elements from different domains. In

this case, the inconsistency of one context does not propagate to the

whole context space. The most prominent approaches based on this

kind of semantics are DFOL [Serafini+etAll-05] and C-OWL

[Bouquet+etAll-04].

Considering that a local model semantics is desirable for reasoning

with LP-based interconnected ontologies, an important issue is how

to define the evaluation technique. This one of the direction for my

research.

2) the treatment of negation as failure: as discussed at

http://www.w3.org/2004/12/rules-ws/report/#negation-as-failure,

negation as failure is a feature that is desired for representing

knowledge on the Web, but due to the OWA, which is

characteristic to this environment, cannot be applied without

certain restrictions. The suggested restriction is to define the scope

of the search for failure, the new type of negation being called

scoped negation as failure. However, due to the multiple ways of

defining the scope of the search for failure, different semantics can

be defined for programs that embed this type of negation. At the

initiative of Axel, and together with Andreas, we did some work

and plan to further continue in this direction.

65


Progress

towards PhD

Implementations

Publications

3) the possibility of employing heuristics for distinguishing between

relevant and not-so-relevant information for a query: the idea is to

reduce the search space for answers to a query.

So far, I have investigated the state-of-the-art in more areas which

are related to distributed reasoning. For example, I had a look at

approaches related to ontology mapping like MAFRA

[Maedche+MotikETAL-02], OntoMap [Kiryakov+SimovETAL-01a,

Kiryakov+SimovETAL-01b], RDFT [Omelayenko-02], etc. (actually

all the surveyed approaches are based on particular kind of

mappings, but other approaches are regarded from another point of

view/classified in a different category because they have other most

prominent characteristics), context-based approaches (Flora

[Yang+Kifer+Zhao-03, Kifer-05], Triple [DeckerETAL-05,

Sintek+Decker-03]), among these a special place having the

approaches that are based/extend the local model semantics (C-OWL

[Bouquet+GiunchigliaETAL-04],

DFOL[Serafini+StuckenschmidtETAL-05]), query-rewriting

approaches [Calvanese+GiacomoETAL-04a], the connection

between the data integration approach and automatic Web service

composition [Thakkar+Ambite+Knoblock-04], frameworks that take

into account the relationships between peers[Bertossi+Bravo-04],

etc..

As a result, I had identified the issues mentioned in my research

interests as being both relevant for the topic of distributed reasoning

and not deeply/widely treated in the existing work. Thus, working on

each of these issues and their combination into a general framework,

has the potential of getting original research results.

Recently I had a look in several Datalog evaluation procedures and I

am currently surveying the literature in order to identify classes of

programs for which a certain evaluation procedure is preferable over

the others. This work is relevant both for my PhD topic and for the

reasoner component (concerning its optimality).

As concerns the scoped negation as failure, together with Axel and

Andreas we wrote a paper in which we defined two possible

semantics for logical programs with contexts and (scoped) negation

as failure[Polleres+Feier+Hart].

In the near future, I intend to have a look at possible way to define

contexts, since the semantics for distributed reasoning are sensitive

to this issue (what information gets actually to be accessed given a

certain query and a certain syntactical form of rules with contexts).

As already mentioned in the research direction, i intend to proceed

by defining a local model semantics and an evaluation technique for

interconnected logical programs.

Book Chapters:

66


Jos de Bruijn, Marc Ehrig, Cristina Feier, Francisco Martin-

Recuerda, Francois Scharffe, Moritz Weiten: Ontology mediation,

merging and aligning – SEKT Book Chapter, 2006 (to appear).

Stollberg, M., Feier, C.; Roman, D., Fensel: Semantic Web Services -

Concepts and Technology. In N. Ide, D. Cristea, D Tufis (eds.):

Language Technology, Ontologies, and the Semantic Web. Kluwer

Publishers, 2006 (to appear).

Journal Articles:

Dumitru Roman, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Jos de Bruijn, Rubén

Lara, Michael Stollberg, Axel Polleres, Cristina Feier, Christoph

Bussler, and Dieter Fensel: Web Service Modeling Ontology. Applied

Ontology, IOS Press, 2005

Publications in Conference Proceedings:

Axel Polleres, Cristina Feier, Andreas Harth: Logic Programs with

Contextually Scoped Negation, ISWC06.

Feier, Roman, D.; Polleres, A.; Domingue, J.; Stollberg, M. and

Fensel, D.: Towards Intelligent Web Services: Web Service Modeling

Ontology (WSMO). In Proceedings of the International Conference

on Intelligent Computing (ICIC) 2005, Hefei, China, August 23-26,

2005.

67


3.4.2.5. Uwe Keller

Name

Uwe Keller

Entry date January 2004

Cluster Reasonable Semantic Web Services - RSWS

Objective Reasoning

Projects Currently and in the near future I am involved in the tasks and

project deliverables listed below past activities are not listed.

RW2

I Deliverable D1.2 – Report on reasoning techniques and prototype

implementation for the WSML-Core and WSML-DL languages

I Deliverable D1.3 – Report on reasoning techniques and prototype

implementation for the WSML-Rule and WSML-FOL languages

I Deliverable D1.4 – Evaluation of the reasoning procedures and

techniques

I Deliverable D4.2 – Revision of D4.1 (State-of-the art in semantic

Web service description and usage)

I Deliverable D5.2 – Report on and evaluation of the dissemination

strategy

I Deliverable D6.2 – Report on standardization activities and

achieved results

I Deliverable D7.2 – Final project report SEnSE

I Deliverable D0.1 v1 – Project Report (mid-term)

I Deliverable D0.1 v2 – Project Report (mid-term)

I Deliverable D2.1 – Upper-level Ontology

I Deliverable D2.2 – Design of Reasoning System

I Deliverable D2.3 – Reasoning Infrastructure

I Deliverable D3.1 – Agent System Design

I Deliverable D3.2 – SEnSE Multi-agent Infrastructure

I Deliverable D4.1 – Semantic Facade Design

I Deliverable D4.2 – Semantic Facade Framework

I Deliverable D5.1 – Software Prototype: SEnSE Environment

I Deliverable D6.1 – Test and Verification Report

I Deliverable D7.1 – List of Publications WSMO & WSML

I Deliverable D28.1 – Functional Specification of Web

Services: Elaborate the current presentation and discussion of the

interplay between description language and mathematical model

underlying the semantic layer; relation between semantic notions and

syntactic criteria to detect them; criteria for extensions of functional


Research topic

Progress

towards PhD

descriptions; completion of proofs. Furthermore, I am project

responsible for the SEnSE project and managing the project for

DERI Innsbruck. Given the list above, it is obvious that there are too

many deliverables to be handled by a single person.

Up to now, the progress towards my PhD is only marginal. I

investigated some parts of relevant literature concerning reasoning in

general (not specifically on Semantic Web reasoning), but failed for

a long time to develop a concrete idea of a suitable but not unrealistic

direction for a PhD. Instead, I collected various small ideas, but

never found the time to really start investigating them seriously. Only

very recently, in a discussion with my cluster leader Stijn Heymans

(where we talked about my plans for a PhD), I myself recognized

that many of the ideas somehow are related and actually should

provide enough material for a serious PhD project.

This means, so far I have identified a promising area of research for a

PhD project. The project sketched in Section 3 is a promising one for

the following reasons:

• It has a clear research hypothesis / question, which is not too

general and allows to go in sufficient depths as well

• Both theoretical and practical aspects are involved

• It can be done in finite time

• One can start small and extend the project in various directions as

needed

• It addresses an approach that has not been considered yet, however

clearly is based and motivated by existing work. The results and

work the project uses itself is well-investigated only partially, and

thus new results on underlying techniques are possible.

• After the completion of the project, a new small piece in the

solution space for a concrete problem of practical interest will be

governed and a small gap will be filled. In the best case, the result

will even lead to more powerful techniques in the field.

• The solutions can be implemented an thus clearly evaluated with

respect to existing tools (based on commonly accepted

benchmarks)

• The project is related to our community (Semantic Web), the

Description Logic community, and the Automated Reasoning

Community (and perhaps for the Modal Logic community too).

• The project is of general interest to a larger community, instead of a

DERI-intern research problem, that might have the problem of

lacking acceptance and feedback within a research community of

suitable size

• The outcomes can be applied in the context of specific work in

DERI as well, in particular for WSML-DL reasoning.

The next steps in regard of the PhD project is to seriously get into all

the relevant material, and to write a PhD project proposal, which

69


thoroughly develops the justification of the project, is backed by

concrete pointers to relevant literature and ensures the feasibility of

the approach. Finally, it will include a workplan that manifests the

roadmap for the project.

Based on this proposal, we intend to write a project proposal (e.g.

Austrian-funded, foundational research: FWF) and send it to a

respective funding agency. In case of acceptance, the work

distribution in regard of existing projects has to be reconsidered.

Implementations Currently, I am involved in or responsible for the development of the

following pieces of software:

WSML2Reasoner: WSML2Reasoner is a flexible framework for

reasoning over WSML-Ontologies. Currently, it supports query

answering over WSML-Core, WSMLFlight and WSML-Rule

ontologies. The framework serves as a translational middleware

as well as a unified interface between clients interested in

WSML reasoning and specific reasoning engines. In particular, it

does not fix the engine to be used for evaluation of reasoning

tasks (e.g. query answering) and allows to integrate new engines

in a simple manner.

MINS: Design and Implementation of the DERI Rule Engine.

Essentially, MINS can perform query answering over Horn

theories (including default negation and built-in/datatype

predicates) and therefore be used (as a reasoner underlying

WSML2Reasoner) for query answering over WSML-Core,

WSML-Flight and WSMLRule.

Publications

Semantic Facades: The SEnSE project aims at the development of a

knowledge-based information system for engineers that proactively

supports the information needs of people involved in

complex engineering processes.

Semantic Facades are particular software components that wrap

legacy sources within the SEnSE environment and integrate them

into the system. They provide a semantic perspective of relevant

information stored (or represented) within the source and allow

uniform and semantic-based access to these information across

multiple heterogeneous resources.

Chris Bussler, Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, and Brahmananda

Sapkota, editors. 2nd WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW

2005), Innsbruck, Austria, volume 134 of CEUR Workshop

Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073. CEUR, June 2005.

Jos de Bruijn, Chris Bussler, John Domingue, Dieter Fensel, Martin

Hepp, Uwe Keller, Michael Kifer, Birgitta Knig-Ries, Jacek

Kopecky, Ruben Lara, Holger Lausen, Eyal Oren, Axel Polleres,

70


Dumitru Roman, James Scicluna, and Michael Stollberg. Web

Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO). W3C Member Submission,

June 2005.

Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Michael Kifer, Holger

Lausen, Reto Krummenacher, Axel Polleres, and Livia Predoiu. Web

Service Modeling Language (WSML). W3C Member Submission,

June 2005.

Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, and Rub´en Lara. Using

the Web Service Modelling Ontology to enable Semantic eBusiness.

Communications of the ACM, Special issue on the Semantic e-

Business Vision, 48(12):43–47, December 2005.

Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Ioan

Toma. WWW or What is Wrong with Web Service Discovery.

Proceedings of the W3C Workshop on Frameworks for Semantics in

Web Services, Innsbruck, Austria, June 2005.

Uwe Keller. Some Remarks on the Definability of Transitive

Closure in First-order Logic and Datalog. Internal Report, Digital

Enterprise Research Institute (DERI), University of Innsbruck, June

2004.

Uwe Keller. Development of a WSML Reasoning Infrastructure.

Internal Report, Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI),

University of Innsbruck, August 2005.

Uwe Keller. How common Specification Frameworks for Software

Components deal with Inputs in functional Specifications. Internal

Report, Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI), University of

Innsbruck, January 2005.

Uwe Keller, Rub´en Lara, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter

Fensel. Automatic Location of Services. In Proceedings of 2nd

European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC), Heraklion, Greece,

pages 1–16, May 2005.

Uwe Keller and Holger Lausen. Semantic Web Service Discovery in

WSMO, Chapter in Semantic Web Services: Theory, Tools and

Applications. 2006 to appear.

Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, and Michael Stollberg. On the

Semantics of Functional Descriptions of Web Services. In York Sure

and John Domingue, editors, Proceedings of the 3rd European

Semantic Web Conference (ESWC), Budva, Montenegro, volume

71


4011 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), pages 605 –

619. Springer, June 11-14 2006.

Uwe Keller, Michael Neswal, and Alois Reitbauer. Semantic Web

meets Product Engineering – It does make a lot of SEnSE. Poster

proposal about the SEnSE project, unpublished, 2006.

Uwe Keller, Michael Stollberg, and Dieter Fensel. WOOGLE meets

Semantic Web Fred. In Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMO

Implementations (WIW 2004), Frankfurt, Germany, September

2004. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073.

Michael Kifer, Rub´en Lara, Axel Polleres, C. Zhao, Uwe Keller,

and Holger Lausen. A Logical Framework for Web Service

Discovery. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Semantic Web

Services: Preparing to Meet the World of Business Applications,

International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), Hiroshima,

Japan, November 2004.

Dumitru Roman, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Rub´en Lara Jos de

Bruijn, Michael Stollberg, Axel Polleres, Cristina Feier, Christoph

Bussler, and Dieter Fensel. Web service modeling ontology. Applied

Ontology, 1(1):77–106, 2005.

Michael Stollberg, Uwe Keller, and Dieter Fensel. Partner and

Service Discovery for Collaboration Establishment on the Semantic

Web. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Web

Services (ICWS 2005), Orlando, Florida, July 2005.

Michael Stollberg, Uwe Keller, Peter Zugmann, and Roman Herzog.

Semantic Web Fred – Agent Cooperation on the Semantic Web. In

Demonstration at the 3rd International Conference on Semantic Web

(ISWC 2004), Hiroshima, Japan, January 2004.

Michael Stollberg, Dimitru Roman, Ioan Toma, Uwe Keller, Roman

Herzog, Peter Zugmann, and Dieter Fensel. Semantic Web Fred –

Automated Goal Resolution on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of

the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

(HICSS 2005), Hawaii, January 2005.

A. Zhdanova and Uwe Keller. Semantic Web Fred – Automated

Goal Resolution on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the Second

World Enformatika Congress (WEC 2005), Istanbul, Turkey, pages

47–50, February 2005.

72


3.4.2.6. Holger Lausen

Name

Holger Lausen

Entry date April 2003

Cluster RSWS

Objective Discovery (and infrastructure service like WSMO4J)

Projects - Kweb Contributer

- SWS Challenge Organization

- Contribution to Discovery Prototype

- RW² Project Management (supervision 2 students / coordination

Researcher

- RW² Deliverables:

- d2.2 Discovery Framework Specification

- d2.3 Prototype Implementation of the Discovery Component

- d3.2 First prototype of the base framework for the WSMO-Studio

including the WSMO-API

- d3.3 WSMO Studio Prototype

- Dissemination/Technology Watch/Progress Reports

- W3C

- Semantic Annotation for WSDL Working Group

- RIF Working Group (getting less involved here)

Research topic Web Service Discovery

Numerous proposals exist on adding /semantics/ to Web Service

Discovery, but most focus on some specific aspect without revealing

their underlying assumptions. Each approach has a specific approach

to model service requests and service offers. While often the notion

of a match is logically sound described, it is not mapped to actual

requirements in the problem domain. I want to show how different

granularities of modeling can address a particular problem, i.e. a

keyword based search works perfectly fine for a manual search in

even a relatively big amount of services as long as their domain is

sufficient different.

Adding concept based descriptions can increase the precision, given

that providers (or some one else) is willing to invest the effort of

annotation. This Annotations can ease *manual to semi-automatic*

discovery, and it can be shown that ontologies are a more flexible

means for this type of classification than standard classification


schemes like UNSPC. Respectively it can be shown that one can

disambiguating concepts mentioned in UNSPC, by adding further

annotation using an ontology language.

Finally for the vision of automatic discovery, selection and

invocation it is clear that more precise annotations are needed.

Slowly annotating inputs and outputs (as in many OWL-S based

approaches) have the deficiency that they do not describe the relation

between inputs and outputs.

The aim of the PhD is to outline those "levels" of modeling and how

they relate/address to different problems in the area of service

discovery.

An implementation based on the previous work on WSML will

illustrate how a particular approach can be realized.

Progress

towards PhD

1) Introduction

2) Snapshot of Web Services

Analyze of a collection of public Web services and currently

available search engines (respectively portals)

3) Analyze of Approaches to improve Service Discovery.

- The AI/Planning Approach (focus on the input/output

annotation)

- Ubiquitous Computing (focus on the discovery protocol

aspect)

- Component Retrieval in Software Specification (complete

specification of functionality)

4) Methodology for Modeling Web Services

5) Implementation

5.1) Architecture

5.2) Foundations (WSMO4J / WSML2Reasoner)

6) Evaluation

7) Conclusion

Implementations Lead (Innsbruck): WSMO4J

Participating: WSML2Reasoner, MINS (parser extension),

Discovery Engine

Publications Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen and Michael Stollberg. On the Semantics

74


of Functional Descriptions of Web Services in Proceedings of the 3rd

European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2006). Budva,

Montenegro, June 2006.

Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres and Dieter Fensel. The

Web Service Modeling Language: An Overview in Proceedings of the

3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2006), Budva,

Montenegro, June 2006.

Dumitru Roman, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Jos de Bruijn, Rubén

Lara, Michael Stollberg, Axel Polleres, Cristina Feier, Christoph

Bussler, and Dieter Fensel: Web Service Modeling Ontology. To

appear in Applied Ontology, IOS Press, 2005.

Holger Lausen, Ying Ding, Michael Stollberg, Dieter Fensel, Rubén

Lara, and Sung-Kook Han: Semantic web portals: state-of-the-art

survey. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2005, Volume: 9 Issue:

5 Page: 40 - 49

Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Ioan

Toma: What is wrong with Web services Discovery. In W3C

Workshop on Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services,

Innsbruck, Austria, June 2005. Position Paper.

Emanuele Della Valle, Dario Cerizza, Politecnico di Milano Veli,

Bicer Yildirak, Kabak Gokce, Banu Laleci, and Holger Lausen. The

Need for Semantic Web Service in the eHealth. In W3C Workshop

on Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services, Innsbruck, Austria,

June 2005. Position Paper.

Jos de Bruijn, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel: The

WSML rule languages for the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the

W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for Interoperability, Washington

DC, USA, April 2005. Position Paper.

Holger Lausen, Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, and Dieter Fensel:

WSML - a Language Framework for Semantic Web Services. W3C

Rules Workshop. In Proceedings of the W3C Workshop on Rule

Languages for Interoperability, Washington DC, USA, April 2005.

Position Paper.

Uwe Keller, Ruben Lara, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and Dieter

Fensel: Automatic Location of Services, In Proceedings of the 2nd

European Semantic Web Symposium (ESWS2005), Heraklion,

Crete, 29th May - 1st June, 2005.

75


Vladimir Alexiev, Michael Breu, Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Ruben

Lara and Holger Lausen: Information Integration with Ontologies:

Ontology based Information Integration in an Industrial Setting,

ISBN: 0-470-01048-7, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, UK, April

2005.

Daniel Olmedilla, Rubén Lara, Axel Polleres, and Holger Lausen:

Trust negotiation for semantic web services. In Lecture Notes in

Computer Science, volume 3387, pages 81-95, 2005.

Michael Kifer, Rubén Lara, Axel Polleres, Chang Zhao, Uwe Keller,

Holger Lausen, and Dieter Fensel. A logical framework for web

service discovery. In ISWC 2004 Workshop on Semantic Web

Services: Preparing to Meet the World of Business Applications,

volume 119, Hiroshima, Japan, 2004. CEUR Workshop Proceedings.

Holger Lausen and Michael Felderer. Architecture for an ontology

and web service modeling studio. In Proceedings of the Workshop on

WSMO Implementations, volume 107. CEURWorkshop

Proceedings, 2004.

Ying Ding, Dieter Fensel, Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Michael

Stollberg, and Sung-Kook Han, editors. Proceedings of the ECAI

2004 Workshop on Application of Semantic Web Technologies to

Web Communities, Valencia, Spain, August 23-27, 2004, volume 107

of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2004.

Michael Stollberg, Holger Lausen, Rubén Lara, Ying Ding, Sung-

Kook Han, and Dieter Fensel. Towards semantic web portals. In

WWW Workshop on Application Design, Development and

Implementation Issues in the Semantic Web, 2004.

Jos de Bruijn and Holger Lausen. Active ontologies for data source

queries. In The Semantic Web: Research and Applications, First

European Semantic Web Symposium, ESWS 2004, Heraklion, Crete,

Greece, May 10-12, 2004, Proceedings, volume 3053 of Lecture

Notes in Computer Science, pages 107-120, Heraklion, Crete, 2004.

Springer.

Rubén Lara, Sung-Kook Han, Holger Lausen, Michael Stollberg,

Ying Ding, and Dieter Fensel. An evaluation of semantic web

portals. In IADIS Applied Computing International Conference,

Lisbon, Portugal, 2004.

Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Sinuhé Arroyo, Jos de Bruijn, and

Dieter Fensel. Semantic web services: description requirements and

76


current technologies. In International Workshop on Electronic

Commerce, Agents, and Semantic Web Services, Pittsburgh, PA,

September 30, 2003.

Technical Reports

Holger Lausen, Michael Stollberg, Rubén Lara, Ying Ding, Sung-

Kook Han, and Dieter Fensel. Semantic web portals state of the art

survey. Technical Report DERI-TR-2004-04-03, Digital Enterprise

Research Institute, Innsbruck, Austria, 2004.

Michael Stollberg, Holger Lausen, Sinuhe Arroyo, Peter Smolle,

Reinhold Herzog, and Dieter Fensel. Fred whitepaper - an agent

platform for the semantic web. Technical Report DERI TR-2004-01-

09, Digital Enterprise Research Institute, Innsbruck, Austria, 2004.

77


3.4.2.7. Ruzica Piskac

Name

Ruzica Piskac

Entry Date August 2006

Cluster

Component

Projects

Research topic

Progress

towards PhD

RSWS

Reasoning

None, but we intend to write FWF proposal

Our main goal is to define a reasoner for the First-order

Autoepistemic Logic (WSML Full) in the framework of WSML

languages.

Since I have just started at DERI week ago, I have only done the first

steps in the direction of my PhD. We defined briefly the topic and

main guidelines during the research. We outlined the following

phases in the research:

1) investigating the literature

2) defining the reasoner

3) implementation

Implementations

Publications

Currently I am getting myself familiar with relevant papers and the

newest results. We expect that in the near future, after I accustom

myself with the terminology and problems, we shall formulate the

FWF proposal.

Journal Articles:

P. Saiz, L. Aphecetche, P. Buncic, R. Piskac, J.-E. Revsbech, V.

Sego. 2003. AliEn-ALICE environment on the GRID. Nuclear

Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A, Volume

502, Issue 2-3, p. 437-440.

Publications in Conference Proceedings:

H. de Nivelle, R. Piskac. Verification of an Off-Line Checker for

Priority Queues. Proceedings of Third IEEE International Conference

on Software Engineering and Formal Methods, Koblenz, IEEE

computer society press, Washington, 2005, 210-219.


L. Caklovic, R. Piskac, V. Sego. 2001. Improvement of AHP method.

Mathematical Communications - Supplement No.1 (2001), 13-21.

Master Thesis:

R. Piskac. Formal Correctness of Result Checking for Priority

Queues. Masters thesis, Universitastät des Saarlandes, 2005.

R. Piskac. Parallel Algorithms for Sorting and Merging (in Croatian).

Diploma thesis. University of Zagreb, 2000.

79


3.4.2.8. Richard Pöttler

Name

Richard Pöttler

Entry date January 2006

Cluster RSWS

Objective Reasoning and Mediation

Projects

Research topic

At the moment I'm working as a programmer / researcher for DERI.

In more detail I'm programming for the mappingAPI (Francois) and

the reasoner (Darko). In the mappingAPI I implemented the parser

for the XML-Language, edited the objectmodel, reimplemented the

OWL and WSML export and now I'm implementing the conditions.

In the reasoner I got to implement the builtins.

Implementations ● OMWG (Advisors: Jan Henke, Francois Scharffe)

○ Reimplemented the Exports of the mappings (XML Format,

WSML, OWL)

○ Implemented the parser/marshaller for the XML language

○ Implementing conditions

○ Trying to find similarities between ontologies

○ Cleaning up the objectmodel

● WSML Reasoner (Advisors: Darko Anicic, Holger Lausen)

○ Implemented builtins

○ Implemented datatypes

● GoldenBullet (Advisors: Ying Ding, Martin Hepp)

○ Refactored/bugfixed the code

○ Made submited data persistent

○ Implemented a search mask


3.4.2.9. James Scicluna

Name

James Scicluna

Entry date October 2004

Cluster RSWS

Objective Choreography

Projects Infrawebs:

Tasks:

- Behavioral Language

- QoS Metric and Monitor

- Error Handling

- P2P Architecture Specification

- Final SWS-E and QoS-Monitor

- Use Case Preparation for Demonstrator

- Contribution in the WSMO Use Case Description

- Contribution in the Dissemination Efforts

Deliverables:

- D7.3.2 Realization of SWS-E, Error Handling and QoS Monitor

- D7.4.3 Final SWS-E and Running P2P-Agent and Demonstrator

Preparation

Research topic Use Cases (both B2C and B2B) for choreography interfaces.

Identification of choreography patterns from a combination of

workflow patterns [9] and service interaction patterns. Evaluation of

the suitability of framework such as Petri Nets [6], Abstract State

Machines [4], Transaction Logic [3] and Process Algebra [1] for the

formalization of the choreography patterns. Adequate combination of

tow or more of these methodologies such that the:

1. the (newly defined) semantics for the combined framework

provides the needed expressiveness for the modeling of

choreography patterns

2. formal automated reasoning procedure should exist for the

combined framework

Evaluation with respect to other formal languages such as YAWL

[8]. Application of this language in the Semantic Web [7] and an

execution engine on top.

Progress Draft outline of the PhD Thesis.

towards PhD

1. Introduction


2. Motivation

- why choreography interface patterns?

- why combining different formalisms to adequately formulate

these patterns?

- In what way will the above two points ease compatibility

checking and other reasoning tasks?

- What kind of advantages can this bring to the semantic web?

3. Use cases

- Description of B2B and B2C scenarios clearly showing

interactions between the parties

- Identify which service interaction [2] and workflow patterns [9]

can be combined into choreography patterns

4. Formal Methods

- Writing down the choreography patterns using the methodologies

such as Petri Nets [6], Transaction Logic [3], Abstract State

Machines [4] and Process Algebra [1].

- Evaluation of the formal methods based in (1) the effort required

to model the choreography patterns and (2) expressivity of the

methodology (taking into account the requirements for allowing

to reason on compatibility checking [5])

- Combination of methodologies: identification of requirements in

choreography and how those requirements are expected to

present in different representation formalisms, which enforces a

combination: we will define the formal combined language,

provide semantics for this language that captures the intended

requirements for choreography.

5. Application in the Semantic Web

- Reasoning: to enable the effective deployment of Semantic Web

Services we will investigate formal decidable reasoning (in the

sense that we will first check whether decidable reasoning is

possible with the combined framework, and if not, we will

identify expressive fragments of the combined framework that do

provide with decidable reasoning). This decidable reasoning

depends on the required reasoning for Semantic Web Services,

bur envisage at least compatibility check and maybe others. We

will formally define how those reasoning tasks (like

compatibility checking) can be reduced to decidable reasoning in

the combined framework.

- Relation to WSMO Choreography [7]: investigate the mapping of

the above combined framework into a standard logic

programming language like WSML-Rule. Moreover investigate

whether choreography reasoning calls for specific reasoning tasks

82


(like compatibility checking) which are currently not provided by

the WSML Reasoning component. This would require the

investigation of new algorithms and the subsequent

implementation of these algorithms in the WSML Reasoner.

6. Evaluation

7. Conclusion

[1] J.C.M. Baeten. Procesalgebra: en formalisme voor parallelle,

communicerende processen. Deventer: Kluwer, 1988.

[2] Alistair Barros, Marlon Dumas, and Arthur ter Hofstede. Service

interaction patterns: Towards a reference framework for servicebased

business process interconnection. Technical report, Faculty

of Information Technology, Queensland University of

Technology, Brisbane, Australia, March 2005.

[3] Anthony J. Bonner and Michael Kifer. Transaction logic

programming. Pages 257-279, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1993. MIT

Press.

[4] Egon Börger and Robert Stärk. Abstract State Machines: A

Method for High-Level System Design and Analysis. Springer,

2003.

[5] Axel Martens. Verteilte Geschäftsprozesse – Modellierung und

Verifikation mit Hilfe von Web Services. PhD thesis, Humboldt-

Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, 2003.

[6]Carl Adam Petri. Kommunikation mit Automaten. PhD thesis,

Institut für Instrumentelle Mathematik, Bonn, 1962.

[7] James Scicluna, Axel Polleres, and Dumitru Roman. Ontologybases

choreography and orchestration of wsmo services.

Technical Report D14, DERI Innsbruck, October 2005.

[8] W.M.P. van der Aalst and A.H.M. ter Hofstede. Yawl: Yet

another workflow language. Information Systems, 30(4):245-

275, 2005.

[9] W.M.P. van der Aalst, A.H.M. ter Hofstede. B. Kiepuszewski,

and A.P. Barros. Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel

Databases, 14(3):5-51, July 2003.

Implementations - Design and Specification of the Choreography Syntax

- Design and Implementation of the Choreography API for

83


Publications

WSMO4J

- Input in the Design and Implementation of the Choreography

Engine for WSMX

- Design and Implementation of the Quality of Service Metrics for

the Infrawebs project

- Design and Implementation of the Quality of Service Monitor for

the Infrawebs project (ongoing)

José-Manuel López-Cobo, Alejandro López-Pérez and James

Scicluna: A Semantic Choreography-driven Frequent Flyer Program

in Proceedings of the Future Research Challenges of Software and

Services Workshop, Vienna (Austria), April, 2006

James Scicluna and Axel Polleres: Semantic Web Service Execution

for WSMO Based Choreographies in Proceedings of the Semantic

Web Applications Workshop, EuroMedia 2005, Toulouse (France),

April, 2005

84


3.4.2.10. Alexander Wahler

Name

Alexander Wahler

Entry date December 2003

Cluster SEBIS

Objective Semantic Web Services

Projects I coordinate the DERI team in SALERO. Major tasks are the

development of representation techniques for multimedia objects,

development of an ontology language for multimedia objects and

API Ontologies for multimedia objects and a workbench (tools).

I was one of the main editors of the SUPER proposal and

contributed to the definition of the new research field of

“semantic business process management”.

I participated also from the very beginning the NFN proposal

SESA.

Research topic My main focus of the research is applying semantic web services

to real world applications and to evaluate the integration of SWS

in existing software architectures.

Progress Due to heavy commercial activities there is no progress to report.

towards PhD Potential topic for the PhD thesis is the evolvement of ecosystems

based on the service oriented computing paradigm

Implementations So far there are no implementations

Publications

1. Martin Hepp, Frank Leymann, John Domingue, Alexander

Wahler,and Dieter Fensel Semantic Business Process

Management: A Vision Towards Using Semantic Web

Services for Business Process Management

Proceedings of the IEEE ICEBE 2005, October 18-20,

Beijing, China, pp. 535-540.

2. Siegfried Reich, Georg Güntner, Tassilo Pellegrini,

Alexander Wahler (Hrsg.) Semantic Content Engineering

Proceedings der Semantics 2005, Trauner Verlag, Linz

3. Alexander Wahler, Bernhard Schreder, Aleksandar

Balaban, Juan Miguel Gomez, Klaus Niederacher: MIKSI

- A Semantic and Service Oriented Integration Platform.

ESWS 2004: 459-472

4. Eyal Oren, Alexander Wahler, Bernhard Schreder,

Aleksandar Balaban, Michal Zaremba, Maciej Zaremba

Demonstrating WSMX: Least Cost Supply Management,


1st WSMO Implementation Workshop, Frankfurt,

Germany

5. Klaus Niederacher, Alexander Wahler: Concept for

content administration of database powered multimedia

web-sites. ACM Multimedia (2) 1999: 57-58

86


3.4.3. Senior Researchers

Senior Researchers

No Name Topic

3 Dr. Stijn Heymans Reasoning

3.4.3.1. Stijn Heymans

Name

Stijn Heymans

Entry date March 2006

Cluster RSWS

Objective Reasoning and Formal Languages

Projects I will be involved in the SENSE project and wrote the long version

of project part 6 of the SESA nfn proposal (SOA-S, semantics in

SOAs). Regarding deliverables, I did some minor reviewing for

D14.

Research topic My main focus of research is the extension of logic programming

paradigms in order to make them more suitable for conceptual

reasoning. E.g., the investigation of logic programs under an open

domain semantics as is standard in Description Logics. In particular,

I am interested in the integration of Description Logics (or

Ontological reasoning) and Logic Programming (or Rule-based

reasoning).

On my to do list in that respect are:

- A simulation of Rosati’s r-hybrid knowledge base which combines

Description logics and Datalog in our framework of Logic

Programs under the open answer set semantics, as well as show

that the latter have advantages over the former for Semantic Web

reasoning. (in 2 months, scheduled for ALPSWS 06 or similar

workshop/conference)

1. In the further future we intend to devise effective algorithms

for reasoning with logic programs under the open answer set

semantics. To make an analogy, in DLs one has both

decidability proofs (e.g., by automata translation) and

effective algorithms (so-called tableaux algorithms) enabling


Progress

towards Habil

reasoning with DLs. The presence of the well-investigated

theoretical foundations of DLs and the existence of those

algorithms is (part of) the explanation of the success of DLs

in the SW community (that and being on the right place and

the right time basically with a good dose of luck). The intent

of this line of research is to do a similar thing for logic

programs under the open answer set semantics, i.e., the

theoretical decidability results are largely done, so it is time

to look into effective algorithms. Since LP has nice features

DLs lack (such as nonmonotonicity) this would yield a quite

attractive framework for doing knowledge representation and

reasoning. In a latter stage, we will implement those

algorithms. (2 years work to cover a broad range of fragments

of logic programs under the open answer set semantics and

have decent implementations)

Besides these personal topics, I intend to be involved in the research

of my cluster colleagues (in different degrees of involvement) with

topics as: distributed reasoning in the (WSML) LP context,

formalizations of choreography/orchestration, formalizations related

to service discovery, decidability of first-order logic extensions to

auto-epistemic logic (in the WSML-Full context), efficient (WSML-

)DL reasoning through alternative FOL-based methods.

Since I have my PhD since February there is no progress to report

regarding the Habilitation yet. For the future, the anageable of

algorithms for reasoning with logic programs under the open answer

set semantics, as described in my research topic above, is planned to

constitute a part of the Habilitation.

Implementations So far there are no implementations. As described above, after the

algorithms for the above semantics have been devised, they will be

implemented and integrated in the current WSML reasoner.

Publications Conceptual Logic Programs. Stijn Heymans, Davy Van

Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Annals of Mathematics and

Artificial Intelligence (Special Issue on Answer Set Programming),

pp. x-x, Springer Netherlands, 2006. Accepted for publication.

Open Answer Set Programming for the Semantic Web. Stijn

Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Journal of

Applied Logic, pp. x-x, Elsevier, 2006. Accepted for publication.

Cooperating Answer Set Programming. Davy Van Nieuwenborgh,

Stijn Heymans and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of 22th International

Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2006), pp. x-x, Springer

LNCS x, 2006. Accepted for publication.

Approximating Extended Answer Sets. Davy Van Nieuwenborgh,

88


Stijn Heymans and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of 17 th European

Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2006), pp. x-x, , 2006.

Accepted for publication.

Reasoning with the Description Logic DLRO-less than using Bound

Guarded Programs. Stijn Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh, Dieter

Fensel and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of Reasoning on the Web

workshop (RoW 2006), pp. x-x, , 2006. Accepted for publication.

Hierarchical Decision Making in Multi-Agent Systems using Answer

Set Programming. Davy Van Nieuwenborgh, Marina De Vos, Stijn

Heymans and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of Seventh Workshop on

Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems (CLIMA-VII), pp. x-x,

Springer LNAI , 2006. Accepted for publication.

Unsatisfiability Reasoning in ORM Conceptual Schemes. Mustafa

Jarrar and Stijn Heymans. In Proc. Of International Conference on

Semantics of a Networked World (ICSNW 2006), pp. x-x, Springer

LNCS , 2006. Accepted for publication.

Guarded Open Answer Set Programming with Generalized Literals.

Stijn Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc.

Of Fourth International Symposium on Foundations of Information

and Knowledge Systems (FoIKS 2006), pp. 179-200, Springer LNCS

3861, 2006.

Preferential Reasoning on a Web of Trust. Stijn Heymans, Davy

Van Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of 4 th International

Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2005), pp. 368-382, Springer

LNCS 3729, 2005.

Synthesis from Temporal Specifications Using Preferred Answer Set

Programming. Stijn Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh and Dirk

Vermeir. In Proc. Of ICTCS 2005, pp. 280-294, Springer LNCS

3701, 2005.

Guarded Open Answer Set Programming. Stijn Heymans, Davy Van

Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of 8 th International

Conference on Logic Programming and Non Monotonic Reasoning

(LPNMR 2005), pp. 92-104, Springer LNAI 3662, 2005.

Intelligence Analysis using Quantitative Preferences. Davy Van

Nieuwenborgh, Stijn Heymans and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of

Answer Set Programming: Advances in Theory and Implementation

(ASP 2005), pp. 233-247, Research Press International, 2005.

89


Extending Conceptual Logic Programs with Arbitrary Rules. Stijn

Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of

Answer Set Programming: Advances in Theory and Implementation

(ASP 2005), pp. 27-41, Research Press International, 2005. 3

Nonmonotonic Ontological and Rule-Based Reasoning with

Extended Conceptual Logic Programs. Stijn Heymans, Davy Van

Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of 2 nd European Semantic

Web Conference (ESWC 2005), pp. 392-407, Springer LNCS 3532,

2005.

Weighted Answer Sets and Applications in Intelligence Analysis.

Davy Van Nieuwenborgh, Stijn Heymans and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc.

Of 11 th International Conference on Logic for Programming,

Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning (LPAR 2004), pp. 169-183,

Springer LNCS 3452, 2005.

An Ordered Logic Program Solver. Davy Van Nieuwenborgh, Stijn

Heymans and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of Seventh International

Symposium on Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages (PADL

2005), pp. 128-142, Springer LNCS 3350, 2005.

Semantic Web Reasoning with Conceptual Logic Programs. Stijn

Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of

3 rd International Workshop on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for

the Semantic Web, pp. 113-127, Springer LNCS 3323, 2004.

Hierarchical Decision Making by Autonomous Agents. Stijn

Heymans, Davy Van Nieuwenborgh and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of

9 th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA

2004), pp. 44-56, Springer LNAI 3229, 2004.

On Programs with Linearly Ordered Multiple Preferences. Davy Van

Nieuwenborgh, Stijn Heymans and Dirk Vermeir. In Proc. Of 20 th

International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2004), pp.

180-194, Springer LNCS 3132, 2004.

Integrating Description Logics and Answer Set Programming. S.

Heymans and D. Vermeir. In Proc. Of International Workshop on

Principles and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning (PPSWR 2003),

pp. 146-159, Springer LNCS 2901, 2003.

Integrating Semantic Web Reasoning and Answer Set Programming.

S. Heymans and D. Vermeir. In Proc. Of Answer Set Programming:

90


Advances in Theory and Implementation (ASP03), pp. 194-208,

Volume 78 of CEUR Proceedings, 2003.

Integrating Ontology Languages and Answer Set Programming. S.

Heymans and D. Vermeir. In Proc. Of Fourteenth International

Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, pp. 584-

588, IEEE Computer Society, 2003.

A Defeasible Ontology Language. S. Heymans and D. Vermeir. In

Proc. Of Confederated International Conferences: CoopIS, DOA, and

ODBASE 2002, pp. 1033-1046, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer

Science 2519, 2002.

Using Preference Order in Ontologies. S. Heymans and D. Vermeir.

In Proc. Of Thirteenth International Workshop on Database and

Expert Systems Applications, pp. 85-89, IEEE Computer Society,

2002.

91


4. Semantics in Business Information Systems Cluster (SEBIS)

In the following we describe the SEBIS cluster in general terms, in terms of the

objectives it takes care, in terms of the project it takes care, and in terms of its members.

4.1. General Description

Name

Acronym

Web site

Leader

Team

Semantics in Business Information Systems

SEBIS

http://sebis.deri.org

Ying Ding and Martin Hepp

Senior Researchers:

Ying Ding

Matin Hepp

Junior Researchers:

Tobias Bürger

Jan Henke

Dumitru Roman

Francois Scharffe

Katharina Siorpaes

Michael Stollberg

Objectives

Projects

Students:

Daniel Bachlechner

Andreas Klotz

Bernhard Leschinger

Michael Luger

Kathrin Prantner

(1) Ontologies

dip, EASIER, Eastweb, enRIAF, etPlanner, MUSING, myOntology,

OnTourism, SUPER Martin

92


Mission

In our research group, we work at transferring Semantic Web and

Semantic Web Services technology to research problems in Business

Information Systems, in order to bridge the gap between the fundamental

work yielded by the Formal Ontology and Semantic Web communities on

one hand, and the application-oriented challenges of BIS/MIS as a

discipline.

This includes the following two dimensions:

Maturing Semantic Web foundations, so that they become compatible

with the real world complexity and scale.

This includes four main areas of research:

• Ontology engineering,

• Community-driven ontology building,

• Economic aspects of ontology building and usage, and

• Ontology Management Systems (OMS).

Applying Semantic Web technology to core challenges of Information

Systems in order to realize and evaluate the business benefit and to

identify the open research challenges. We currently focus on various

application domains, e.g.:

• Semantics-supported Business Process Management,

• Semantic Web services, especially WSMO/WSML/WSMX, and

• Electronic Markets and Electronic Procurement.

Major

tasks and

deliverables

DIP:

a) Delivery of M30 deliverables

WP1: Final version of Reasoner Technology Scan and Recommendation

and WSML Semantics Specification

WP2: Final version of editing and browsing, versioning, mapping;

preparation of Ontology Management Book

WP3: „Goal Ontologies for Effective Resource Management” and

“Semantic Web Services grounding specification”

WP4: Final version of Discovery Module Prototype and, Orchestration

engine prototype

b) Preparation of the final review (October 23-26, 2006 in Innsbruck)

MUSING

• Deliverables:

• D18: Position paper on multi-industry methodologies and

tools (basically a journal paper; due M12 – April 2007)

• D30: Solution simulations (experiments of ontologysupported

Business Intelligence; due M18 – August 2007)

• Tasks:

• 3.1 Ontologies development and management

• Propose Ontology languages, methodologies, and

93


propose/provide infrastructure

• 5.1 Methodologies and Tools paper (same as D18)

• WP 5 lead

• 6.4 Domain Ontology Financial Risk Management

• 7.4 Domain Ontology Internationalization

• 8.4. Domain Ontology IT Operational Risk

SUPER

Delivery of M6, M12, M18 deliverables

WP1: (Semantic Business Process Ontology and BP Operational

Semantics)

• D1.1 Process Modelling Ontology and Mapping to WSMO (M12)

• Process Ontology Language and

• D1.3 Operational Semantics for Semantic Business Processes

• (currently lead by NUIG, negotiations to shift responsibility to

UIBK; M12)

• D1.4 Process Ontology Query Language merged with D 1.3 (M18)

WP11:

• D11.2 SBPM community building activities (M18)

Contributions

WP 2 (Semantic Process Life Cycle Methodology and Evaluation)

WP 8 (Telecoms Use Case framework and Ontology)

4.2. Objectives

• Ontologies (1)

4.2.1. Ontologies

Nr 1

Title Ontologies

Mission In this research topic, we want to advance the state of the art the use of

statement ontologies for advancement in the automation of business processes.

Ontologies in our understanding are community contracts about a

representation of a domain of discourse. Representation in here

includes (1) formal parts that can be used for machine reasoning, and

(2) informal parts like natural language descriptions and multimedia

elements that help humans establish, maintain, and renew consensus

about the meaning of concepts. In our opinion, both aspects of

ontologies are equally important, and we watch the current dominance

of the formal aspects of ontologies in academic research with unease.

Our contributions address the following two main dimensions of using

ontologies for real application:

94


Maturing Semantic Web foundations, so that they become compatible

with the real world complexity and scale. This includes four main

branches of research:

Ontology Engineering

Methodologies for and prototypes of industry-strength business

ontologies, e.g. the gen/tax methodology for deriving ontologies from

existing hierarchical standards and taxonomies (UNSPSC, eCl@ss, ...)

and eClassOWL, the first serious attempt of building an ontology for e-

business applications; and in general advancing the state of the art in e-

business data and knowledge engineering, including metrics for content.

Community-driven Ontology Building

For quite a while, we have been trying to hand back control over the

evolution of ontologies to the user community, including semiautomated

approaches and OntoWiki, a Wiki-centric ontology building

environment.

In this segment also fall quantitative comparisons of community-centric

and engineering-based ontology building.

Economic Aspects of Ontology Building and Usage

Building ontologies consumes resources, and in an economic setting,

these resources are justified and will be spend (by rational economic

actors, at least) only if the effort needed to establish and keep alive a

consensual representation of a domain of discourse is outweighed by the

business gain, either in terms of cost, added value, or strategic

dimensions, e.g. process agility. This research branch is rather young

and underdeveloped, but an important piece of understanding and

fueling the use of ontologies in business applications.

Building actual ontologies for core challenges of Information Systems

in order to realize and evaluate the business benefit and to identify the

open research challenges. We currently focus on five specific

application domains:

Semantics-supported Business Process Management, i.e. the idea to

mechanize Business Process Management by using Semantic Web

techniques and especially Semantic Web Services. There is a first vision

paper and a Working Group being founded.

Semantic Web services, especially WSMO/WSML/WSMX, i.e. the use of

ontologies and related technology for the automation of Web services

discovery, composition, execution, and monitoring.

95


Electronic Markets and Electronic Procurement, including a reference

framework for ontology-supported electronic procurement and an

analysis of the true complexity of business matchmaking.

eTourism, e.g. the automation of the discovery and booking of tourism

offerings.

Web site

Leader

Cluster

Team

Financial reporting, e.g. the automated mediation between financial

2data (e.g. XBRL data) so that balance sheets and other documents

from multiple sources can be integrated on the fly.

http://ontologies.deri.org

Martin Hepp

SEBIS

Senior Researchers:

Martin Hepp

Junior Researchers:

-

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Students:

Daniel Bachlechner

Yihong Ding

Bernhard Leschinger

A major bottleneck towards business applications of Semantic Web

technology and machine reasoning is the lack of industry-strength

ontologies that go beyond academic prototypes. The design of such

ontologies from scratch in a textbook-style ontology engineering process

is in many cases unattractive, for it would require significant effort, and

because the resulting ontologies could not build on top of existing

community commitment. Also, real-world problems of data and systems

interoperability can only be overcome using Semantic Web technology

if ontologies exist that represent the very standards currently in use in

systems and databases. There exist at least four major categories of such

standards:

1. XML schema definitions for message exchange (BMEcat,

ebXML, RosettaNet, …)

2. Non-XML message format standards (UN/EDIFACT, X12,

SWIFT, VDA, SEDAS, EANCOM, CIF, OASIS UBL, …)

3. Taxonomies and thesauri (eCl@ss, UNSPSC, RosettaNet

technical dictionary, …)

4. Numbering schemes and other shallow vocabularies (EAN, UPC,

DUNS, ILN, ISO 639, …)

96


These specifications, though mostly informal in nature, are likely the

most valuable asset on the way to real business ontologies that can help

solve real business interoperability problems, since they reflect some

degree of community consensus and contain, readily available, a wealth

of concept definitions. However, the transformation of such standards

into useful ontologies is not as straightforward as it appears, because of

the following reasons:

1. The specifications come in a variety of formats, e.g. XML, CSV,

Microsoft Access, PDF, or plain text, and mostly lack a formal

meta-model.

2. The specification and the documentation can be very

voluminous, rendering manual translation unfeasible.

3. The same standard can be used in different ways with

incompatible semantics in different contexts.

Future Steps

Publications

In our research work, we want to advance the state of the art in

collaborative ontology building and the mechanized and semi-automated

transformation of existing industrial standards into useful ontologies.

In the next time, we will develop generic methodologies and tools for

the reuse of existing standards and consensus for creating industrystrength

ontologies.

Journals

Martin Hepp: Products and Services Ontologies: A Methodology for

Deriving OWL Ontologies from Industrial Categorization Standards, nt'l

Journal on Semantic Web & Information Systems (IJSWIS), Vol. 2, No.

1, pp. 72-99, January-March 2006.

Martin Hepp: Semantic Web and Semantic Web Services. Father and

Son or Indivisible Twins? IEEE Internet Computing, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.

85-88, March-April 2006. DOI:

http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MIC.2006.42

Conferences

Martin Hepp: The True Complexity of Product Representation in the

Semantic Web Accepted for the 14th European Conference on

Information System (ECIS 2006), June 12-14, 2006, Gothenburg,

Sweden.

Martin Hepp, Katharina Siorpaes, Daniel Bachlechner: Towards the

Semantic Web in E-Tourism: Can Annotation Do the Trick? Accepted

for the 14th European Conference on Information System (ECIS 2006),

June 12-14, 2006, Gothenburg, Sweden.

97


Martin Hepp, Jörg Leukel, and Volker Schmitz A Quantitative Analysis

of eCl@ss, UNSPSC, eOTD, and RNTD: Content, Coverage, and

Maintenance Proceedings of the IEEE ICEBE 2005, October 18-20,

Beijing, China, pp. 572-581.

Martin Hepp, Frank Leymann, John Domingue, Alexander Wahler, and

Dieter Fensel Semantic Business Process Management: A Vision

Towards Using Semantic Web Services for Business Process

Management Proceedings of the IEEE ICEBE 2005, October 18-20,

Beijing, China, pp. 535-540.

Martin Hepp: A Methodology for Deriving OWL Ontologies from

Products and Services Categorization Standards Proceedings of the 13th

European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS2005), May 26 -

May 28, 2005, Regensburg, Germany, pp. 1-12.

Martin Hepp, Jörg Leukel, and Volker Schmitz: Content Metrics for

Products and Services Categorization Standards Proceedings of the

IEEE International Conference on e-Technology, e-Commerce and e-

Service (EEE-05), March 29 - April 1, 2005, Hong Kong, pp. 740-745.

Workshops

Martin Hepp Representing the Hierarchy of Industrial Taxonomies in

OWL: The gen/tax Approach Proceedings of the ISWC Workshop on

Semantic Web Case Studies and Best Practices for eBusiness

(SWCASE'05), November 7, Galway, Ireland, pp. 49-56.

Posters and Poster Proceedings

Martin Hepp: eClassOWL: A Fully-Fledged Products and Services

Ontology in OWL Poster Proceedings of the 4th International Semantic

Web Conference (ISWC2005), November 7-11, 2005, Galway, Ireland.

Software

releases

Martin Hepp, Daniel Bachlechner, and Katharina Siorpaes: OntoWiki:

Community-driven Ontology Engineering and Ontology Usage based on

Wikis Proceedings of the 2005 International Symposium on Wikis

(WikiSym 2005), October 16-18, 2005, San Diego, California, USA

a. BPMO: Business Process Management Ontology and Formal

Semantics

b. SUPER Management Ontology on Business Processes

c. GoodRelations: An ontology for capturing the relationship

between goods and Web resources

98


4.3. Projects

Here we have the following projects:

• DIP

• EASAIER

• EastWeb

• EnIRaF

• etPlanner

• MUSING

• myOntology

• OnTourism

• SUPER Martin

4.3.1. DIP

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Data, Information and Process Integration with Semantic Web Services

DIP

IST-FP6

SEBIS

Martin Hepp

Ontologies, Developer tools, Discovery, Choreography, Mediation,

Grounding, Formal languages, Reasoning, Execution

http://dip.semanticweb.org/

Student Researchers:

Martin Hepp

Junior Researchers:

Jan Henke

Jacek Kopecky

Francois Scharffe

Michael Stollberg

Students:

-

Additional Contributors:

Senior Researchers:


Michal Zaremba.: Architecture tasks WP6, technology buddy

WP9

Junior Reserachers:

Jos de Bruijn: WP 1 tasks

Emilia Cimpian: Mediation WP 5

Thomas Haselwanter: has done orchestration engine

Adina Sirbu: Discovery component

Students:

-

Mission The mission is to develop a conceptual framework, reference

implementation, and use cases as proof-of-concept for Semantic Web

services.

person*mon Total 230.76 per month 6.5

ths budget

Duration 36 months 01/04 – 12/06

Major tasks • Develop WSML language and infrastructure

• Develop Ontology Management environment for WSML

• Develop core WSMX components: discovery, orchestration,

grounding

Deliverables (remaining deliverables)

UIBK leads

• D1.6 Reasoner Technology Scan and Recommendation (Livia)

• D1.7 WSML Semantics (Livia, Jos)

• D1.10 WSML DL Reasoner (Livia)

• D2.6v3 Ontology Mapping and Language Editor (Francois)

• D2.10 Ontology Management Book (Martin)

• D3.10 Goal Ontologies for Effective Resource Management (M.

Stollberg)

• D3.12 Semantic Web Services grounding specification (Jacek)

• D4.13 Aligning WSMO and WSMX with Existing Policy

Specifications (Jacek)

• D4.14 Discovery Module Prototype (Adina)

• D4.20 Orchestration engine prototype (Sami/T.Haselwanter)

• D7.9 RIF Working Group Contributions (Jos)

UIBK contributes

All contributions except for D2.4 and 2.8 are less or equal to 2 MMs!

• D1.9 WSML Flight Reasoner (Livia)

• D2.4v3 Versioning Tool (Jacek)

• D2.8v3 Editing and Browsing Tool (Jan)

• D2.9v3 Ontology Reporting Tool (Jan)

• D2.11 OMS Maintenance and Support (Jan)

• D5.8a First prototype of mediation and composition in real

100


world scenario; internal (Emilia)

• D5.8b Final prototype of mediation and composition in real

world scenario (Emilia)

• D6.11 Semantic Web Services Architecture and Information

Model (Michal)

• D6.14 Semantic Web Services Architecture and Information

Model (Michal)

• D9.11 SWS Enhanced GIS Prototype (WSMX) v 1.0 (Michal)

• D9.12 SWS Enhanced GIS Prototype (WSMX) v 2.0 (Michal)

• D9.14 SWS Enhanced GIS Prototype (WSMX) Final Version

(Michal)

• D14.1d Fourth set of external WSMO Tutorials (M. Stollberg)

• D14.1e Fifth set of external WSMO Tutorials (M. Stollberg)

• D14.5b Industrial Workshop (M. Stollberg)

4.3.2. EASAIER

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Enabling Access to Sound Archives through Integration, Enrichment

and Retrieval

EASAIER

IST-FP6

SEBIS

Ying Ding

Ontologies, Application

http://www.easaier.org/

Senior Researchers:

Ying Ding

Junior Researchers:

Francois Scharffe

Mission

Students:

Michael Luger

This project will enable enhanced access to sound archives by providing

multiple methods of retrieval, integration with other media archives,

content enrichment and enhanced access tools. It offers methods of

searching content based on audio features, musical features, or speech

content. EASAIER also supports cross-media retrieval, enabling access

to other media besides just audio. It implements recent advances in

machine learning, music and speech processing, and information

101


Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

retrieval. Furthermore, it addresses a growing demand for interactive

electronic materials.

Total: 29 per month: 1

Duration 30 months 05/06 – 10/08

Major tasks

Deliverables

a. WP2 Media Semantics and Ontologies

b. T 2.1 Ontology and semantics for media object

representation – Analysis of the requirements for the

representation of semantic aspects of sound objects and

related media. A principle component of this task will be

the alignment of the Ontology language

recommendations with the European effort of WSMO

c. T 2.2 Ontology management environment – This will

support a scalable infrastructure for ontology editing,

browsing, merging, aligning, and versioning.

D2.1 Report on metadata management infrastructure and ontology

language for media objects – (Month 24)

4.3.3. EastWeb

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Building an integrated leading Euro-Asian higher education and

research community in the field of the Semantic Web

EastWeb

IST-FP6

SEBIS

Ying Ding

Application

http://odle.dit.unitn.it/eastweb/indexphp?action=site&site=

EASTWEB

Senior Researchers:

Ying Ding

Junior Researchers:

Alice Carpentier

Students:

-

102


Mission This project aims to build an integrated leading Euro-Asian high

education and research community in the field of the Semantic Web.

Direct target groups are graduate students, faculty staff and enterprises

management personnel. Indirect target groups are European and Asian

students, researchers and enterprises personnel at large.

person*mon Total 2 Per month 0

ths budget

Duration 36 months 03/06 – 02/09

Major tasks • Action leader (Summer school on Semantic Web (SSSW), Asian

Semantic Web Conference (ASWC), Eastweb Research events)

• Coordinator for DL-KM distance education and KM platform

activity

Deliverables None

4.3.4. EnIRaf

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Enhanced Information Retrieval and Filtering for Analytical Systems

enIRaF

IST-FP6

SEBIS

Ying Ding

Application

http://eniraf.mis.ae.poznan.pl/

Senior Researchers:

Ying Ding

Junior Researchers:

Alice Carpentier

Students:

-

Mission This project aims at the improvement of the IRaF system in order to

better satisfy user needs by providing training in the following areas:

formal models of ontologies, software and tools for ontologies,

Semantic Web and Web Services, human language technology, decision

making. Scientific quality of the training is assured by a co-operation

with leading research centers from Austria, Germany, The Netherlands,

Norway, and UK.

person*mon Total 0 per month 0

103


ths budget

Duration 48 months 10/04 -09/08

Major tasks none

Deliverables none

4.3.5. etPlanner

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

etPlanner Semantische Suche

etPlanner

ECCA

SEBIS

Martin Hepp

Ontologies, Application

http://www.etourismaustria.at/portal/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1

Senior Researchers:

Martin Hepp

Mission

Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Junior Researchers:

-

Students:

Daniel Bachlechner

Tourism-related businesses need fast, wide-reaching announcement

facilities to advertise their products. etPlanner is a mobile system for

planning customized tourism experience. Using mobile devices (e.g.

PDA, mobile phones) consumers get their visit planned in an intelligent

way and will be supported throughout their whole journey.

Total: 45 Per month: 1.25

Duration 36 months 04/05 – 3/08

Major tasks

Deliverables

In the 2. Project-year a fully funktionable etPlanner-Framework will be

developed on basis of the existing prototype. The architecture of the

etPlanner Frameworks will be widened, especially concerning a flexible

integration of touristy performances and functionalities as well as the

connection to other systems.

104


4.3.6. MUSING

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Multi-Industry, Semantic-based Next Generation Business Intelligence

MUSING

IST-FP6

SEBIS

Martin Hepp

Ontologies, Application

n/a

Senior Researchers:

Martin Hepp

Junior Researchers:

Jan Henke

Mission

Students:

Yihong Ding

Bernhard Leschinger

2 Master students

MUSING aims at developing a new generation of Business Intelligence

(BI) tools and modules based on semantic-based knowledge and content

systems. MUSING will integrate Semantic Web and Human Language

technologies and combine declarative rule-based methods and statistical

approaches for enhancing the technological foundations of knowledge

acquisition and reasoning in BI applications. The breakthrough impact

of MUSING on semantic-based BI, and its paradigm of multi-industry

potentiality will be measured as the result of user-driven RTD

developments in three vertical domains:

– Finance, through development and validation of next

generation (Basel II and beyond) semantic-based BI

solutions, with particular reference to Credit Risk

Management;

– Internationalisation, (i.e., the process that allows an

enterprise to evolve its business from a local to an

international dimension, hereby expressly focusing on

the information acquisition work concerning

international partnerships, contracts, investments)

through development and validation of next-generation

semantic-based internationalisation platforms;

– Operational Risk Management, through development and

105


Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

validation of semantic-driven knowledge systems for

measurement and mitigation tools, with particular

reference to operational risks faced by IT-intensive

organisations.

Total 82.65 Per month 2

Duration 48 months 04/06 – 03/10

Major tasks • 3.1 Ontologies development and management

• Propose Ontology languages, methodologies, and

propose/provide infrastructure

• 5.1 Methodologies and Tools paper (same as D18)

• WP 5 lead

• 6.4 Domain Ontology Financial Risk Management

• 7.4 Domain Ontology Internationalization

• 8.4. Domain Ontology IT Operational Risk

Deliverables • D18: Position paper on multi-industry methodologies and tools

(basically a journal paper; due M12 – April 2007)

• D30: Solution simulations (experiments of ontology-supported

Business Intelligence; due M18 – August 2007)

4.3.7. myOntology

Name myOntology: Open Ontology Environment for Semantic Web-based E-

Commerce

Acronym myOntology (was renamed from:Ontoword)

Funding line FIT-IT Semantic Systems 2006

Cluster SEBIS

Leader Martin Hepp

Objective Ontologies, Applications

Website http://www.myontology.org (not yet up, but domain already booked)

Team Senior Researchers:

Martin Hepp

Junior Researchers:

Katharina Siorpaes, Francois Scharffe, NN

Students:

Michael Luger

Mission Building a framework and prototype for Semantic-Web-based E-

Commerce and collaborative Ontology Engineering based on Wiki

106


Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Technology.

85 MM / 24 months = 3.54

MM/months

Duration 10/2006 – 9/2008

Major tasks • Building a Wiki-based Ontology Platform

• Conceptual Framework for E-Commerce

Deliverables • D1.1 State-of-the-art in Ontology Engineering, Instance Data

and Mapping Creation

• and Management – Month 4

• D1.2 Definition of Processes in community-driven ontology,

instance data and mapping

• creation and management – Month 6

• D1.3 Definition of Roles in community-driven ontology,

instance data and mapping

• creation and management – Month 6

• D1.4 Definition of Processes in community-driven ontology,

instance data and mapping

• creation and management, revised version – Month 20

• D1.5 Definition of Roles in community-driven ontology,

instance data and mapping

• creation and management – Month 20

• D2.1 Specification of a Wiki language for collaborative

ontology, instance data and

• mapping creation and management – Month 10

• D2.2 Design of graphical UI elements for collaborative

ontology, instance data and

• mapping creation and management – Month 16

• D2.3 System architecture for a platform for collaborative

ontology, instance data and

• mapping creation and management – Month 12

• D2.4 Implementation of a test platform for collaborative

ontology, instance data and

• mapping creation and management – Month 24

• D3.1 Requirements and State-of-the-art Document for a

Scalable Ontology, Instance

• Data and Mapping Management Infrastructure – Month 6

• D3.2 Abstract Specification of a Scalable Ontology, Instance

Data and Mapping

• Management System – Month 12

• D3.3 Prototype Implementation of a Scalable Ontology,

Instance Data and Mapping

• Management System – Month 24

• D4.1 A limited number of product and service ontologies –

107


Month 24

• D4.2 Supplier Ontology – Month 16

• D4.3 Offer Ontology – Month 16

• D4.4 Running Version of semantic web enhanced directory

service WKO.at – Month 14

• D4.5 Ontology retrieval functionality – Month 16

• D4.6 Ontology matching functionality – Month 20

• D4.7 IAC Workflow description – Month 15

• D4.8 IAC adaptations – Month 20

• D4.9 IAC Ontology retrieval & matching functionality – Month

20

• D4.10 Instancing tool – Month 20

• D4.11Test results – Month 24

• D5.1 Ontology retrieval tool – Month 14

• D5.2 First integration approach System One – Month 16 (M12)

• D5.3 First integration approach Smart Information Systems –

Month 24 (M16)

• D5.4 Review and Results Report – Month 24 (M20)

• D6.1 Dissemination strategy and dissemination plan – Month 6

• D6.2 Report on and Evaluation of the dissemination strategy –

Month 24

• D6.3 Standardization plan – Month 6

• D6.4 Report on standardization activities and achieved results –

Month 24

• D 7.1 a – c Periodic Progress Reports (for every 6-monthsperiod,

until Month 18)

• D 7.2 Final Project Report – Month 24

4.3.8. OnTourism

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Ontology-based Online Tourism Offer Integration

OnTourism

FFG, BRIDGE

SEBIS

Martin Hepp

Application, Developer tools

n/a

Senior Researchers:

Martin Hepp

Ying Ding

Junior Researchers:

108


Mission

Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Michael Stollberg

Students:

Andreas Klotz

Today’s information management concepts and solutions for the

complex tasks of tourism intermediaries – such as regional agencies,

national travel organizations (NTOs), supra-national aggregators, and

commercial retailers – are still low-level from a semantic point of view.

Hence, information creation, maintenance and delivery being the

primary business process of tourism intermediaries faces heterogeneities

in various dimensions, requires manual coordination tasks, and suffers

from missing consensus on agreed concepts and technologies.

OnTourism is aimed at (1) applying, concretizing and evaluating

Semantic Web technologies such as ontologies, semantic annotation of

content and semantic search to this information-rich and economically

quite important domain, (2) identifying, developing and integrating

reference ontologies for the tourism industry, and (3) showing the proofof-concept

in a real-world scenario of the Austrian tourism industry.

Based on a semantic content management approach as well as mediator

and data extraction technologies developed in previous research projects

such as Harmonize and Harmo-TEN (www.harmo-ten.org), or utilizing

specialized data wrapping technologies such as liXto ®, OnTourism

seeks to explore and expand the potential of advanced semantic

technologies in a research domain of strong national interest, strength,

and tradition.

Total: 36 per month: 1,7

Duration 21 months 07/06 – 03/08

Major tasks

WP2: Ontology Management (lead by UIBK DERI)

This WP provides the ontology management (OM) methodology, tools

and infrastructure necessary for the project. The major efforts are

targeted to further development, customization and tuning of OM

developed outside the project. OnTourism is aligned from this

perspective with the results of projects such as DIP and SEKT. In a

more general scope, it is based on the work done in the Ontology

Management Working Group (http://www.omwg.org, in terms of

engineering efforts) and the SDK cluster, in terms of the research and

methodological framework. Beside ontology management, this work

package will yield a set of domain ontologies for the tourism and travel

industry.

WP3: Semantic Content Management Processes (lead by UIBK DERI)

This WP is mainly concerned with the organization of all content

management processes of tourism intermediaries. The basic idea is that

the content will be integrated in a semantic, ontology-based registry,

109


thus the entire content organization will be founded on ontologies and

Semantic Web Services technology as provided by WP 2.

Deliverables From the list below, UIBK is responsible only for deliverables in WP 2,

3, and 6:

Staffing cannot be assigned at this point in time, since there is none. We

will be recruiting one senior and one junior researcher for this project.

D1.1 Use Case Design 1 R

D1.2 Use Case Evaluation Framework 1 R

D1.3 Use Case Evaluation Report 1 R

D2.1 Ontology Management Requirements 2 R

D2.2 Ontology Management Model 2 R

D2.3 Tourism Ontologies Draft Version 2 R

D2.4 Tourism Ontologies Final Version 2 R

D3.1 State-of-the-Art and Requirements Analysis 3 R

D3.2 Content Management Design 3 R

D3.3 Content Management Implementation 3 P

D4.1 State-of-the-Art and Requirements Analysis 4 R

D4.2 Content Classification and Annotation Design 4 R

D4.3 Content Classification and Annotation Implementation 4 P

D5.1 Tourism Meta Portal Design 5 R

D5.2 Tourism Meta Portal Prototype 5 P

D5.3 Tourism Meta Portal Evaluation Report 5 R

D6.1 First Project Report 6 R

D6.2 Second Project Report 6 R

D6.3 Final Project Report 6 R

4.3.9. SUPER Martin

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Semantics utilized for Process Management within and between

Enterprises

SUPER-Martin

IST-FP6

SEBIS

Martin Hepp

Ontologies, Choreography, Formal languages

http://super.semanticweb.org/

Senior Researchers:

Martin Hepp

110


Junior Researchers:

Dumitru Roman

Students:

-

Mission Conceptual framework, reference implementation, and use case proofof-concept

for Business Process Management based on Semantic Web

Services

Budget (in Total: 70 mm Per month: 2

terms of

m*m)

Duration 36 months 04/06 – 03/09

Major tasks • WP1 SBPM Ontology (SEBIS cluster leads)

• WP2 SBPM life Cycle (SEBIS cluster as a contributor)

• WP8 Telecoms Framework (SEBIS cluster as a contributor)

• WP10 Exploitation (SEBIS cluster as a contributor)

• WP12 Dissemination (SEBIS and SEE contribute)

Deliverables IBK Business Layer lead:

• D1.1 Process Modeling Ontology and Mapping to WSMO

(SEBIS cluster)

• D11.2 SBPM community building activities (SEBIS cluster)

UIBK Business Layer contributions:

• Several deliverables in WP 2, 10, 12

Staffing not completed – 1 new senior + 1-2 master students for

modeling tasks needed. Martin has 25% and leads WP1.

111


4.4. Staff

Here we discuss student, junior, and senior researchers of the SEBIS cluster.

4.4.1. Student Researchers

Student Researchers

Nr Name Supervisor

1 Daniel Bachlechner Martin Hepp

4 Bernhard Leschinger Martin Hepp

5 Michael Luger Ying Ding

7 Kathrin Prantner

4.4.2. Junior Researchers

Junior Researchers

No Name Objective Cluster

3 Tobias Bürger SEBIS

8 Jan Henke SEBIS

18 Dumitru Roman Choreography SEBIS

19 Francois Scharffe Mediation SEBIS

22 Katharina Siorpaes SEBIS

24 Michael Stollberg SEBIS


4.4.2.1. Tobias Bürger

Name

Tobias Bürger

Entry date February 2006

Cluster SEBIS

Objective

Projects 1) GRISINO, Task T1.1 (Re-assessment of State of the Art: Grid;

SWS; KCOs), Deliverable D1.1 (State of the Art in SWS, GRID

and “Intelligent” Objects – Can they meet?)

2) SALERO, Task WP3.1 (Ontologies to describe Low-level-,

Semantic features and Context of use for Multimedia Objects),

Deliverable D3.1.1 (Representation techniques for multimedia

objects)

Research topic My current research mainly deals with the notion of “intelligent

content”, which is content that is self-describing, adaptive to context

and user needs. The two projects I work on approach the problem of

modelling content in this way from two different views:

1) GRISINO, deals with KCOs that were developed in the recently

finished EU project METOKIS 1 and their relation to Semantic

Web Services (SWS). KCOs are a model for knowledge

enhanced multimedia content objects and are based on the

DOLCE 2 foundational ontology. They have so-called semantic

facets that are modular interfaces to describe the properties of

KCOs, including the 'raw' content object or media, metadata and

knowledge specific to the content object and knowledge about

the topics of the content (its meaning). My current research for

that tries to find answers on the question how to make KCOs

compatible with SWS in order to have context sensitive SWS that

can understand KCOs, for example to base composition or

selection of services on the state of these objects. Vica versa it

should be able to re-contextualize KCOs by SWS (if necessary)

in order to use them in foreign environments.

2) In SALERO our aim is to develop an intelligent content model for

multimedia content and also to establish a formal or de facto

standard for intelligent content. The semantically aware content

objects should amongst others be able to self-adapt to the context


of the media production workflow and be the enabler for a

facilitated indexing, adaptation and most importantly re-use of

media resources. Therefore we currently investigate the

requirements for these objects and investigate especially how

multimedia standards can be combined with user- or domainmodels.

For that task, a deep understanding of the relation of

multimedia models (e.g. MPEG-7, MPEG-21) with upper level

ontologies (i.e. domain ontologies) has to be developed. For

high-level semantic features of the multimedia data we have to

investigate which ontology language is appropriate for the

requirements of the project. Here we will evaluate if WSML or

OWL-Flight can be used. Important at this point is not only the

modelling of the multimedia content but also the description of

services, ie. how to deal with the content.

1

http://metokis.salzburgresearch.at

2

http://www.loa-cnr.it/DOLCE.html

Progress

towards PhD

Implementations

Publications

I started work on my PhD in November 2005, having in mind a

publishing framework that is centered around intelligent content

objects. Meanwhile I aligned my PhD to my project work at DERI.

However, at the moment the main focus is kept on semantically

modelling of (media-rich) content, I additionally want to analyze

how these models can be combined with semantically enabled

service oriented architectures in order to negotiate and expose the

content's functionality and to deal with it in a standardized way. This

should enable trading, sharing and re-using of content in a controlled

way. I currently observe if and how it is possible to conceptually map

task descriptions of intelligent content objects with goal/function

descriptions of Semantic Web Services. Therefore my next step will

be to analyze if it is possible to map concepts of DDPO (DOLCE

Descriptions&Situations Plan Ontologies) to WSMO goal

descriptions. The work done in the two projects SALERO and

GRISINO can serve as an integral part of my PhD work.

Additionally, I’m also part of another IST project that recently

started and where our (my) task is the design of an intelligent media

framework that is centered around so called intelligent media objects.

The work done in this project will also help me to further understand

the needs for semantically describing and handling of media rich

content.

Tobias Bürger: "An Intelligent Media Framework for Multimedia

Content" Accepted for the 1st International Workshop on Semantic

Web Annotations for Multimedia (SWAMM), May 22, 2006,

Edinburgh, Scotland.

Sebastian Schaffert, Diana Bischof, Tobias Bürger, Andreas Gruber,

114


Wolf Hilzensauer, and Sandra Schaffert: Learning with Semantic

Wikis. Salzburg Research Technical Report, March 2006.

Tobias Bürger, Georg Güntner: "SMART CONTENT FACTORY ?

SEMANTIC KNOWLEDGE BASED INDEXING OF

AUDIOVISUAL ARCHIVES" in Proceedings of the 2nd European

Workshop on the Integration of Knowledge (EWIMT '05), Semantic

and Digital Media Technologies, 2005.

Tobias Bürger, Erich Gams, Georg Güntner: "Smart Content Factory

- Assisting Search for Digital Objects by Generic Linking Concepts

to Multimedia Content", in Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM

Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia (HT '05), 2005.

Georg Güntner, Tobias Bürger, Erich Gams: "Smart Content -

Scenarios and Technologies for a Knowledge-based Audiovisual

Archive" in Proceedings of EChallenges 2005, 2005.

115


4.4.2.2. Jan Henke

Name

Jan Henke

Entry date May 2004

Cluster SEBIS

Objective A Usable Group Editor for Ontologies

Projects DIP, MUSING

Research topic Ontological Engineering, Groupware Engineering, Usability

Engineering

Progress Two thirds are missing

towards PhD

Implementations DOME (http://dome.sourceforge.net/)

Publications Jan Henke. The table metaphor: A representation of a class and its

instances. 2nd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2005),

Workshop on User Aspects of the Semantic Web, May 29 th -June 1 st ,

2005. Heraklion, Greece

Anna V. Zhdanova, Reto Krummenacher, Jan Henke, Dieter Fensel

Community-Driven Ontology Management: DERI Case Study

Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on

Web Intelligence

Jan Henke. Towards a Usable Group Editor for Ontologies. Full

paper at the Doctoral Consortium of the Fifth International Semantic

Web Conference (ISWC 2006) November 5-9, 2006. Athens,

Georgia, USA


4.4.2.4. Dumitru Roman

Name

Dumitru Roman

Entry date November 2003

Cluster SEBIS

Objective Choreography

Projects Project name: SWING (Semantic Web services Interoperability

Geospatial decision making)

Tasks: the main task in the project is to apply WSMO/L/X to the

Geospatial decision making research area; other tasks: delegated (by

Martin Hepp) Technical Coordinator of the project and WP7

Dissemination and Exploitation work package leader

Deliverables: (for the next 6-9 months; responsible or contributor;

note that at this time it is not clear how many PM will be associated to

each deliverable as this is decided at the kick-off meeting which is

currently taking place)

D2.1 Spatial Logic Operators (Month 9)

D6.1 Architecture and Component requirements (Month 6)

D7.1 Public Web Site (Month 6)

D7.5 Information dissemination plan (Month 6)

Research topic The research topic I am interested in is Semantic Web Services and

their application to service-oriented environments. More specifically,

in this context, I am interested in issues related to service process

modelling and analysis, workflows, and to some degree reasoning

about specifications of processes and workflows, as well as how such

languages and frameworks can be integrated/complemented with

widely adopted industrial standards in this area, like UN/EDIFACT or

RosettaNet. Specific focus include the applicability of formal

languages like Concurrent Transaction Logic (CTR) to more user

oriented languages like Yet Another Workflow Language (YAWL),

and integration with industrial standards in this area. To some extent

the research topic includes also mediation of processes and protocols

in Semantic Web Services.

Progress The topic for the thesis is more or less defined: the proposal is to

towards PhD extend expressive languages that implement workflow patterns (e.g.

YAWL) to support global constraints - as a need to provide a

powerful control-flow language complemented with support for

constraints modelling; a CTR-based semantics for such a language is


Implementatios

Publications

meant to be defined - as a mean to enable mechanized support for

analyzing specifications in such a language. CTR itself needs some

extensions, as well as some of its workflow scheduling techniques; in

parallel, a translation mechanism from the extended CTR

specifications to ASMs is meant to be provided – as a mean to enable

flexibility and automatic support for checking the consistency of

different level of abstractions in the design of service behavior

specification. The resulting model, language, and methodology are

meant to complement and integrate with the already existing

WSMO/L/X framework.

D. Roman, J. de Bruijn, A. Mocan, I. Toma, H. Lausen, J. Kopecky,

D. Fensel, J. Domingue, S. Galizia, and L. Cabral: Semantic Web

Services - Approaches and Perspectives. In J. Davies, P. Warren, and

R. Studer (eds.), Semantic Web Technologies. To appear.

J. Noll, D. Roman, and M. Pilarski: Roaming of Advanced Telecom

Services through Semantic Annotations. EEE International

Conference on Pervasive Services. 2006.

H. Lausen, A. Polleres, J. de Bruijn, M. Stollberg, D. Roman, and D.

Fensel: Enabling Semantic Web Services: The Web Service Modeling

Ontology. Springer-Verlag Publishing House. To appear.

D. Roman: Semantic Web Services: Perspective and Approaches. In

Proceedings of the Workshop on The Next Generation Web

Technologies. Published by KISS. Dejon, South Korea, March, 2006.

M. L. Brodie, D. Fensel, and D. Roman: Semantically Enabled

Service-Oriented Architectures (SESA). IEEE IT Professional. Under

submission, 2006.

J. Veijalainen and D. Roman: From EDI to SOA: An Inter-

Organizational Perspective. IEEE IT Professional. Under submission.

2006.

D. Roman, J. de Bruijn, A. Mocan, H. Lausen, C. Bussler, and D.

Fensel: WWW: WSMO, WSML, and WSMX in a nutshell. Under

submission. 2006.

P. Dini, P. Lorenz, M. Freire, and D. Roman. Proceedings of the

International Conference on Internet and Web Applications and

Services (ICIW'06). IEEE Computer Society Press. 2006.

118


D. Roman, I. Toma, and D. Fensel: Semantic Web Services - A

Technology for Service-Oriented Computing. In Encyclopedia of

Internet Technologies and Applications. Mário Freire and Manuela

Pereira (Editors). Idea Group Reference. To Appear.

I. Toma, D. Roman, and D. Fensel: Modelling Semantic Web

Services in ASG: The WSMO-based Approach. In Proceedings of

Semantic Content Engineering, Schriftenreihe Informatik, Band 17. S.

Reich, G. Güntner, T. Pellegrini, A. Wahler (Hg.). 2006.

D. Fensel, I. Toma, and D. Roman: Towards a Semantically Enabled

Service Oriented Architecture. In Proceedings of Semantic Content

Engineering, Schriftenreihe Informatik, Band 17. S. Reich, G.

Güntner, T. Pellegrini, A. Wahler (Hg.). 2006.

B. Sapkota, D. Roman, and D. Fensel: Distributed Web Service

Discovery Architecture. In Proceedings of the International

Conference on Internet and Web Applications and Services

(ICIW'06), IEEE Computer Society Press, Guadeloupe, French

Caribbean, February 23-25, 2006.

J. Kopecký, D. Roman, M. Moran, and D. Fensel: Semantic Web

Services Grounding. In Proceedings of the International Conference

on Internet and Web Applications and Services (ICIW'06), IEEE

Computer Society Press, Guadeloupe, French Caribbean, February,

23-25, 2006.

M. Stollberg; D. Roman, A. Duke, and C. Bussler. Proceedings of the

First International Workshop on Web Service Choreography and

Orchestration for Business Process Management. In A. Haller and C.

Bussler (Eds.): Business Process Management Workshops BPM 2005

International Workshops, BPI, BPD, ENEI, BPRM, WSCOBPM,

BPS, Nancy, France, September 5, 2005. Revised Selected Papers.

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3812, Springer, Berlin

Heidelberg, 2006.

J. Domingue, D. Fensel, and D. Roman. Semantic Web Services with

the Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO). In T. Payne (edt.),

AgentLink News, Issue 19, pages 7 – 9, ISSN 1465-3842, November

2005.

I. Toma, D. Roman, K.Iqbal, J. Hofer, D. Fensel, and S. Decker.

Towards Semantic Web Services in Grid Environment. In

proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Semantics,

Knowledge and Grid (SKG2005), Beijing, China, Nov 27, 2005.

119


M. Burstein, C. Bussler, M. Pistore, and D. Roman. Proceedings of

the Workshop on WWW Service Composition with Semantic Web

Services 2005 (wscomps05). Published by the University of

Technology of Compiegne, Compiegner, France, September 19,

2005. ISBN 2-913923-18-6.

I. Toma, D. Roman, K. Iqbal. ASG - Adaptive Services Grid. Poster

at the 4th International Semantic Web Conference 2005 (ISWC 2005).

Galway, Ireland, 6-10 Nov, 2005.

M. Stollberg, C. Feier, D. Roman, and D. Fensel. Semantic Web

Services - Concepts and Technology. Book Chapter. To appear in

Text, Speech and Language Technology series of Kluwer.

B. Sapkota, L. Vasiliu, I. Toma, D. Roman, C. Bussler. Peer-to-Peer

Technology Usage in Web Service Discovery and Matchmaking. In

proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Web Information

Systems Engineering 2005 (WISE 2005), New York City, New York,

Nov 20-22 2005.

I. Toma, K. Iqbal, M. Moran, D. Roman, T. Strang, and D. Fensel. An

Evaluation of Discovery approaches in Grid and Web services

Environments. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on

Grid Services Engineering and Management, Erfurt, Germany,

September 2005.

I. Toma, B. Sapkota, J. Scicluna, J. Gomez, D. Roman and D. Fensel.

A P2P Discovery mechanism for Web Service Execution

Environment. Proc. of 2nd WSMO Implementation Workshop

WIW'2005, Innsbruck, Austria, June 6-7, 2005, CEUR Workshop

Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, online CEUR-WS.org/Vol-

134/lenzerini.ps.

J. Domingue, D. Roman, and M. Stollberg. Web Service Modeling

Ontology (WSMO) - An Ontology for Semantic Web Services.

Position paper at the W3C Workshop on Frameworks for

Semantics in Web Services, June 9-10, 2005, Innsbruck, Austria.

Accessible online at

http://www.w3.org/2005/04/FSWS/Submissions/1/wsmo_position_pa

per.html

C. Feier, D. Roman, A. Polleres, J. Domingue, M. Stollberg, and D.

Fensel. Towards Intelligent Web Services: The Web Service

Modeling Ontology (WSMO). International Conference on Intelligent

Computing (ICIC’05), Hefei, China.

120


D. Roman, U. Keller, H. Lausen, J. de Brujin, R. Lara, M. Stollberg,

A. Polleres, C. Bussler, and D. Fensel. Web Service Modeling

Ontology. Applied Ontology 1(1), 2005.

Stollberg, M.; Roman, D.; Toma, I.; Keller, U.; Herzog, R.; Zugmann,

P.; Fensel, D.: Semantic Web Fred - Automated Goal Resolution on

the Semantic Web. Accepted for the 38th Hawaii International

Conference on System Science, January 2005.

Rubén Lara, Dumitru Roman, Axel Polleres, Dieter Fensel: A

Conceptual Comparison of WSMO and OWL-S. European

Conference on Web Services (ECOWS 2004), Erfurt, Germany,

September 27-30, 2004, pages 254-269.

Stollberg, M.; Roman, D.; Gomez, J. M.: A Mediated Approach

towards Web Service Choreography. In Proceedings of the workshop

"Semantic Web Services: Preparing to Meet the World of Business

Applications" held at the 3rd International Semantic Web Conference,

Hiroshima, November 2004.

A. Netin, D. Roman, O. Cret. FPGA-based Hardware/Software Co-

Design of an Expert System Shell Based on Belief Revision Concepts.

In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Field

Programmable Logic and Applications, Lisbon, Portugal, Springer-

Verlag Publishing House, pages 1067 - 1071, September 1-3, 2003.

A. Netin, D. Roman, O. Cret. Hardware / software codesign of an

expert system. Aurel Netin, Dumitru Roman, Octavian Cret. In

Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Control, Systems

And Computer Science – CSCS-14, vol. 2, Bucharest, Romania,

pages 180 – 186, July 2-5, 2003.

121


4.4.2.5. Francois Scharffe

Name

Francois Scharffe

Entry date September 2004

Cluster SEBIS

Objective Mediation

Projects , ,

Research topic Keywords: Ontology Mapping, alignment and matching, data

mediation, mapping language, mapping algorithms Ontology

mediation is the discipline aiming at reconciling heterogeneous data

description to enable communication between applications having a

semantic description. The practical realization of ontology mediation

require different technologies, from the representation of the

correspondences between the ontological entities to the development

of user tools. I concentrate my thesis on a back-end ontology

mediation system, taking especially care of representing the ontology

mappings (via the abstract mapping language) and discovering them

(via a set of linguistic and graph based algorithm). An important

contribution of this work is to give a representation of the mappings

independent from the representation language, giving a common

platform for research in mapping discovery that can be integrated in

different applications (Semantic knowledge management and

Semantic web services).

Progress Ontology Mediation Management

towards PhD Abstract: This document presents the structure of my PhD as far as

now (end of March 2006). For each chapter a figure indicates the

percentage of realization until now. For the relevant chapters, the

project(s) in which the work is done is mentioned. I don't have any

precise deadline but expect a first draft together with the relative

implementation at the end of the year.

1 Introduction (0)

2 State of The Art (50)

-Mapping Representation

-COWL

-Alignment Format

122


-SKOS

-Mapping Discovery

-CMS

-Cupid

-OLA

-S-Match

-FOAM

3 Ontology Mapping Representation / Abstract Mapping Language

(SEKT) (80)

-Motivation

-Ontology language independence

-Mapping Concept hierarchy

-Subset of first-order logic

-More expressive

-Complex Mappings

-Conditional Mappings

-Instance Transformation

-Human readable

-Syntax

-Surface syntax

-RDF/XML syntax

-Semantics

-OWL Grounding

-WSML Grounding

-First-order Reference Semantics

4 Ontology Mapping Discovery (SEKT) (40)

-Linguistic Techniques

-Graph Based Techniques

-Combination of Different Techniques

-Notion of Measure and Threshold

-Combination Parameters

5 Ontology Mapping API (SEKT, DIP, TSC) (50)

-General Architecture

-Modules

-Object Model

-Parser Module

-Abstract Syntax Parser

-XML Parser

-Export Module

-WSML/ WSMO Mediator

-OWL/ OWL+SWRL

-RDF Schema

-Mapping Language Syntaxes

123


-Adapters

-WSMO4j

-OWL API

-Mapping Discovery Module

6 Two scenarios (30)

-Digital Library (SEKT Project)

-General Description

-Mediation Technology

-WSMO Mediators (Dip Project)

-General Description

-Data Mediation Framework in WSMX

7 Conclusion (0)

Implementations Ontology Mapping API

Programmative support for the mapping language and mapping

automation (in-progress). Used as the basis for different graphical

ontology mapping tools (Ontomap from Ontoprise (SEKT), Unicorn

Ontology Mapping Editor (DIP), WSMX data mediation tool). The

API and the language are now developed in cooperation with INRIA

(Jerome Euzenat).

Publications

Future directions are on the automation of mapping.

Conference papers:

Francois Scharffe: Instance Transformation for Semantic Data

Mediation. the 2006 International Conference on Semantic Web and

Web Services Conference (SWWS'06), June 2006, Las Vegas, USA.

Ying Ding and Francois Scharffe and Andreas Harth and Aidan

Hogan: AuthorRank: Ranking Improvement for the Web. The 2006

International Conference on Semantic Web and Web Services

(SWWS'06), June 2006, Las Vegas, USA.

Francois Scharffe, Jos de Bruijn: A Language to specify Mappings

between Ontologies, IEEE Conference on Internet-Based Systems

SITIS, December 2005, Yaounde, Cameroon.

Articles in books:

Jos de Bruijn, Marc Ehrig, Cristina Feier, Francisco Martín-

Recuerda, François Scharffe, and Moritz Weiten. Ontology

mediation, merging and aligning. In Semantic Web Technologies.

Wiley, UK, 2006.

124


4.4.2.6. Katharina Siorpaes

Name

Katharina Siorpaes

Entry date March 2004

Cluster SEBIS

Objective

Finding real business scenarios where the usability and potential of

SW technology can be demonstrated.

Projects • Musing

• MyOntology

Research topic

Progress

towards PhD

• Probably OnTourism

Applying SW technology in different areas, such as tourism, various

business areas, and the legal domain. The usability of SW

applications, such as ontology editors, must be increased in order to

enable non-computer scientists to use these tools.

I have completed my Master degree in computer science in August

2006 with my thesis “Semantic Web and e-Tourism: Investigating

opportunities and downfalls of applying Semantic Web technology in

e-tourism”. I have just started defining a topic for my PhD.

Implementations OnTour-I, OnTour-II, OntoWiki

Publications • Martin Hepp, Katharina Siorpaes, and Daniel Bachlechner:

Towards the Semantic Web in E-Tourism: Can Annotation

Do the Trick, June 2006.

• Martin Hepp, Katharina Siorpaes, and Daniel Bachlechner:

Towards the Semantic Web in e-Tourism: Lack of Semantics

or Lack of Content?, June 2006.

• Martin Hepp, Daniel Bachlechner, and Katharina Siorpaes:

Harvesting Wiki Consensus - Using Wikipedia Entries as

Ontology Elements, June 2006.

• Daniel Bachlechner, Katharina Siorpaes, Holger Lausen,

Dieter Fensel: Web Service Discovery - A Reality Check,

June 2006.

• Martin Hepp, Daniel Bachlechner, and Katharina Siorpaes:

OntoWiki: Community-driven Ontology Engineering and

Ontology Usage based on Wikis, October 2005.


4.4.2.7. Michael Stollberg

Name

Michael Stollberg

Entry Date May 2003

Cluster

SEBIS

Objective Semantic Goal Caching

Projects

Project name: DIP

Tasks: WP 2 manager, researcher (i.e. working on deliverables /

work packages), project management assistance for Martin Hepp

Deliverables: (for 2006)

D3.10 Goal Description Ontology June 06 lead

D3.8 (Chor & Orch version II + III) June / Dec 06 part

D2.10 Ontology Management Book Dec 2006 part

D2.12 WP 2 Final Report Dec 2006 lead

D14.2 Tutorials & Dissemination ongoing part

D15.2 Project Management ongoing part

Research topic

My research (= PhD) topic is Semantic Goal Caching, short SGC.

The idea is to capture discovery results for already solved goals and

utilize this knowledge for omitting or reducing the number of

matchmaking operations for detecting usable Web services for new,

semantically similar goals. This allows achieving significant

scalability increases of Web service detection, in dependence of the

scenario setting.

In consequence, the central research questions (= central aspects of

my PhD work) are:

1. Goals and Semantic Matchmaking: definition, usage, and

semantic description of goals as formalized client requests;

and the central operation for Web service detection

(discovery and composition) on basis of formal semantic

descriptions of goals and Web services

2. Caching Mechanism for Goals: specification & prototype

implementation for the SGC technique

3. Usability Evaluation: exhaustive examination of application

scenarios of Web services / service-oriented computing &

evaluation of the usability of Semantic Goal Caching with

respect to the achievable efficiency increase.


Progress towards

PhD

Naturally, my work is aligned with the WSMO framework

(description model for Goals & Web services, semantic

matchmaking as elaborated in WSMO). However, I intend to specify

my technical approach in a language-independent manner so that it

is also applicable for other Semantic Web Service frameworks.

Regarding the contributions & expected applicability of the work, I

will present a not before existing technique that overcomes one of

the central bottlenecks of Semantic Web and Web services

technology: scalability for the Web. This is critical for the success of

semantic technologies, especially with respect to industrial

applicability. Furthermore, the third part (usability evaluation) is

intended to provide insights into the problems arising for real-world

applicability of Web service / SOA and semantic technology. This

co-aligns with the research aims of the SEBIS cluster.

I have presented the initial ideas in some publications (see below,

not all are related to the PhD work). A detailed plan for the PhD

thesis has been submitted to the SEBIS cluster. There is also a

working draft of my PhD. [available on request]

Currently, I am working on the detailed specification of the SGC

technology. I have completed the major parts of the first aspect

(goals), and currently work on a couple of technical reports that

elaborate the technical / formal details of the SGC technology. As

soon as these will be completed, I will use them as a basis for

publications (as well as completion of the PhD thesis itself).

As potential reviewers, I have gotten positive acceptance from the

following people: David Martin (SRI), John Domingue (KMI),

Laurent Henocque (ILOG / University of Marseille).

Implementations

Publications

It is to remark that I had to change my PhD topic in 2005 (due to

bankruptcy of Net Dynamics as the project partner).

- - (merely applier / tester / reviewer, resp. project manager)

Cimpian, E.; Mocan, A.; Stollberg, M.: Mediation Enabled

SemanticWeb Services Usage. Accepted for 1st Asian Semantic

Web Conference (ASWC 2006), Beijing, China

Keller, U.; Lausen, H. and Stollberg, M.: On the Semantics of

Functional Descriptions of Web Services. In Proc. of the 3rd

European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2006), Budva,

Montenegro.

Stollberg, M.; Roman, D.; Duke, A. and Bussler, C.: Proceedings of

the First International Workshop on Web Service Choreography and

Orchestration for Business Process Management. In A. Haller and

C. Bussler (Eds.): Business Process Management Workshops BPM

2005 International Workshops, BPI, BPD, ENEI, BPRM,

127


WSCOBPM, BPS, Nancy, France, September 5, 2005. Revised

Selected Papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3812,

Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2006. Online at:

http://www.springeronline.com/3-540-32595-6

Stollberg, M.; Cimpian, E.; Mocan, A. and Fensel, D.: A Semantic

Web Mediation Architecture. In Proc. of the Canadian Semantic

Web Symposium (CSWWS 2006), Quebec, Canada.

Lausen, H.; Ding, Y.; Stollberg, M.; Fensel, D.; Lara, R.; Han, S.-

K.: Semantic Web Portals: State-of-the-Art Survey. In Journal of

Knowledge Management 9(5), Special Issue on Semantic

Knowledge Management, pp. 40 - 49, 2005.

Stollberg, M.; Cimpian, E.; Fensel, D.: Mediating Capabilities with

Delta-Relations. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop

on Mediation in Semantic Web Services, Amsterdam, the

Netherlands, December 2005; EUR Workshop Proceedings Vol 168.

Stollberg, M.; Strang, T.; Fensel, D.: Automated Collaboration on

the Semantic Web. In GESTS International Transactions on

Computer Science and Engineering 17(1), 2005.

Stollberg, M. and Strang, T.: Integrating Agents, Ontologies, and

Semantic Web Services for Collaboration on the Semantic Web. In

Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Agents and the

Semantic Web, 2005 AAAI Fall Symposium Series Arlington,

Virginia, USA, 4th - 6th November, 2005.

D. Roman, U. Keller, H. Lausen, J. de Brujin, R. Lara, M. Stollberg,

A. Polleres, C. Feier, C. Bussler, and D. Fensel: Web Service

Modeling Ontology. In Applied Ontology 1(1), October 2005.

Bussler, C.; Duke, A.; Roman, D.; Stollberg, M.: Proceedings of the

First International Workshop on Web Service Choreography and

Orchestration for Business Process Management. In conjunction

with the Third International Conference on Business Process

Management (BPM 2005), Nancy, France, September 2005.

Stollberg, M., Feier, C.; Roman, D., Fensel, D.: Semantic Web

Services - Concepts and Technology. In N. Ide, D. Cristea, D Tufis

(eds.): Language Technology, Ontologies, and the Semantic Web.

Kluwer Publishers, 2006 (to appear).

Stollberg, M.: Automated Collaboration on the Semantic Web. In

Doctoral Symposium at the Fifth International Conference on Web

128


Engineering (ICWE 2005), Sydney, Australia, July 2005.

Stollberg, M.: Reasoning Tasks and Mediation on Choreography

and Orchestration in WSMO. In Proceedings of the 2nd

International WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW 2005),

Innsbruck, Austria, June 2005, EUR Workshop Proceedings Vol.

134.

Feier, C.; Roman, D.; Polleres, A.; Domingue, J.; Stollberg, M. and

Fensel, D.: Towards Intelligent web Services: Web Service

Modeling Ontology (WSMO). In Proceedings of the International

Conference on Intelligent Computing (ICIC) 2005, Hefei, China,

August 23-26, 2005.

Domingue, J. B.; Roman, T.; Stollberg, M. (Eds.): Web Service

Modeling Ontology (WSMO) - An Ontology for Semantic Web

Services. Position paper at the W3C Workshop on Frameworks for

Semantics in Web Services, June 9-10, 2005, Innsbruck, Austria.

Stollberg, M.; Keller, U.; Fensel, D.: Partner and Service Discovery

for Collaboration Establishment with Semantic Web Services. In

Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Web Services,

Orlando, Florida, July 2005.

Stollberg, M.; Roman, D.; Toma, I.; Keller, U.; Herzog, R.;

Zugmann, P.; Fensel, D.: Semantic Web Fred - Automated Goal

Resolution on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii

International Conference on System Science, January 2005.

Stollberg, M.; Herzog, R.; Zugmann, P.: Semantic Web Fred. Poster

at the 3rd International Semantic Web Conference ISWC2004,

Hiroshima, Japan, November 2004.

Stollberg, M.; Keller, U.; Zugmann, P.; Herzog, R.: Semantic Web

Fred - Agent Cooperation on the Semantic Web, demonstration at

the 3rd International Semantic Web Conference, Hiroshima, Japan,

7 - 11 November 2004.

Stollberg, M.; Lausen, H.; Lara, R.; Ding, Y.; Sung-Kook, H.; Fensel. D:

Towards Semantic Web Portals. In C. Bussler, S. Decker, D. Schwabe, O.

Pastor (eds): Application Design, Development and Implementation Issues

in the Semantic Web 2004, Proceedings of the WWW2004 Workshop on

Application Design, Development and Implementation Issues in the

Semantic Web, New York, NY, USA, May 18, 2004. CEUR Workshop

Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073.

U. Keller, M. Stollberg, D. Fensel: WOOGLE meets Semantic Web

129


Fred. Proceedings of the Workshop on WSMO Implementations

(WIW 2004) Frankfurt, Germany, September 29-30, 2004. CEUR

Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, online at CEUR-

WS.org/Vol-113/.

R. Lara, S. H. Han, H. Lausen, M. Stollberg, Y. Ding, and D.

Fensel: An Evaluation of Semantic Web Portals. In Proceedings of

the IADIS Applied Computing International Conference 2004,

Lisabon, Portugal, March 23-26, 2004.

S. Arroyo, Y. Ding. R. Lara, M. Stollberg, and D. Fensel: Semantic

Web Languages: Strenghts and Weakness, International Conference

in Applied Computing (IADIS04), Lisabon (Portugal), 23-26 March

2004.

Stollberg, M.; Roman, D.; Gomez, J. M.: A Mediated Approach

towards Web Service Choreography. In Proceedings of the

workshop on Semantic Web Services: Preparing to Meet the World

of Business Applications held at the 3rd International Semantic Web

Conference, Hiroshima, November 2004.

Ying Ding, Dieter Fensel, Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Michael

Stollberg, Sung-Kook Han (Ed.): Proceedings of the ECAI 2004

Workshop on Application of Semantic Web Technologies to Web

Communities, CEUR, ISSN 1613-0073, Vol-107, 2004.

available at: http://sunsite.informatik.rwthaachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-107/

Stollberg, M.; Zhdanova, A., V.; Fensel, D.: hTechSight: A Next

Generation Knowledge Management Platform. In Journal for

Information & Knowledge Management, Vol. 3, No.1 (March

2004), pp. 47-66.

Stollberg, M. and Rhomberg, F.: Survey on Goal-driven

Architectures. DERI Technical Report DERI-2006-06-04, June

2006.

Lausen, H.; Stollberg, M.; Lara, R.; Ding, Y.; Han, S.-K.; Fensel,

D.: Semantic Web Portals: State of the Art Survey, Technical Report

DERI-TR-2004-04-03, 2004.

Stollberg, M.; Lausen, H.; Arroyo, S., Smolle, P.; Herzog, R.;

Fensel, D.: Fred Whitepaper: An Agent Platform for the Semantic

Web, Technical Report DERI TR-2004-01-09, 2004.

130


4.4.3. Senior Researchers

Senior Researchers

No Name Topic

1 Dr. Ying Ding

2 Dr. Martin Hepp Ontologies

4.4.3.1. Ying Ding

Name

Ying Ding

Entry date February 2003

Cluster SEBIS

Objective WSMX Discovery box

Projects , ,

Research topic triple space computing, web ranking based on metadata, product

classification. Details are Semantic Google PeopleRank This work

adopts Google's PageRank idea to rank people based on web FOAF

data or vCard data. This methodology can be further extended to any

community portal such as Orkus, Linkedin and so on. Co-occurrence

clustering based on PeopleRank show the map of the social

networks.

SemanticPageRank

To improve Google's PageRank by assigning weights to different

links based on link ontology. Furthermore semantics of the links can

be obtained from the anchor text of the links. Context of the in-bound

and out-bound links also provides important information to improve

PageRank.

$ E-Commerce

GoldenBullet is the semi-automatic product description classification

system based on UNSPSC. It has been implemented and tested with

real industrial data. The key algorithm originates from information

retrieval and machine learning area.

$ Semantic Web

Ontology is the backbone of Semantic Web technology. How to

generate ontology semi-automatically and create on-site mapping and


versioning of various ontologies are critical and interesting research

areas.

Ontology generation

Research is focusing on how to use linguistic support to extract part

of domain or application ontology semi-automatically. Classes of

ontologies can be normalized as key noun phrases. Relation

extraction is considered as one of the bottlenecks of the ontology

generation.

Associated relationship among noun phrases is currently identified as

the way to extract relation among these phrases. Future research will

be focus on verb, adjective or preposition extraction as relations of

ontologies.

Progress

towards Habil

Ontology mediation

Ontology meditation is the key part for the whole ontology

management structure. Current solutions for ontology mediation still

stay at the stage of manually aligning and mapping ontologies with

some limited recommendation services. Research is focusing on to

identify patterns for ontology mediation. Patterns should be stored in

mediation libraries allowing for flexible and easy access and reuse.

Ontology mediation library should be set up to manage various

mediation patterns. Patterns with some similarity will be clustered

together (called patterns cluster) to facilitate the reuse. Personalized

view on one mediation pattern can be tailored according to the

requirement of specific task or application.

Habil title: Semantic Web: from concept to application

Abstract: This habilitation thesis aims to explore the evolution of the

Semantic Web since the author has been involved in the very earlier

stage of the field and witnessed and experienced these interesting

historical changes. It focuses on the basic research to prove Semantic

Web as pragmatic solutions for the current Web and also takes some

applications as proof of concept to show the real life value of the

deployment of the Semantic Web technologies. The whole content of

the thesis will be follows. Section 2 mainly discusses the theoretical

part of the Semantic Web, which includes ontology, ontology

learning, ontology mapping, and ontology versioning.

Section 3 illustrates the real-life applications, such as ontology

libraries, eCommerce, Knowledge Management, Semantic Web

portal, and Semantic Web Services. Section 4 is about the general

discussion of the Semantic Web, pros and cons, and future.

Progress: I have discussed this with Prof. Gerti Kappel from

Technical University of Wien. But the requirement of this university

is hard to fulfill because I need to have one single authored journal

paper on the different area. I would like to recommend changing to

another university to see the possibilities.

132


Implementations My Habilitation thesis is already more than 200 pages based on the

works I have done after my PhD. Also I am organizing conferences

and workshops and give teachings in order to improve my profile.

Publications Ying Ding, Francois Scharffe, Andreas Harth and Adrian Hogan

(2006): AuthorRank: Ranking Improvement for the Web. The 2006

International Conference on Semantic Web and Web Services

(SWWS06), June 26-29, 2006, Las Vegas, USA.

Reto Krummenacher, Francisco Martin-Recuerda, Martin Murth,

Johannes Riemer, Ying Ding, Dieter Fensel (2006): Triple Space

Computing: New communication paradigm for web services. Poster

at the 3rd European Semantic Web Conference 2006, June 11-14,

2006, Budva, Montenegro.

Holger Lausen, Ying Ding, Michael Stollberg, Dieter Fensel, Ruben

Lara and Sung-Kook Han (2005): Semantic Web Portals – State of

the Art Survey. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(5), 40-49.

Ying Ding and Dieter Fensel (2005). Semantic Web powered portal

infrastructure. The 9th International Symposium on Social

Communication, Santiago de Cuba, Cuba, Jan 24-28, 2005.

Ying Ding, Dieter Fensel, Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Michael

Stollberg, Sung-Kook Han (ed.): Proceedings of the ECAI 2004

Workshop on Application of Semantic Web Technologies to Web

Communities, CEUR, ISSN 1613-0073, Vol-107, 2004

Stollberg, M.; Lausen, H.; Lara, R.; Ding, Y.; Sung-Kook, H.;

Fensel. D (2004): Towards Semantic Web Portals. In C. Bussler, S.

Decker, D. Schwabe, O. Pastor (eds): Application Design,

Development and Implementation Issues in the Semantic Web 2004,

Proceedings of the WWW2004 Workshop on Application Design,

Development and Implementation Issues in the Semantic Web, New

York, NY, USA, May 18, 2004. CEUR Workshop Proceedings,

ISSN 1613-0073.

S. Arroyo, Y. Ding, M. Stollberg and D. Fensel (2004): Semantic

Web Languages. Strengths and Weakness. International Conference

in Applied computing (IADIS04), Lisbon (Portugal), 23-26 March

2004.

R. Lara, S. Han, H. Lausen, M. Stollberg, Y. Ding, D. Fensel (2004).

An Evaluation of Semantic Web Portals. In Proceedings of the

IADIS Applied Computing International Conference 2004, Lisbon,

Portugal, March 23-26, 2004.

133


S. Arroyo, R. Lara, J. Gomez, D. Berka, Y. Ding & D. Fensel (2004):

Semantic aspects of web services (book chapter). Munindar P.Singh

(ed.) Practical Handbook of Internet Computing. Chapman Hall and

CRC Press, Baton Rouge. 2004.

H. Lausen, M. Stollberg, R. Lara, Y. Ding, S. Han and D. Fensel

(2003): Semantic Web Portals – State of the Art Survey. Technical

Report, DERI-Innsbruck.

Y. Sure, H. Akkermans, J. Broekstra, J. Davies, Y. Ding, A. Duke, R.

Engels, D. Fensel, I. Horrocks, V. Iosif, A. Kampman, A. Kiryakov,

M. Klein, T. Lau, D. Ognyanov, U. Reimer, K. Simov, R. Studer, J.

van der Meer, and F. van Harmelen (2003): On-To-Knowledge:

Semantic Web Enabled Knowledge (book chapter), N. Zhong, J. Liu

and Y. Yao (eds.), Web Intelligence. Springer, 2003, pages 277-300.

D. Fensel, F. van Harmelen, Y. Ding, M. Klein, H. Akkermans, J.

Broekstra, A. Kampman, J. van der Meer, Y. Sure, R. Studer, U.

Krohn, J. Davies, R. Engels, V. Iosif, A. Kiryakov, T. Lau, and U.

Reimer (2003): On-To-Knowledge: Semantic Web Enabled

Knowledge Management, IEEE Computer.

D. Fensel, F. van Harmelen, Y. Ding, et al (2003). On-To-

Knowledge in a Nutshell. Special Issue of IEEE Computer on Web

Intelligence (WI)

Y. Ding, D. Fensel and Hans-Georg Stork (2003). The Semantic

Web: from Concept to Percept. Austrian Artificial Intelligence

Journal, 21 (4), 4-18.15.

Y. Ding, D. Fensel (2003). Semantic Web: The Next Generation

Web – Guest Editor Introduction. Austrian Artificial Intelligence

Journal, 21 (4). 1-3.

Y. Ding, D. Fensel and Hans-Georg Stork (2003). Semantic web

enabled web services – Guest Editor Introduction. Austrian Artificial

Intelligence Journal, 21 (5), 1-4.

Y. Ding, D. Fensel, M. Klein, B. Omelayenko and E. Schulten

(2003): The role of ontologies in eCommerce (book chapter). S.Stab

& R. Studer (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, Springer.

D. Fensel, C. Bussler, Y. Ding, and B. Omelayenko: The Web

Service Modeling Framework WSMF, Electronic Commerce

Research and Applications, 1(2), 2002.

134


M. Klein, Y. Ding, D. Fensel and B. Omelayenko (2002). Ontology

management: Storing, aligning and maintaining ontologies (book

chapter). In J. Davis, D. Fensel and F. van Harmelen (eds.) Towards

the Semantic Web: Ontology-driven knowledge management, John

Wiley & Sons Ltd.

D. Fensel, C. Bussler, Y. Ding, V. Kartseva, M. Klein, M. Korotkiy,

B. Omelayenko, and R. Siebes: Semantic Web Application Areas. In

Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Applications of

Natural Language to Information Systems, Stockholm - Sweden,

June 27-28, 2002.

Y. Ding, D. Fensel, M. Klein, and B. Omelayenko: The Semantic

Web: Yet Another Hip? Data and Knowledge Engineering, 41(3), p.

205-227, 2002.

D. Fensel, B. Omelayenko, Y. Ding, E. Schulten, G. Botquin, M.

Brown, and A. Flett (2002): Intelligent Information Integration in

B2B Electronic Commerce (Book).

Ying Ding & Schubert Foo (2002). Ontology Research and

Development: Part 1 – A Review of Ontology Generation. Journal of

Information Science, 28(2).

B. Omelayenko, M. Crubézy, D. Fensel, R. Benjamins, B. Wielinga,

E. Motta, M. Musen, and Y. Ding: UPML: The Language and Tool

Support for Making the Semantic Web Alive. In D. Fensel et al.

(eds.), Spinning the Semantic Web, MIT Press, Boston, to appear

2002 (book chapter).

Ying Ding & Schubert Foo (2002): Ontology Research and

Development: Part 2 – A Review of Ontology mapping and evolving.

Journal of Information Science, 28(4).

Y. Ding, M. Korotkiy, B. Omelayenko, V. Kartseva, V. Zykov, M.

Klein, E. Schulten, and D. Fensel: GoldenBullet: Automated

Classification of Product Data in E-commerce, BIS-2002: 5th

International Conference on Business Information Systems, Pozna,

Poland, April 24-25, 2002.

Y. Ding, M. Korotkiy, B. Omelayenko, V. Kartseva, V. Zykov, M.

Klein, E. Schulten, and D. Fensel: GoldenBullet in a Nutshell,

FLAIRS-2002: The 15th International FLAIRS Conference,

Beachside Resort and Conference Center, Pensacola Beach, Florida,

May 14-16, 2002.

Ying Ding (2001). A review of ontologies with the Semantic Web in

135


view. Journal of Information Science, 27(6) 377-384(8)

Ying Ding & Dieter Fensel (2001). OntoWeb: The Thematic

Network for Semantic Web. AgentLink Newsletter 8.11-13.

Ying Ding (2001). IR and AI: The role of ontology. In Proc. 4th

International Conference of Asian Digital Libraries, Dec 10-12,

Bangalore, India.

Y. Ding and D. Fensel (2001). Ontology Library Systems: The key

for successful Ontology Reuse. The first Semantic web working

symposium, Stanford, USA, July 29th-August 1st, 2001

Y. Ding and R. Engels (2001). IR and AI: Using co-occurrence

theory to generate lightweight ontologies. Workshop on Digital

Libraries (Dlib2001), 12th International Conference on Database and

Expert Systems Applications (DEXA2001), Munich, Germany, Sep

3-7, 2001.

Y. Ding, G. Chowdhury, S. Foo (2001). Bibliometric cartography of

information retrieval research by using co-word analysis.

Information Processing & Management, 37(6), 817-842.

Dieter Fensel , Ying Ding, Ellen Schulten, Borys Omelayenko, Guy

Botquin, Mike Brown, and Alan Flett (2001): Product Data

Integration in B2B E-commerce. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16(4):

54-59.

136


4.4.3.2. Martin Hepp

Name

Martin Hepp

Entry date January 2005

Cluster SEBIS

Objective (1) Ontologies

Projects DIP: DERI lead, WP4 lead, D 2.10 Ontology Management Book

SUPER: WP 1 lead and contributions to other WPs - roughly 30 MM

for the first 18 MMs to coordinate

MUSING: DERI lead

SWING: temporary DERI lead

FIT-IT proposal lead

Various other stuff. More than enough.

Research topic My major research interest is Semantics in Business Information

Systems, especially the use of ontologies for advancement in the

automation of business processes. Ontologies in my understanding are

community contracts about a representation of a domain of discourse.

Representation in here includes (1) formal parts that can be used for

machine reasoning, and (2) informal parts like natural language

descriptions and multimedia elements that help humans establish,

maintain, and renew consensus about the meaning of concepts. In my

opinion, both aspects of ontologies are equally important, and I watch

the current dominance of the formal aspects of ontologies in academic

research as with unease. My contributions address the following two

main dimensions of using ontologies for business information systems:

1. Maturing Semantic Web foundations, so that they become

compatible with the real world complexity and scale. This includes

four main branches of research.

1.1 Ontology Engineering

Methodologies for and prototypes of industry-strength business

ontologies, e.g. the gen/tax methodology for deriving ontologies from

existing hierarchical standards and taxonomies (UNSPSC, eCl@ss, ...)

and eClassOWL, the first serious attempt of building an ontology for

ebusiness applications; and in general advancing the state of the art in

e-business data and knowledge engineering, including metrics for


content.

1.2 Community-driven Ontology Building

Since my PhD thesis I have been trying to hand back control over the

evolution of ontologies to the user community, including semiautomated

approaches and OntoWiki, a Wiki-centric ontology

building environment. In this segment also fall quantitative

comparisons of community-centric and engineering-based ontology

building.

1.3 Economic Aspects of Ontology Building and Usage

Building ontologies consumes resources, and in an economic setting,

these resources are justified and will be spend (by rational economic

actors, at least) only if the effort needed to establish and keep alive a

consensual representation of a domain of discourse is outweighed by

the business gain, either in terms of cost, added value, or strategic

dimensions, e.g. process agility. This research branch is rather young

and underdeveloped, but an important piece of understanding and

fueling the use of ontologies in business applications.

1.4 Ontology Management Systems

The use of Semantic Web technology beyond toy applications requires

ontology management infrastructure for editing and browsing,

versioning, mapping and merging, and ontology mediation, that

remains cognitively adequate and sufficiently performant for large

ontologies. I chair the Ontology Management Working Group

(OMWG), in which we are trying to develop a consistent framework

of requirements plus prototypes of ontology management

infrastructure that meets this demand.

2. Applying Semantic Web technology to core challenges of

Information Systems in order to realize and evaluate the business

benefit, and to identify the open research challenges. I currently focus

on three specific application domains:

2.1 Semantics-supported Business Process Management, i.e. the idea

to mechanize Business Process Management by using Semantic Web

techniques and especially Semantic Web Services. There is a first

vision paper and a Working Group being founded.

2.2 Semantic Web services, especially WSMO/WSML/WSMX, i.e. the

use of ontologies and related technology for the automation of Web

services discovery, composition, execution, and monitoring. I am

member of the Web Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO) Working

Group and project manager of the EU-funded Integrated Project "DIP

- Data, Information, and Process Integration with Semantic Web

138


Progress

towards Habil

Implementations eclassOWL

goodRelations

Publications Journal Papers

Services" (FP6-507483). This research direction is complemented by

work on using the idea of persistent publication, as an alternative to

the predominant message exchange paradigm of today's Web services.

See work on Triplespace Computing.

2.3 Electronic Markets and Electronic Procurement, including a

reference framework for ontology-supported electronic procurement

and an analysis of the true complexity of business matchmaking.

I have been admitted as a habilitation candidate at the University of

Würzburg, School of Economics and Business Management, as of

November 7, 2005. The members of my habilitation committee are

Prof. Rainer Thome (Würzburg), Prof. Ronald Bogaschewsky

(Würzburg), and Prof. Matthias Schumann (University of Göttingen).

The regulations require that I settle an agreement with my thesis

committee about the results to be achieved in teaching, scholarship,

and service in order to be eligible. This agreement is in the stage of

finalization.

All requirements for the degree should be fulfilled by the end of 2007.

Peer-reviewed Journals

Hepp, Martin: Products and Services Ontologies: A Methodology for

Deriving OWL Ontologies from Industrial Categorization Standards,

in: Int'l Journal on Semantic Web & Information Systems (IJSWIS),

Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 72-99, January-March 2006.

Hepp, Martin: Semantic Web and Semantic Web Services: Father and

Son or Indivisible Twins?, in: IEEE Internet Computing, Vol. 10, No.

2, pp. 85-88, March-April 2006.

Hepp, Martin; Leukel, Jörg; Schmitz, Volker: A Quantitative Analysis

of Product Categorization Standards: eCl@ss, UNSPSC, eOTD, and

RNTD, submitted to Knowledge and Information Systems (KAIS,

Springer).

Other Journals

Hepp, Martin; Thome, Rainer: XML-Spezifikationen und Standards für

den Datenaustausch, in: wisu – das wirtschaftsstudium, 32 (2003) 4,

pp. 510-518.

Hepp, Martin; Thome, Rainer: Dateiorganisation, in: wisu – das

wirtschaftsstudium, 31 (2002) 4 (Studienblatt).

139


Hepp, Martin; Doerflein, Michael: Katalogdatenintegration auf Basis

von Güterklassen, in: Deutsche EC/EDI-Gesellschaft: eBusiness

aktuell 2002, Berlin 2002, pp. 20-26.

Hepp, Martin; Thome, Rainer: Datenmodellierung, in: wisu – das

wirtschaftsstudium, 30 (2001) 7, (Studienblatt).

Hepp, Martin; Schinzer, Heiko: B2B-Marktplätze, in: wisu – das

wirtschaftsstudium, 29 (2000) 11, pp. 1513-1521.

Conference and Workshop Papers

Peer-reviewed Conference and Workshop Proceedings

Martin Hepp, Daniel Bachlechner, and Katharina Siorpaes: Harvesting

Wiki Consensus - Using Wikipedia Entries as Ontology Elements,

Proceedings of the 1st Workshop: SemWiki2006 - From Wiki to

Semantics, co-located with the 3rd Annual European Semantic Web

Conference (ESWC 2006), June 12, 2006, Budva, Montenegro

(forthcoming).

Martin Hepp: The True Complexity of Product Representation in the

Semantic Web, Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on

Information System (ECIS 2006), June 12-14, 2006, Gothenburg,

Sweden (forthcoming).

Martin Hepp, Katharina Siorpaes, Daniel Bachlechner: Towards the

Semantic Web in E-Tourism: Can Annotation Do the Trick?

Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Information System

(ECIS 2006), June 12-14, 2006, Gothenburg, Sweden (forthcoming).

Hepp, Martin: eClassOWL: A Fully-Fledged Products and Services

Ontology in OWL, in: Poster Proceedings of the 4th International

Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2005), November 7-11, 2005,

Galway, Ireland.

Hepp, Martin; Bachlechner, Daniel; Siorpaes, Katharina: OntoWiki:

Community driven Ontology Engineering and Ontology Usage based

on Wikis, in: Proceedings of the 2005 International Symposium on

Wikis (WikiSym 2005), October 16-18, 2005, San Diego, California,

USA.

Hepp, Martin: Representing the Hierarchy of Industrial Taxonomies in

OWL: The gen/tax Approach, in: Proceedings of the ISWC Workshop

140


Semantic Web Case Studies and Best Practices for eBusiness

(SWCASE05), November 7, 2005, Galway, Ireland, pp. 49-56.

Krummenacher, Reto; Hepp, Martin; Polleres, Axel; Bussler,

Christoph; Fensel, Dieter: WWW or What is Wrong with Web services,

in: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE European Conference on Web

Services (IEEE ECOWS 2005), November 14-16, Växjö, Sweden, pp.

235-243.

Hepp, Martin; Leymann, Frank; Domingue, John; Wahler, Alexander,

and Dieter Fensel: Semantic Business Process Management: A Vision

Towards Using Semantic Web Services for Business Process

Management, in: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on

e-Business Engineering (ICEBE 2005), October 18-20, Beijing,

China, pp. 535-540

Hepp, Martin; Leukel, Jörg; Schmitz, Volker: A Quantitative Analysis

of eCl@ss, UNSPSC, eOTD, and RNTD Content, Coverage, and

Maintenance, in: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on

e-Business Engineering (ICEBE 2005), October 18-20, Beijing,

China, pp. 572-581.

Schmitz, Volker; Leukel, Jörg; Hepp, Martin: Integrierte

Dokumentation und Spezifikation von E-Business-Standards mit XML

Schema-Annotationen, in: Proceedings of the Berliner XML Tage

2005 (BXML 2005), September 12-14, Berlin, Germany, pp. 179-190.

Hepp, Martin; Leukel, Jörg; Schmitz, Volker: Content Metrics for

Products and Services Categorization Standards, in: Proceedings of

the IEEE International Conference on e-Technology, e-Commerce and

e-Service (EEE-05), March 29 – April 1, 2005, Hong Kong, pp. 740-

745.

Hepp, Martin: A Methodology for Deriving OWL Ontologies from

Products and Services Categorization Standards, in: Proceedings of

the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2005), May

26-28, 2005, Regensburg, pp. 1-12.

Hepp, Martin: Measuring the Quality of Descriptive Languages for

Products and Services, in: Proceedings of the Multi-Konferenz

Wirtschaftsinformatik MKWI 2004, March 9-11, 2004, Essen, pp.

157-168. Page 3 of 4

Others

Hepp, Martin: Product Reasoning Services: Economic Relevance and

141


Architectural Approaches, in: Proceedings of the 5. Paderborner

Frühjahrstagung "Innovationen im E-Business", Paderborn, Germany,

April 10, 2003, pp. 469-477.

Hepp, Martin: Interoperabilität, Metamarktplätze und agentenbasierte

Arbitrageure, in: Proceedings of the 4. Paderborner Frühjahrstagung

"Modelle im E-Business", Paderborn, Germany, April 11, 2002, pp.

475-489.

Hepp, Martin; Boehnlein, Claus: Modellierung der Pflege von

Standards mit Hilfe höherer Petri-Netze, in: Proceedings of the 8th

Symposium "Simulation als betriebliche Entscheidungshilfe",

Göttingen, Germany, March 11, 2002, pp. 3-13 .

Book Chapters

Hepp, Martin: XML-Spezifikationen und Klassifikationsstandards für

den Datenaustausch, in: Thome, R.; Schinzer, H.; Hepp, M. (eds.):

“Electronic Commerce und Electronic Business. Mehrwert durch

Integration und Automation“, 3rd edition, Vahlen, Munich 2005, pp.

191-216.

Thome, Rainer; Schinzer, Heiko; Hepp, Martin: Electronic

Commerce: Ertragsorientierte Integration und Automatisierung, in:

Thome, R.; Schinzer, H.; Hepp, M. (eds.): “Electronic Commerce und

Electronic Business. Mehrwert durch Integration und Automation“,

3rd edition, Vahlen, Munich 2005, pp.1-28.

Hepp, Martin: Datenschutz (p. 157); Datensicherheit (pp. 157f. );

Elektronische Unterschrift (p. 188), in: Horváth, P.; Reichmann, T.:

„Vahlens Großes Controllinglexikon“, 2nd ed., Vahlen, München

2002.

Hepp, Martin: Electronic Procurement (pp. 171f.), Computervirus

(pp. 119f.); Datensicherheit (pp. 148-150 ), in: Mertens, P. et al.:

„Lexikon der Wirtschaftsinformatik“, 4th ed., Springer, Berlin etc.

2001.

Non-refereed Publications, Working Papers, and Posters

Hepp, Martin; Leukel, Jörg; Schmitz, Volker; Fensel, Dieter: PRODIS

2005: Workshop on Product-related Data in Information Systems

(Workshop Summary), in: Cremers, A.; Manthey, R; Martini, P.;

Steinhage, V.: Proceedings of INFORMATIK 2005, September 19-22,

2005, Bonn, p. 443.

Hepp, Martin: Product Representation in the Semantic Web, Working

142


Paper, April 2004.

Hepp, Martin: OntoMeter: Metrics for Ontologies, poster presented at

the 1 st European Semantic Web Symposium (ESWS2004), Heraklion,

Greece, May 10 – May 12, 2004.

Hepp, Martin: Using Web Services for the Maintenance and the

Version Management of Descriptive Languages for Products and

Services, research report about an internship at the IBM Software

Solutions Development Lab in Böblingen, Germany, May 12 – May

16, 2003. Page 4 of 4

Books

Hepp, Martin; Polleres, Axel; van Harmelen, Frank; Genesereth,

Michael (eds.): Proceedings of the First International Workshop on

Mediation in Semantic Web Services (MEDIATE 2005), CEUR

Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, Vol. 168, 2005.

Thome, Rainer; Schinzer, Heiko; Hepp, Martin. (eds.): Electronic

Commerce und Electronic Business. Mehrwert durch Integration und

Automation, 3rd edition, Vahlen, Munich 2005.

Hepp, Martin: Güterklassifikation als semantisches

Standardisierungsproblem, Deutscher Universitaets- Verlag,

Wiesbaden, Germany 2003.

Standards Submissions

Jos de Bruijn, Christoph Bussler, John Domingue, Dieter Fensel,

Martin Hepp, Uwe Keller, Michael Kifer, Birgitta König-Ries, Jacek

Kopecky, Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Eyal Oren, Axel Polleres,

Dumitru Roman, James Scicluna, Michael Stollberg: Web Service

Modeling Ontology (WSMO), W3C Member Submission,

http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSMO/, 2005.

143


5. Semantic Execution Environment Cluster (SEE)

In the following we describe the SEE cluster in general terms, in terms of the objectives it

takes care, in terms of the project it takes care, and in terms of its members.

5.1. General Description

Name

Acronym

Web site

Leader

Team

Semantic Execution Environment

SEE

http://see.deri.org

Michal Zaremba (Deputy: Mick Kerrigan)

Senior Researchers:

Michal Zaremba

Junior Researchers:

Emilia Cimpian

Graham Hench

Zhou Jingtao

Mick Kerrigan

Adrian Mocan

Omair Shafiq

Adina Sirbu

Zhixian Yan

Objectives

Projects

Mission

Students:

Thomas Haselwanter

Mark Mattern

Applications (2), developer tools (3), mediation (8), and execution

management (15)

ASG, SEEMP, SemanticGov, SemBiz, SUPER Michal, TSC

It is mission of the Semantic Execution Environment (SEE) cluster to

create an execution environment for the dynamic discovery, selection,

mediation, invocation and inter-operation of Semantic Web Services.

Enterprises' information systems were subject of great changes during the

last years. In order to adjust to more and more dynamic business demands,

a new concept/paradigm has come to replace the traditional applications:

the service. By this (and by some other auxiliary changes) the information

system as a whole becomes a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). Such

an approach offers a set of advantages that comes with SOA but it doesn't

solve all the interoperability problems that existed for classical

applications too. Inside of a particular SOA, independent services offering

the same functionality should be seamlessly interchangeable with each

other. Different such services can have different vendors, and as a

consequence, different peculiarities. Our platform is going to be a sample

implementation of the Web Services Modelling Ontology (WSMO) which

144


Major

tasks and

deliverables

describes all aspects of Semantic Web Services.

Our goal is to provide both a testbed for WSMO and to demonstrate the

viability of using WSMO as a means to achieve dynamic inter-operation

of Web Services. Semantic Web has been a domain of research for IT for

half of a decade, and represents the vision of the new Web, a Web

containing “machine understandable" information. Semantic Web Services

is a relatively new area, exploring how the classical Web Services can be

enhanced from a static to a dynamic Web Services in a semantic context.

That is, not only the data on the Web can be augmented with semantics

but the applications (i.e. Web services) as well. By successfully applying

semantics to a dynamic Web, the number of error prone and laborious

tasks fulfilled by humans today would be reduced. Furthermore, the costs

of knowledge management or business to business integration tasks would

be drastically decreased. Semantic Execution Environment (SEE) cluster

acts in this context, combining the benefits of semantics and Semantic

Web Services with new architectural practices producing the concept of a

Semantic Service Oriented Architecture.

Following work initiated in WSMX working group we will adapt a topdown,

component based development approach, delivering a whole

framework capable of carrying out in the future, the dynamic discovery,

mediation, selection, invocation and inter-operation of Web Services.

From the beginning we aim to include all the services of the WSMX

platform, providing complete implementation for them in the later stages

of the project. The strong component decoupling allows new components

to be plugged in and provides opportunities to achieve richer functionality.

Each subsequent version of our platform will extend and improve the

functionality of the components of the framework until it reaches the full

Semantic Web Services support.

The SEE cluster is open for any new members and to extend it existing

foundation of work on the SWS platform. We aim to integrate together

DERI Innsbruck teams to build together the complete Semantic Web

Services execution environment.

The SEE team members’ actively participate in the appropriate standards

bodies, specifically the OASIS, and will seek to influence these bodies

towards adopting SEE findings and ideas. The team leader is currently cochairing

the Oasis Semantic Execution Environment technical committee,

whose declared objective is to provide guidelines, justifications and

implementation directions for an execution environment for Semantic

Web services. Several proposed members of the team also contributed to

WSMX W3C submission.

Being actively involved in several EU projects, the team members can

easily interact with researchers from both academia and industry,

receiving inputs that will guide their work. Also, the team members

contributed to earlier prototype versions of WSMX architecture, which

has been used as an execution environment in various European projects

dealing with Semantic Web and Semantic Web Services.

145


Current responsibilities of particular members of SEE team are structured

around two dimensions:

• DERI objectives

• Project responsibilities

In terms of DERI objectives, SEE cluster contributes to the following

WSMX services: developer tools, end user applications, mediation,

discovery, choreography, storage and communication, reasoner,

monitoring (leader to be decided) and execution management. The most

advanced WSMX components are the ones driven by SEE cluster, which

are developer tools, mediation (data and process) and execution

management.

In terms of project responsibilities, members of SEE cluster have been

involved in several projects, namely: SUPER, DIP, SemBiz, SEEMP,

KW, ASG, TripleSpace, AsiaLink, Tripcom and SemGov. For SEEMP,

ASG and SemanticGov the SEE cluster takes the full responsibility for the

complete execution of the project for DERI Innsbruck (from a local

coordination to research lead and scientific contributions). SUPER is

shared together with SEBIS cluster and project has been divided on the

workpackages level. For other projects members of SEE cluster remain

contributors leading deliverables or contributing to them.

Currently following deliverables are assigned to SEE researchers:

• ASG – D1.I-6 WSML reasoner engine implementation 2nd release

• ASG – D1.I-7 M30 Update of Collection of semantic specifications

for ASG services

• ASG – D2.I-3 Service Matchmaker & Query Processor 1st Release

• DIP – D6.11 Semantic Web Services Architecture and

Information Model

• DIP – D6.14 Semantic Web Services Architecture and

Information Model

• DIP – D9.11 SWS Enhanced GIS Prototype (WSMX) v 1.0

• DIP – D9.12 SWS Enhanced GIS Prototype (WSMX) v 2.0

• DIP – D9.14 SWS Enhanced GIS Prototype (WSMX) Final

Version

• SUPER – D6.3 Process Ontology Reasoner

• SUPER – D12.3 Dissemination Strategy and SDK Activities

• SUPER – contribution to WP4 BP Mediation, WP5 Modeling

Analysis Tools, WP6 SBPM Execution Engine, WP11 Community,

Standards, WP12 Dissemination

• Tripcom and Triplespace – contribution to several deliverables

• SemanticGov - WP3: Design of Semantic Web Service Architecture

for National and Pan-European e-Government services (second

highest involvement)

• SemanticGov - WP5: Development of SWS Execution Environment

for

146


• SemanticGov - Services (highest involvement, leaders of WP)

• SemanticGov - D3.1: SemanticGov Architecture v.1

• SemanticGov - D3.2: SemanticGov Architecture v.2

• SemanticGov - D3.3: Analysis of Mediator Requirements and

Mediator Implementation

• SemanticGov - D5.1: Design and development of SemanticGov

software components v.1

• SemanticGov - D5.2: Design and development of SemanticGov

software components v.2

• SEEMP - Involved in all 8 work packages

• SEEMP – WP 3 SEEMP Platform Functional Specification (lead

partner)

• SEEMP - D21 (Contributor): Semantic and Technical Aspects in e-

Gov Software Development

• SEEMP - D31 (Coordinator): SEEMP Platform Specifications

• SEEMP - D41 (Contributor): SEEMP Components Design

• SEEMP - D43 (Contributor): 1st SEEMP Interoperability

Framework

• SEEMP - D51 (Coordinator): Requirements and Specifications

Revision

• SEEMP - D53 (Contributor): Final SEEMP Interoperability

Framework

• SEEMP - D71 (Contributor): Project Presentation

• SEEMP - D73 (Contributor): Exploitation and Dissemination Plan

• SEEMP - Project Management Reports

• SemBiz – have not started yet and will be probably postponed later

2006

• ASG – WSML reasoner engine implementation 2nd release

• ASG – Update of Collection of semantic specifications for ASG

services

5.2. Objectives

• Applications (2),

• Developer tools (3),

• Mediation (8), and

• Execution Management (15)

5.2.1. Applications

Nr 2

Title Applications

Mission Mission of the Application box is to develop a common understanding

147


statement

Web site

Leader

Cluster

Team

of various technologies intended to facilitate the use of other services of

SESA using semantic annotations. This working group will develop (1)

use case scenarios that help validate the real-world fitness of SESA

components and (2) domain-specific implementations which will be

used for testing of SESA services.

http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Applications

Michal Zaremba

SEE, SEBIS

Senior Researchers:

Ying Ding

Michal Zaremba

Junior Researchers:

Holger Lausen

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Future Steps

Students:

Mark Mattern

Semantic Web Services challenge (www.sws-challenge.org) has been

our first attempt to provide a case bed for future Application box. The

goal of the SWS Challenge is to develop a common understanding of

various technologies intended to facilitate the automation of mediation,

choreography and discovery for Web Services using semantic

annotations. The intent of this challenge is to explore the trade-offs

among existing approaches. Additionally we would like to figure out

which parts of problem space may not yet be covered. The challenge

aims to provide a forum for discussion based on a common application.

This Challenge seeks participation from industry and academic

researchers developing software components and/or intelligent agents

that have the ability to automate mediation, choreography and discovery

processes between Web services. This work is related to but distinct

from the IEEE Contest in several respects. First, the SWS Challenge

focuses on the use of semantic annotations: participants are provided

with semantics in the form of natural language text that they can

formalize and use in their technologies. Second, this is a challenge rather

than a contest, meaning that workshop participants mutually evaluate

and learn from each others' approaches.

The first step is to form an Applications group, as till now the group

operated unofficially and consisted only of two members: Holger and

Michal. Once formed, more detailed plan will be established. At this

stage we can say for sure that we will continue work on SWS challenge.

The second phase of this challenge planned for June 2008 has been

described in detail at www.sws-challenge.org and following phases will

be defined also by us. We also consider to create similar challenges for

other domains (e.g. banking, government, telecom etc.), but for the next

148


Publications

Software

releases

couple of months our major focus remain RosettaNet and integration and

discovery aspects as defined on by current specification of the challenge.

Since the Applications box has just started its existence, there are no

accepted publications yet.

The current implementation of Semantic Web Services challenge is

available at www.sws-challenge.org. Future releases will be listed on

Application website.

5.2.2. Developer tools

Nr 3

Title Developer Tools

Mission The mission of the developer tools working group is to produce high

statement quality tools related to Semantic Web Services that can be used by users

of all competency levels. To this end we provide a large number of tools

that can be used by users with different skill sets. Members of the

working group are working on tools for managing WSMO ontologies,

web services, goals and mediators, for creating mappings between

WSMO ontologies for runtime mediation, for executing WSDL web

services and managing WSMO execution environments.

Web site Information: http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Developer_Tools

Releases: http://wsmt.sourceforge.net & http://dome.sourceforge.net

Leader Mick Kerrigan

Cluster

Team

SEE, (SEBIS)

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Jan Henke

Mick Kerrigan

Adrian Mocan

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Students:

Thomas Haselwanter

Nathalie Steinmetz

Martin Tanler

In the SEEMP project work will be done on improving the WSMO

Choreography support in the plug-ins from the WSMT, for example

adding choreography support to the WSML Text Editor and WSML

Visualizer. Further contributing projects are SUPER, SemBiz, and RW2

The developer tools implemented with DERI are broken down into a

number of plug-ins for Eclipse. The plug-ins are bundled together as two

different products, namely the Web Services Modeling Toolkit (WSMT)

and the DERI Ontology Management Environment (DOME). The

WSMT is aimed at covering all the functionality of WSMO, WSML and

149


WSMX. With the WSMT the user is able to create and manage WSMO

ontologies, web services, goals and mediators through the WSML

human readable syntax, create mappings between two WSML

ontologies for the purposes of instance transformation and thirdly

manage and interact with the WSMX environment. The primary focus of

DOME is the use of WSMO as an ontology language and thus focuses

only on the ontology and mediator parts of the WSMO specification.

Users of DOME can create and manage their WSMO ontologies and

mediators through the WSML human readable, XML and RDF syntaxes.

They can also create mappings between two ontologies that can be used

later by an execution environment.

The plug-ins shipped in these tools includes:

WSMO4J: The WSMO4J plug-in provides access to the functionality

of WSMO4J, which is a parser, serializer and object model for WSMO

documents. This plug-in provides a standard integration point for all

tools that need to perform some operation on WSMO descriptions.

WSML Reasoner: The WSML Reasoner plug-in exposes the

functionality of the WSML 2 Reasoner to other plug-ins in the WSMT.

The reasoner can translate the ontology elements in a WSML description

into predicates and rules and provides a facade allowing integration with

many different underlying reasoners.

WSML: This plug-in layers on top of the WSMO4J plug-in and

provides Eclipse GUI related functionality for WSML.

WSML Text Editor: The WSML Text Editor Plug-in provides a text

editor for editing the human readable syntax of WSML. This text editor

presents advanced features so that users who prefer to work with the raw

syntax of a WSML document can get added value from the tool set.

WSML Conceptual Editor: This editor allows for visual editing of

ontologies. It includes two sub-views – a class tree and an instance table.

The class tree displays the hierarchy of classes and relations including

their attributes and parameters; also axioms are available here.

WSML Visualizer: The WSML Visualizer is an ontology engineering

tool based on a graph based approach. It is unique in that it is not just an

ontology visualization tool bolted on top of an existing ontology

engineering tool, but there is full editing support for WSMO ontologies,

web services, goals and mediators built into the visualization.

WSML Reasoner View: This plug-in provides an Eclipse view based

upon the functionality of the WSML Reasoner plug-in. This allows the

150


user to execute queries over the ontology that is open in the currently

selected editor.

AML: The AML plug-in provides access to the functionality of the

Abstract Mapping Language created by the Ontology Management

Working Group (OMWG). This functionality includes a parser,

serializer and object model for Mapping documents. This plug-in

provides a standard integration point for all tools that need to perform

some operation on AML Documents.

AML Text Editor: The AML Text Editor Plug-in provides a text editor

for editing the AML syntax. This text editor presents advanced features

so that users who prefer to work with the raw syntax of an AML

document can get added value from the tool set.

AML Conceptual Editor: The mapping tree editor is responsible for

the visual editing of documents in the abstract mapping language. It

displays the tree of elements that can be created in this language and

allows for editing through the use of the context menu.

WSMX Data Mediation Mapping Tool: The Data Mediation Mapping

Tool Plug-in offers an alternative to manual, text-based mapping

creation between ontologies. That is, a set of graphical mechanism are in

place in order to support the domain expert in his/her work, and to offer

a truly semi-automatic system for ontology alignment.

WSDL Invocation: This plug-in can be used to invoke a WSDL web

service. The user can provide a WSDL document and the plug-in will

provide templates for the messages that need to be sent to invoke a given

operation.

Future Steps

Publications

WSMX Management: The WSMX Management plug-in in the WSMT

provides a perspective and a number of UI components for managing the

WSMX server and the WSMX adapter framework.

For each of the plug-ins there are a large number of features planned for

each, that lead these plug-ins in the direction of more usable, featureful

tools for described ontologies, web services mediators and goals,

creating mappings between different ontologies and using execution

environments and services.

Conferences

Mick Kerrigan: WSMOViz: An Ontology Visualization Approach for

WSMO, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on

Information Visualization (IV06), July, 2006, London, England

151


Workshops

Adrian Mocan and Emilia Cimpian: Mapping Creation Using a View

Based Approach, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on

Mediation in Semantic Web Services (Mediate 2005), Dec, 2005,

Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Mick Kerrigan: The WSML Editor Plug-in to the Web Services

Modeling Toolkit}, Proceedings of the 2nd WSMO Implementation

Workshop (WIW), June, 2005, Innsbruck, Austria

Jan Henke: The table metaphor: A representation of a class and its

instances, Proceedings to Workshop on User Aspects of the Semantic

Web (ESWC), May, 2005, Heraklion, Greece

Tutorials

Semantic Web Service Systems and Tools}, 4 th International Semantic

Web Conference (ISWC), Nov, 2005, Galway, Ireland

Posters

Tools for the Web Services Modeling Language (WSML), International

Conference on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web

(RuleML), Nov, 2005, Galway, Ireland

Software

releases

Web Services Modeling Toolkit including plug-ins:

- WSML Plug-in

- WSML Text Editor Plug-in

- WSML Vizualizer Plug-in

- WSML Reasoner View Plug-in

- Abstract Mapping Language Plug-in

- Abstract Mapping Language Text Editor Plug-in

- WSMX Management Plug-in

DERI Ontology Management Environment including plug-ins

- WSML Conceptual Editor Plug-in

- AML Conceptual Editor Plug-in

- Mapping Plug-in

- Versioning Plug-in

152


5.2.3. Mediation

Nr 8

Title Mediation

Mission

statement

Mediation in WSMX aims at providing flexible mediation service in

WSMX at both data and process level.

Data Mediation provides automatic data transformation from the format

used by the source party to the format required by the target party

involved in conversation.

As WSMX is a semantic enabled service execution environment, we

assume that the data to be mediated is semantically described, i.e. it

consists of ontology instances. As a consequence the WSMX Data

Mediation Service has to support instance transformation from terms of

one ontology to the terms of another ontology, based on set of already

created mappings between the two given ontologies.

The Process Mediator component has the task of solving the

communication (behavioral) mismatches that may occur during the

communication between a requestor and a provider of a service. As in

WSMO, the requestor is a WSMO Goal, while the provider is a

Semantic Web Service, the Process Mediator’s task is be to

accommodate the mismatches between the goal’s

requestedChoreography and the SWS’s choreography.

Web site http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Data_Mediation,

http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Process_Mediation

Leader Adrian Mocan

Cluster Semantic Execution Environment (SEE) and Semantics in Business

Information Systems (SEBIS)

Team Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Emilia Cimpian (PM)

Adrian Mocan (DM and PM)

Richard Pöttler

Francois Scharffe (DM)

Omair Shafiq

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Students:

Thomas Haselwanter

Knowledge Web, SemanticGov, Sekt, SemBiz, SUPER, SEEMP, DIP,

TSC, TripCom

The Data Mediation service in WSMX aims to provide a solution to

solve the heterogeneity problems that can appear at the data level. As all

messages in WSMX are semantically described in WSML, the data to be

mediated is described in terms of ontologies, i.e. data consists of

ontology instances.

153


In this context, the heterogeneity problems at the data level appear when

the requester and the provider of a service use different ontologies to

conceptualize their domain. As a consequence, data has to be

transformed from terms of one ontology (e.g. requester’s ontology) into

terms of the other ontology (e.g. provider’s ontology). Due to the fact

that these transformations are taking place during run-time the whole

process has to be completely automatic. The data mediator component in

WSMX achieves this by relying on a set of mappings (semantic

relationships) between the source and target ontology identified during

design-time and stored in a persistent storage.

The mappings are in fact logical rules that are executed during run-time

by a reasoner component against the incoming data, to output data as

required by the target party. There are several ways (languages) of

representing these rules, depending of the reasoning support available.

In order to encourage interoperability between various mediation

systems and to allow a flexible and an easy management of these

mappings, a language independent format (called the Abstract Mapping

Language) is used. As a consequence, each time a set of such mappings

have to be used in a concrete scenario (as the instance transformation in

WSMX) the mappings have to be “grounded” to a concrete ontology

representation language (in our case WSML). The grounding not only

transforms the mappings in an executable form, but also associate them

a formal semantics, a meaning in respect with the concrete

representation language and the mediation scenario to be used in.

The WSMX Data Mediation service is a data mediation engine capable

of performing instance transformation for given pairs of ontologies

based on a given set of mappings. These mappings are represented as

statements in an Abstract Mapping Language which assures an ontology

representation language neutrality. By applying different grounding

mechanism, the same set of abstract mappings can be used in different

mediation scenarios using different reasoning systems.

The Process Mediator component currently consists from the following

subcomponents:

− Validator – determines if a certain instance is expected or not

by the targeted partner (valid or not from the conversation

point of view);

− Internal Repository – stores the instances that are going to be

sent at some point in time to one of the partners;

− WSML Reasoner – actually a wrapper for the KAON reasoner

− Core Component – manage the interaction with other DIP

components, and to coordinate the activities of the Process

Mediator internal sub-components.

The process mediation works with an old version of choreography

154


Future Steps

specification, and an old version of Choreography Engine. This was due

to the necessity to have a working version of Process Mediator, while

the work on the Choreography Engine was advancing in a very alert

rhythm.

Data Mediation Service

o As a WSML reasoner (MINS) is now available, a replacement of

the Flora-2 reasoner is necessary. By this replacement the

burdensome introduced by the rapper around the Flora-2

reasoner will be eliminates. In this way, the focus can be shifted

from overcoming the technical problems to real improvements of

the services. In addition, this will allow the development of a

unified grounding mechanism, by updating the already existing

grounding in Abstract Mapping Language to the requirements of

the Data Mediation Service.

o The storage mechanism used by the Data Mediation Service to

store mappings is currently a MySQL (http://www.mysql.com)

database. It is in out intention to provide means for usage of

alternative storing mechanisms, ranging from a simple file

system to a more complex and efficient ones like the one used by

WSMX itself.

o The Data Mediation Service highly depends of the mappings

generated during design-time phase. A great benefit would be to

deliver the Data Mediation Service as a stand-alone application

as well that would allow the testing of the mappings outside of

the WSMX system. If integrated in WSMT, such testing could

take place during the actual creation of mappings, giving a

valuable real-time feed-back to the domain expert.

o As we act in the Semantic Web Services area the Data Mediation

Service has to be made available as a Semantic Web Services. As

such, one of the future plans is to deploy it as a WSDL service

and to provide the necessary semantic descriptions for it.

o It is important to test the feasibility and the soundness of our

conceptual ideas implemented through this Data Mediation

Service. We intend to test this service on real data and to make a

set of measurements regarding the efficiency and time

consuming aspects of the instance transformation process.

Mapping API

o Automation Algorithms: The mapping API provide also

support to automate mapping using a set of string distance,

graph matching and linguist techniques in order to facilitate

to the user the elaboration of the mapping document. This

imply to be able to manipulate the ontological entities by

making adapters to the respective APIs (WSMO4j, OWL

API).

o Transformation functions: The mediated instances have in

155


certain cases to be structurally transformed. We will provide

a set of functions realizing these transformations.

Publications

Process Mediation

For the future, the following sub-components need to be updated:

Validator – this component operates on the choreographies sent by the

Choreography Engine. It needs to be updated to properly work with the

latest version of the Choreography engine

WSML Reasoner – migrate from KAON to MINS; this may cause some

flaws in the execution process.

Core Component – the logic driving the Core Component functionality

needs to be extended, for addressing more complex scenarios

Michael Stollberg, Emilia Cimpian, Adrian Mocan, Dieter Fensel: A

Semantic Web Mediation Architecture, Canadian Semantic Web

Working Symposium (CSWWS 2006), June 2006, Québec city, Canada

Adrian Mocan, Emilia Cimpian: Mapping Creation Using a View Based

Approach, 1st International Workshop on Mediation in Semantic Web

Services (Mediate 2005), December 2005, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Francois Scharffe, Jos de Bruijn: A Language to specify Mappings

between Ontologies, IEEE Conference on Internet-Based Systems

SITIS6, December 2005, Yaounde, Cameroon.

E. Cimpian, A. Mocan: WSMX Process Mediation Based on

Choreographies, 1st International Workshop on Web Service

Choreography and Orchestration for Business Process Management,

September 2005, Nancy, France.

E. Cimpian, M. Kerrigan: WSMX Process Mediation, Second WSMO

Implementation Workshop, June 2005, Innsbruck, Austria. (position

paper).

E. Cimpian: Process Mediation Using Choreographies, CDH Seminar,

December 2005, Galway, Ireland.

5.2.4. Execution management

Nr 15

Title Execution management

Mission The execution management component is responsible for the

statement management of WSMX as a platform and for the coordination of the

individual components. As the kernel of the system it enables and

156


ealizes the overall operational semantics of WSMX that let the system

achieve the promised functional semantics of its client-side interface. It

takes the functionality offered by the individual components of the

framework and orchestrates these atomic pieces into a coherent whole in

an orderly and consistent fashion. These properties are guaranteed by the

execution semantics, which are executed over the set of services that are

available to the execution management component

Web site http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Execution_Manager (scheduled

for move)

Leader Thomas Haselwanter

Cluster

Team

SEE

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Omair Shafiq

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Students:

Thomas Haselwanter

DIP, Infrawebs, TSC; TripCom

This component is available in a fully functional incarnation today. It

provides

(a) a rigid, managable infrastructure to components of WSMX and

(b) enables execution semantics as a deployable formal definition of the

operational behavior of the system.

The execution management component provides a complete

infrastructure to the components of the system, including boot-strap,

registration, hot-deploy and life-cycle management.

As in all systems of a certain complexity, management becomes a

critical issue. We make a clear separation between domain problem

logic and management logic, treating them as orthogonal concepts. If we

did not separate these two elements, it would become increasingly

difficult to maintain the system and keep it flexible, as it grows and

matures. From a certain perspective it could be argued that the very

process of making management explicit captures an invariant that helps

to leverage the support for dynamic, informed change of the rest of the

system.

Naturally, presenting a coherent view of all management aspects of

components and not getting lost in complexity are conflicting goals and

subject to compromise, yet the available WSMX consoles manage to

present a unified view that covers the infrastructure subsystems as well

as the components instrumentation. The kernel employs self-

157


management techniques such as scheduled operations and automatic

recovery from subsystem failures, and additionally allows administration

through management consoles. With the kernel being representation

agnostic, management consoles may be anything from command

prompts or web interfaces to dedicated standalone management

applications, of which currently one instance of each of these three

categories exists.

Future Steps

Publications

Software

releases

The development approach is iterative and results are measured and

driven by builds, and further grouped by versions, which translates

directly to targets and milestones in project management lingua. Today

the execution management stands at milestone 5 and iteration 83,

providing a usable and working base today.

Two main pillars are scheduled for exploration, the use of web service

technology within the kernel and the use of semantic technology within

the kernel and the components interfaces, which will result in the

crossing of the border to a self-executing architecture.

The architecture specification will define web service interfaces as well

as semantic descriptions of these services, on which work has begun.

With Milestone 6 (kernel modularization) in October, milestone 7

(intrakernel services) is targeted for the end of the year. Due to its

ambitient nature experiments for milestone 8 (intrakernel semantics) will

run concurrently to the implementation of the two earlier two

milestones. There will be operatively working, early iteration at the end

of the year, but efforts for milestone 8 will continue into 2007.

T. Haselwanter, Maciej Zaremba and Michal Zaremba. Enabling

Components Management and Dynamic Execution Semantic in WSMX.

WSMO Implementation Workshop 2005 (WIW 2005), 6-7 June,

Innsbruck, Austria.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx

158


5.3. Projects

Here we have the following projects:

• ASG

• SEEMP

• SemanticGov

• SemBiz

• SUPER Michal

• TSC

5.3.1. Adaptive Service Grid

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Adaptive Services Grid

ASG

IST-FP6

SEE

Emilia Cimpian

Ontologies, Applications, Adaptation, Composition, Grounding,

Monitoring, Formal languages, Reasoning, Storage, Execution

http://asg-platform.org

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Emilia Cimpian

Adina Sirbu

Darko Anicic

Students:

-

Mission The goal of Adaptive Services Grid (ASG) is to develop a proof-ofconcept

prototype of an open development platform for adaptive

services discovery, creation, composition, and enactment.

person*mon Total: 168 Per months: 5,5

ths budget

Duration 30 months 09/04 – 02/07

Major tasks service discovery


Deliverables

Remaining:

• D1.I-6 WSML reasoner engine implementation 2nd release

(lead) (Adina Sirbu, Sven Groppe, Jinghua Groppe)

• D1.I-7 M30 Update of Collection of semantic specifications for

ASG services (lead) (Jinghua Groppe, Adina Sirbu, Sven

Groppe)

• D2.I-3 Service Matchmaker & Query Processor 1st Release

(contribute) (Sven Groppe, Adina Sirbu)

• D2.IV Documentation of Interaction among Components

(contribute) (N.N.)

• D2.I-4 Service Matchmaker & Query Processor 2nd Release

(contribute) (N.N.)

5.3.3. SEEMP

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Single European Employment Market Place

SEEMP

IST-FP6

SEE

Mick Kerrigan

Developer tools, Mediation, Choreography

http://www.seemp.org

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Mick Kerrigan

Students:

-

Mission The mission is to design and implement in a prototypal way an

interoperability architecture for public e-Employment services which

encompasses cross-governmental business and decisional processes,

interoperability and reconciliation of local professional profiles and

taxonomies, semantically enabled web services for distributed

knowledge access and sharing.

Budget (in Total: 37 per month: 1

160


terms of

m*m)

Duration 30 months 01/06 – 06/08

Major tasks

Involved in all 8 work packages

WP 3 SEEMP Platform Functional Specification (lead partner)

Deliverables • D21 (Contributor): Semantic and Technical Aspects in e-Gov

Software Development

• D31 (Coordinator): SEEMP Platform Specifications

• D41 (Contributor): SEEMP Components Design

• D43 (Contributor): 1st SEEMP Interoperability Framework

• D51 (Coordinator): Requirements and Specifications Revision

• D53 (Contributor): Final SEEMP Interoperability Framework

• D71 (Contributor): Project Presentation

• D73 (Contributor): Exploitation and Dissemination Plan

• Project Management Reports

5.3.4. SemanticGov

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Providing integrated Public Services to Citizen at the National and Pan-

European level with the use of Emerging Semantic Web Technologies

SemanticGov

IST-FP6

SEE

Adrian Mocan

Ontologies, Developer tools, Discovery, Composition, Mediation,

Grounding, Reasoning, Storage

http://www.semantic-gov.org/

Senior Researchers:

Michal Zaremba

Junior Researchers:

Emilia Cimpian

Graham Hench

Mick Kerrigan

Adrian Mocan

Omair Shafiq

161


Mission

Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Adina Sirbu

Students:

Thomas Haselwanter

SemanticGov aims at building the infrastructure (software, models,

services, etc) necessary for enabling the offering of semantic web

services by public administration (PA). Through this cutting edge

infrastructure, SemanticGov will address longstanding challenges faced

by public administrations such as achieving interoperability amongst PA

agencies both within a country as well as amongst countries, easing the

discovery of PA services by its customers, facilitating the execution of

complex services often involving multiple PA agencies in

interworkflows.

Total: 32 per month: 1

Duration 36 months 01/06 – 12/08

Major tasks • WP3: Design of Semantic Web Service Architecture for

National and Pan-European e-Government services (second

highest involvement)

• WP5: Development of SWS Execution Environment for

Services (highest involvement, leaders of WP)

Deliverables • D3.1: SemanticGov Architecture v.1 - SEE Cluster

• D3.2: SemanticGov Architecture v.2 - SEE Cluster

• D3.3: Analysis of Mediator Requirements and Mediator

Implementation - SEE Cluster

• D5.1: Design and development of SemanticGov software

components v.1 - SEE Cluster

• D5.2: Design and development of SemanticGov software

components v.2 - SEE Cluster

5.3.5 SemBiz

Name

Semantic Business Process Management for flexible dynamic value

162


Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

chains

SemBiz

FIT-IT

SEE

Emilia Cimpian

Development of the Business Process Management Suite

http://www.sembiz.org/

Senior Researchers:

Michal Zaremba

Junior Researchers:

Emilia Cimpian

Mission

Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Duration

Major tasks

Deliverables

Students:

To be determined

Bridging the gap between the business level perspective and the

technical implementation level in Business Process Management (BPM)

by semantic descriptions of business processes along with respective

tool support.

74 1,5

24 months

WP1: Semantic Business Process Modeling Ontology

Lead:

WP1: Semantic Business Process Modeling Ontology

WP6: Dissemination

WP7: Project Management

5.3.6. SUPER Michal

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Semantics utilized for Process Management within and between

Enterprises

SUPER-Michal

IST-FP6

SEE

Michal Zaremba

163


Objective

Website

Team

Semantic Execution Environment

http://super.semanticweb.org/

Senior Researchers:

Michal Zaremba

Mission

Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Junior Researchers:

Emilia Cimpian

Graham Hench

Mick Kerrigan

Adrian Mocaan

Students:

Thomas Haselwanter

The major objective of SUPER is to raise Business Process

Management (BPM) to the business level, where it belongs, from the IT

level where it mostly resides now. This objective requires that BPM is

accessible at the level of semantics of business experts. Semantic Web

and, in particular, Semantic Web Services (SWS) technology offer the

promise of integrating applications at the semantic level. By combining

SWS and BPM, and developing one consolidated technology SUPER

will create horizontal ontologies which describe business processes and

vertical telecommunications oriented ontologies to support domainspecific

annotation. Therefore this project aims at providing a semanticbased

and context-aware framework, based on Semantic Web Services

technology that acquires, organizes, shares and uses the knowledge

embedded in business processes within existing IT systems and

software, and within employees' heads, in order to make companies

more adaptive.

Total 86 Per month 2,5

Duration 36 months 04/06 – 03/09

Major tasks • WP4 BP Mediation

• WP5 Modeling Analysis Tools

• WP6 SBPM Execution Engine

• WP11 Community, Standards

• WP12 Dissemination (SEBIS and SEE contribute)

164


Deliverables

Lead:

• D6.3 Process Ontology Reasoner (SEE cluster)

• D12.3 Dissemination Strategy and SDK Activities (SEE cluster)

Contributions. All deliverables from the following workpackages:

• WP4 BP Mediation

• WP5 Modeling Analysis Tools

• WP6 SBPM Execution Engine

• WP11 Community, Standards

• WP12 Dissemination

5.3.7. TSC

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Triple Space Computing

TSC

FFG, FIT-IT

UBISERV

Reto Krummenacher

Storage

http://tsc.deri.at/

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Darko Anicic

Graham Hench

Reto Krummenacher

Omair Shafiq

Students:

Michael Luger

Mission The aim of the TSC project is to develop Triple Space Computing as

communication and coordination framework for Semantic Web and

Semantic Web services. The outcome of the TSC project will be a

generic framework and prototype implementation for a Triple Space

Computing environment.

person*mon Total 28 Per Month 1

ths budget

Duration 30 months 03/05 – 08/07

165


Major tasks • Mediation within Triple Space (TS)

• Querying of data - Discovery/Localization of TS

• Implementation of prototype

• Use Case: TS in respectively between WSMXs

• Design of Mediation and Query Engine

• Implementations

• WSMX integration of TS

Deliverables • D2.3 Mediation and Query Engine

• D3.3 Triple Storage Repository

• D3.4 Discovery and Mediation prototypes

• D4.1 Integration of WSMX and TSC

• D4.2 WSMX Triple Space prototype

• D6.3 Final Project Report

166


5.4. Staff

Here we discuss student, junior, and senior researchers of the SEE cluster.

5.4.1. Student Researchers

Student Researchers

Nr Name Supervisor

2 Thomas Haselwanter Michal

6 Mark Mattern Holger

5.4.2. Junior Researchers

Junior Researchers

No Name Objective

4 Emilia Cimpian Mediation

7 Graham Hench Reasoning

9 Zhou Jingtao

11 Mick Kerrigan Developer Tools

15 Adrian Mocan Mediation

21 Omair Shafiq Storage & Communication

23 Adina Sirbu Discovery

27 Zhixian Yan


5.4.2.1. Emilia Cimpian

Name

Emilia Cimpian

Entry date February 2006

Cluster Semantic Execution Environment - SEE

Objective Mediation

Projects So far I’ve been working on DIP. From now on I’ll be mainly

involved in SemBiz (coordination work) and Super, and also in other

projects coordinated by the SEE cluster if this will be required. I

don’t know yet in what deliverables I will be involved, since these

projects are going to start, or they started recently.

Research topic Going from the most general to the particular research topic, my

interests would be:

Semantic Web Services – of a particular interest for me is the SWS

interoperability, which is strongly dependent of how SWS interfaces

are represented. Two aspects of interest result from this: the

choreography and the orchestration. WSMO choreography being just

a particular representation of public processes, I’m trying to extend

my research to other business process representation languages as

well. The orchestration is also interested from the interoperability

point of view, but I haven’t invested too much time in finding good

solutions of how the orchestration can be represented.

Mediation Framework – developing a framework able to solve all

types of mismatches in a SWS environment is quite an interesting

challenge from my point of view (of course, the implementation of

such a framework is not a one man/woman task). WSMO mediators

provide conceptual support for doing this, although some of the

mediators are underspecified being still on-going work. Additionally

WSMX provides means for actually realizing the mediation service

for two particular levels (data and process), but these two prototypes

are offering partial support, for simple cases and they are not as easy

to use as they should be. A global mediation architecture, with

different execution semantics and different entry points would be, in

my opinion, the right solution for the problem (but these would mean

equivalent efforts as for WSMX itself).


Progress

towards PhD

Process Mediation – the main part of my research, a working

prototype operating on the choreographies of two participants in a

conversation. This prototype is able to solve a limited set of

behavioral mismatches and for now can operate only with two

choreographies. What I would consider a challenge is to extend it to

address more mismatches (still what and how is to be determined,

probably based on use-cases produced in different projects) and also

to allow the communication of multiple partners, not only two

(which may be useful for the actual orchestration of SWSs).

Implementation of Process Mediation – not robust and complex

enough, but still can be used as proof of concept for a PhD External

Supervisor: John Domingue Currently documenting for the State of

the Art section

Implementations Process Mediation prototype, available from downloading from:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx/

Publications M Stollberg, E. Cimpian, A. Mocan, D. Fensel: A Semantic Web

Mediation Architecture, Canadian Semantic Web Working

Symposium 2006 (to appear)

E Cimpian, A. Mocan: WSMX Process Mediation Based on

Choreographies, 1st International Workshop on Web Service

Choreography and Orchestration for Business Process Management,

September 2005, Nancy, France.

E. Cimpian, M. Kerrigan: WSMX Process Mediation, Second

WSMO Implementation Workshop, June 2005, Innsbruck, Austria.

(position paper).

A. Mocan, E. Cimpian: Mappings Creation Using a View Based

Approach, First International Workshop on Mediation in Semantic

Web Services, December 2005, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

M. Stollberg, E. Cimpian, D. Fensel: Mediating Capabilities with

Delta-Relations, First International Workshop on Mediation in

Semantic Web Services, December 2005, Amsterdam, the

Netherlands.

E. Cimpian: Process Mediation Using Choreographies, CDH

Seminar, December 2005, Galway, Ireland.

A. Haller, E. Cimpian, A. Mocan, E. Oren, C. Bussler: WSMX - A

Semantic Service-Oriented Architecture, International Conference

on Web Services (ICWS 2005), 2005, Orlando, Florida, USA.

L. Vasiliu, S. Harand, E. Cimpian: The DIP Project: Enabling

Systems & Solutions for Processing Digital Content with Semantic

169


Web Services, European Workshop on the Integration of

Knowledge, Semantics and Digital Media Technology, November

2004, London, UK.

Adrian Mocan, Emilia Cimpian, Michal Zaremba, Christoph

Bussler: Mediation in Web Service Modeling Execution

Environment (WSMX), Information Integration on the Web

(iiWeb2004), August 2004, Toronto, Canada

170


5.4.2.2. Graham Hench

Name

Graham Hench

Entry date June 2005

Cluster SEE & “Reasoner Working Group”

Objective Reasoner Component – specifically maintaining/updating

wsml2reasoner

Projects SENSE – Project (at least DERI’s part) will begin this Friday

(7.4.06). DERI will be responsible for various tasks/deliverables

ranging from ontology engineering/developing, to implementing

basic reasoner functionalities to meet the project needs. DERI will

mainly contribute to the following WP, though is indeed involved in

almost every WP:

2 – “Ontology and Reasoner Development”

3 – “Multi-Agent System Development”

Personally, my specific contributions will focus on implementing the

reasoner functionalities.

Research topic

Progress

towards PhD

SUPER – Project began today (3.4.06) – DERI will contribute to

various WP, specifically:

1 – Project lead for D1.1 “Process Modeling Ontology” & D1.5

“Process Ontology Query Language”

5 – Project lead for D5.6 “Process Ontology Query Language Parser”

11 – Project lead for D11.2 “Setup SBPM Community Portal”

Personally, my specific contributions will again focus on

implementing the reasoner functionalities, namely development of a

process reasoner.

Will later contribute to TSC & TripCom

Currently, I am not a student – though my main research focus as of

recently is further developing an extendable and fully functional

WSML reasoner

Currently, I am not a PhD student because there are problems with

the approval of my foreign academic degree.

Implementations -Past/Completed –

-OMWG – Mediation Module

-Mapping API –

-Groundings

-Re-implemented Abstract Syntax export/serialization

171


Publications

-Implemented WSML & OWL/RDF/XML

exports/serializations

-Documentation and further implementations

-Current/Future –

-Reasoner Component –

-wsml2reasoner- maintenance, unit tests, updates, and bug

fixes

-Adaptation of current wsml2reasoner to new reasoner

-Implementation of semi-naïve and dynamic filtering

evaluation algorithms for query answering

-SUPER –

-DERI Innsbruck representative for WP6 and leader for

deliverable 6.3, i.e. development and implementation of a

process ontology reasoner to enhance the execution engine

by allowing external querying of running process instances

-TSC –

-D4.2 – implementation of WSMX/TSC prototype

-SENSE –

-WP3 (Multi-Agent System Development) –

integration/implementation of Triple Space

-Contribute to WP2 (Ontology and Reasoner Development),

WP4 (Semantic Façade Design), WP5 (System

Integration), & WP6 (Verification & Testing)

Extensive proofreading and editorial contributions

Planned publications:

• ESWC 2007 - Paper submission on IRIS implementation and

implementation support

• SEnSE dissemination - Reasoning within semanticallyenabled

multi- agent systems

• SUPER dissemination - Process Ontology Reasoning for

SBPM

172


5.4.2.3. Zhou Jingtao

Name

Jingtao Zhou

Entry date December 2006

Cluster Semantic Execution Environment - SEE

Objective Semantic Mediation and Integration

Projects By now, I have taken part in several projects working as from

programmer, system analyst, technical leader and project manager.

These projects include “Semantic Integration of Enterprise

Heterogenous Data Sources based on Semantic Web”, “Semantic and

Model Based Integration of Enterprise Heterogenous Data Sources

(http://aame.nwpu.edu.cn/smi/)”, “Information Sharing and

Visualization Technologies for Network Product Development”,

“Computer Aided Man-hour Rationing System for Mould and

Fixture Apparatus”, ”Web-based Products Information Sharing &

Visualization System”, and “Computer Aided Process Planning and

Information Management System for Machining Parts”.

Research topic I have a fierce interest in developing new generation technologies of

information mediation, integration and management for enterprises

by undertaking the intersection research of semantic web, peer-topeer,

web service and grid computing technologies.

Progress

towards

PhD/Habil

Implementations Semantic and Model Based Integration prototype,

http://aame.nwpu.edu.cn/smi/

Publications Edited Books

Zhou Jingtao, Zhao Han, Wang Kefei, et al, (eds), “Complete

Handbook for Eclipse”, Publishing House of Electronics Industry,

2006

Papers (In English)

Jingtao Zhou, Shusheng Zhang, Mingwei Wang, Han Zhao

“Semantic Integration of Enterprise Information: Challenges and

Basic Principles”, the First Asia Semantic Web Conference (ASWC

2006), LNCS 4185, pp. 219 – 233, 2006.

Jingtao Zhou, Shusheng Zhang, Mingwei Wang, Han Zhao “XML-

RDB Driven Semi-Structure Data Management”, Journal of

Information and computing Science, 2006 (Accepted)

Jingtao Zhou, Shusheng Zhang, Mingwei Wang, Han Zhao


“Enterprise Information Integration: State Of The Art and Technical

Challenges”, PROgraming LAnguages for MAchine Tools

conference, China, 2006 (Accepted)

Jingtao Zhou, Mingwei Wang, Shusheng Zhang, Han Zhao “SGII:

Combining P2P Data Integration Paradigm and Semantic Web

Technology On Top Of OGSA-DAI”, CCGrid 2006 – IEEE/ACM

International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid 2006,

Singapore, May 2006

Jingtao Zhou, Mingwei Wang, “Semi-Structure Data Management by

Bi-Directional Integration between XML and RDB”, The 10th

International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work

in Design May 3-5, 2006, Nanjing, P.R. China

Jingtao Zhou, Mingwei Wang, “Semantic Enterprise Information

Integration”, ICEIS 2006 – 8th International Conference on

Enterprise Information Systems, Paphos – Cyprus, May 2006

(accepted)

Jingtao Zhou, Mingwei Wang, “ESD: Enterprise Semantic Desktop“,

International Workshop on Web-based Internet Computing for

Science and Engineering (WBICSE'06), APWeb 2006, LECTURE

NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, Vol.3842, pp: 943 – 946, 2006

Jingtao Zhou, Mingwei Wang, “Semantic-Grid-Enabled Peer-To-

Peer Framework for Enterprise Information Integration“,

International Conference on Advanced Design and Manufacture,

January 2006

Jingtao Zhou, Mingwei Wang, “Catching Concepts From Databases

by Schema-Based Column Matching and Clustering“, International

Conference on Advanced Design and Manufacture, January 2006

Jingtao Zhou, Mingwei Wang, “Semantic Desktop Data Grid:

Towards Integration and Coordination of both Organizational and

Personal Information on Top of P2P Semantic Grid“, SWAP 2005

(Semantic Web Applications and Perspectives), 2nd Italian Semantic

Web Workshop Trento, Faculty of Economics, 14-15-16 December,

2005 (accepted paper)

Jingtao Zhou, Shusheng Zhang, Han Zhao, Mingwei Wang, “SGII:

Towards Semantic Grid-based Enterprise Information Integration“,

The 4th International Conference on Grid and Cooperative

Computing, LECTURE NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE 3795,

pp: 560 - 565, 2005

174


Jingtao Zhou, Shusheng Zhang, Mingwei Wang, Han Zhao, et al,

“Concept Capture Based On Column Matching and Clustering“.

IEEE Computer Society, 1st International Conference on Semantics,

Knowledge and Grid, BeiJing, 2005

Jingtao Zhou, Shusheng Zhangg, Mingwei Wang, Peng Li, Han

Zhao, Chao Zhang, Xiaofeng Dong, Kefei Wang, “Element

Matching by Concatenating Lingistic-based Matchers and

Constraint-based Matcher“, The 17th IEEE International Conference

on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI), IEEE Computer

Society, Hong Kang, pp: 265-269, 2005

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Sun Hongwei, et al, “An XML-based

schema translation method for relational data sharing and

exchanging“, The 8th International Conference on Computer

Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD 2004), Vol.1,

pp:714-717, 2004

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Sun Hongwei, et al, “An XML-

Based Architecture for Semantic Integration of Heterogeneous

Relational Databases“, Proceeding of International Workshop on

Grid and Cooperative Computing, Sanya, China, pp:465-474, Dec

2002

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Sun Hongwei, et al, “Constraints

Preserving Mapping from Relational Schema to XML-Schema“, In

Proceeding of 8th Joint International Computer Conference, Ningbo,

China, pp:60-65, Nov 2002

Mingwei Wang, Shusheng Zhang, Jingtao Zhou, Han Zhao, An

Architecture of Semantic Desktop Data Grid, The 10th International

Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design

May 3-5, 2006, Nanjing, P.R. China (accepted)

Mingwei Wang, Jingtao Zhou, Shusheng Zhang, “A Model for

Resolving Semantic Conflicts in Collaborative Design“, Proceedings

of the International conference on Advanced Design and

Manufacture 8-10 January, 2006, Harbin, China

Mingwei Wang, Jingtao Zhou, Shusheng Zhang, “Multi-Agent Based

Cooperative Knowledge Based Engineering Framework“,

Proceedings of the International conference on Advanced Design and

Manufacture 8-10 January, 2006, Harbin, China

175


Sun Hongwei, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao et al, “XQuery-to-SQL

Translating Algorithm with Little Dependence on Schema Mapping

Between XML and RDB“, The Eight International Conference on

CSCW in Design, Xiamen, China, Vol.1, pp: 526-531, May 26-28,

2004

Sun Hongwei, Zhang ShuSheng, Zhou Jingtao, et al, “The Threetired

Bi-directional Integration between XML and RDB“, Proceeding

of the 8th Joint International Computer Conference, Ningbo, China,

pp: 87-91, Nov 2002

Sun Hongwei, Zhang ShuSheng, Zhou Jingtao, et al, “An XML-to-

RDB Independent Translating Algorithm from XQuery to SQL“,

Proceeding of 8th Joint International Computer Conference, Ningbo,

China, pp:562-566, Nov 2002

Sun Hongwei, Zhang ShuSheng, Zhou Jingtao, et al, “Mapping

XML-Schema to Relational Schema“, LECTURE NOTES IN

COMPUTER SCIENCE, Vol.2510, pp:322-329, October 2002

Sun Hongwei, Zhang ShuSheng, Zhou Jingtao, et al, “Constraintspreserving

Mapping Algorithm from XML-Schema to Relational

Schema“, LECTURE NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE,Vol.2480,

pp:193-207, Sep.2002

Papers (In Chinese)

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Zhao Han, Wang Mingwei, Zhang

Chao, Wang Kefei, Dong Xiaofeng, “Semantic Model-based Bus

Architecture for Enterprise Information Integration”, Jisuanji Jicheng

Zhizao Xitong/Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems-CIMS,

2006 (to appear)

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Dong XiaoFeng, Wang Kefei, Zhao

Han, Zhang Chao, “Service Oriented Semantic Navigation of

Enterprise Data“, Jisuanji Jicheng Zhizao Xitong/Computer

Integrated Manufacturing Systems-CIMS, Vol.11, No.9: 1333-

1339+1350, 2005

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Wang Mingwei, “New Semanticbased

Work Model for Collaborative Engineering“, Computer

Engineering, Vol.31, No.13: 24-26,2005

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Wang Mingwei, Sun Hongwei, He

176


Yanli, Gao Junjie, “A Method for Merging XML Schema Based

Heterogeneous Resource Databases “, Mechanical Science and

Technology, Vol.23, No.5: 627-630,2004

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Sun Hongwei, Wang Mingwei,

“XML-based Schema Translation Method for Relational Data

Sharing and Exchanging“, Jisuanji Jicheng Zhizao Xitong/Computer

Integrated Manufacturing Systems-CIMS, Vol.9, n SUPPL: 127-

129+135, 2003

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang shushing, Wang Jian, Yang Bailong, Wang

Mingwei, He Yanli, “A STEP-based Method for Product

Information Organization Under IIE Circumstance“, Computer

Engineering and Applications, Vol.39, No.17: 11-13, 2003

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Sun Hongwei, Wang Mingwei, “A

New Translation Algorithm Based on Constraints-Preserved

Mapping from Relational Schema to XML Schema“, Journal of

Northwestern Polytechnical University, Vol.21, No.3: 373-376, 2003

Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Sun Hongwei, Li Rong, Wang

Mingwei, Wang He, “Study and Implementation of Extensible Limit

Deviation Automatic Labeling System“, Mechanical Science and

Technology, Vol.22, No.2: 312-314, 2003

Wang Mingwei, Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, “A Multi-Agent

Based Cooperative Knowledge Based Engineering Framework“,

Application Research of Computers, September 2006

Wang Mingwei, Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Chen Yaqi, “Active

Information Sharing System Framework Based On Workflow“,

Manufacturing Automation, February 2006

Zhao Han, Zhou Jingtao, Zhang Shusheng, Zhang Chao, “Semantic

Model Construction Method for Heterogeneous Database

Integration“, Jisuanji Jicheng Zhizao Xitong/Computer Integrated

Manufacturing Systems-CIMS, 2006 (to appear)

Zhu Lixin, Zhou Jingtao, Gao Junjie, Zhang Shusheng, “A Study on

the Development of Man-hour Ration Based on Artificial Neural

Networks”, Mechanical Science and Technology, Vol.23, No.6:702-

704+747, 2004

Zhang Chao, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, “A Semantic Modeling

Approach for Heterogeneous Data based Protégé Knowledge

Model“, Computer Engineering and Applications, December 2006

177


(to appear)

Zhang Chao, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, “A Requirement

Driven Approach for Building Semantic Model, Application

Research Of Computers“, May 2006 (to appear)

Liu Dongjun, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, “Research and

application on the ontology exchange based on PSL“, Machinery

Design & Manufacturing, No.10: 81-83, 2005

Dong Xiaofeng, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, Zhao Han, Feng

Yun, Tian Zhanqiang, “Semantic Query of Enterprise Data Base on

Semantic Model”, Application Research Of Computers, November

2006 (to appear)

Sun Hongwei, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, Wang, Jing,

“XQuery-to-SQL translation with little dependence on schema

mapping between XML and RDB“, Jisuanji Fuzhu Sheji Yu

Tuxingxue Xuebao/Journal of Computer-Aided Design and

Computer Graphics, Vol.16, No.9: 1301-1306, 2004

Sun Hongwei, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, Wang, Jing, Zhao

Han, “Synchronized Update in Data Integration Between XML and

RDB Source“, Xibei Gongye Daxue Xuebao/Journal of

Northwestern Polytechnical University, Vol.22, No.3: 333-337, 2004

Li Peng, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, et al, “Research on the

Information Share of Product’s 3D-Model Based on the Web“,

Computer Engineering and Applications, Vol.40, No.13: 46-48, 2004

Sun Hongwei, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, Wang Jing, “Three-

Tier Bi-Directional Data Integration Between XML(eXtensible

Markup Language) and RDB(Relational Data Base)“, Xibei Gongye

Daxue Xuebao/Journal of Northwestern Polytechnical University,

Vol.21, No.5: 511-514, 2003

Li Peng, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, “Group technology applied

in CAMRS System, Computer Applications“, Vol.23, No.6: 42-43,

2003

Sun Hongwei, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, et al, “Bi-directional

Mapping Between XML and Database Based on Model-drive“,

Computer Engineering and Applications, Vol.38, No.4:25-27, 2002

Gao Junjie, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, “Application of Hybrid

Reasoning Method In Computer-Aided Ration of Man Hour and

178


Tools“, Computer Applications, Vol.22, No.12: 37-40, 2002

Gao Junjie, Zhang Shusheng, Zhou Jingtao, “The Design and

Implement of the Intelligent Decision Support for CAMRS System“,

The Place of Science and Technology for Postgraduate,

Northwestern Polytechnical University Publication, 2002

Li Rong, Zhang Shushen, Zhou Jingtao, “Research on Dimension

Verification between Part Process Drawing and Design Drawing“,

Journal Of Engineering Graphics, Vol.23, No.2:18-22, 2002

He Yanli, Yang Haicheng, He Weiping, Zhou Jingtao, “Information

Query for Manufacturing Oriented Resources: Acknowledged Based

Approach“, Computer Engineering & Science, Vol.26, No.6: 77-80,

2004

He Yanli, Yang Haicheng, He Weiping, Zhou Jingtao, “Knowledge

Integration for Information Integration“, Computer Engineering and

Applications, Vol.39, No.4: 38-41, 2003

179


5.4.2.4. Mick Kerrigan

Name

Mick Kerrigan

Entry date February 2006

Cluster SEE

Objective Component Leader for Developer Tools Box and co-component

leader for discovery box.

Projects Project: SEEMP

Role: LFUI Project Coordinator, WP3 Leader, Contributor to

deliverables

Deliverables: D21 (Contributor): Semantic and Technical Aspects in

e-Gov Software Development

D31 (Coordinator): SEEMP Platform Specifications

D41 (Contributor): SEEMP Components Design

D43 (Contributor): 1st SEEMP Interoperability

Framework

D51 (Coordinator): Requirements and Specifications

Revision

D53 (Contributor): Final SEEMP Interoperability

Framework

D71 (Contributor): Project Presentation

D73 (Contributor): Exploitation and Dissemination

Plan

Project Management Reports

Project: OntoStar

Role: LFUI Coordinator

Deliverables: None

Project: SystemOne

Role: LFUI Coordinator

Deliverables: None

Research topic

Project: OASIS SEE TC

Role: TC Secretary

Deliverables: Admin Work, Case Studies and Architecture document

My research to this date with DERI (in Galway) has focused on

development of tools that aid in the adoption of technologies like


WSMO, WSML and WSMX. At this point this is still my focus and

my current project work is reflecting this (It would appear that the

LFUI effort in the SEEMP project will focus on enhancing our

tools). My aim is that over the next 4 – 6 months to extending the

WSMT into a heavily featured toolkit for WSMO, WSML, WSMX,

IRSIII and WSDL by using my own skills and those of the other

contributors in the “Developer Tools” box, namely Jan Henke,

Adrian Mocan, Martin Tanler, Thomas Haselwanter and Nathalie

Steinmetz, as well as other resources from other institutes, for

example Barry Norton from Open University. More specifically this

research focuses on identifying the requirements that ontology

engineers have, whether they are advanced users who want to be

hands on with the raw syntax or more beginner users who need to be

guided through the process in a more graphical way. Once these

requirements are identified my focus is on implementing these

solutions in the most usable way possible. Thus the aim is to provide

high-quality tools that can be used by users of all competency levels.

As part of this research I also want to look at current mechanisms for

quantitatively analysing the usability of tools (I intend to use Jan as a

spring board for this research as I believe he has done a lot of work

in this area). This research will include applying these techniques to

the WSMT, specifically to analyse how much easier it is to build

semantic descriptions using WSMT over tools like WSMO Studio,

Onto Studio, and Protégé.

Progress

towards PhD

I am also contributing to the discovery box where my current aim is

to try and look at how users do, should and need to model web

services (and goals) in WSMO, in order to achieve goal based

discovery of web services, so that we can feed this information back

into the design phase. More generally this research interest extends

itself in the direction of potentially providing a set of “best practices”

for creating WSMO ontologies, web services, goals and mediators,

using the WSML language and supporting these best practices

through the developer tools.

As I have only been in DERI Innsbruck for a very small period of

time and I have only just completed my Masters Thesis, I have not

given the topic a huge amount of thought yet. My current plans are to

continue working in the Developer Tools research area, actively

looking for a good thesis topic, while also reading around the other

“boxes” to see what interests me.

Some of the crazy thesis ideas:

1) Extension of WSMOViz: further research into how to best

represent WSMO choreographies, orchestrations and logical

181


expressions graphically. Further research into how to improve

the graph scalability problem while still showing all the

complexities in the visualization, is also possible.

2) WSML Instance Store: provide a tool for extracting WSMO

ontologies from database schemas and creating database

schemas from WSMO ontologies. The mappings created to

do this can then be used for runtime extraction of WSMO

Instances from an underlying relational database. I know

some research has been done on this in the past for other

ontology languages and certainly some research on previous

efforts would be needed first.

3) WSMX Selection: At the end of last year I wrote a paper

entitled “Web Service Selection Mechanisms in the Web

Service Execution Environment (WSMX)” which I will

present at the Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC) later

in April 2006. This paper outlines a number of selection

mechanisms for WSMX, automatic, semi-automatic and

manual that use non-functional properties along with some

group collaborative filtering techniques to provide a ranking

over the web services returned by discovery.

4) Web Service Monitoring in WSMX: This falls into a similar

category as the previous thesis idea but looks more at the

mechanisms and key performance indications for monitoring

the process of invoking a web service as WSMX performs the

invocation. This monitoring then allows for the nonfunctional

properties of the web service description to be

automatically maintained by WSMX (as obviously a web

service cannot be trusted to provide reliable information on

its own availability, scalability etc.).

So in short I have not got a clue yet ☺.

Implementations Web Services Modeling Toolkit v0.1 to v0.3 (Java swing version)

Publications

Web Services Modeling Toolkit v1.0 to v1.2 (Eclipse based)

including plugins:

- WSML Plug-in

- WSML Text Editor Plug-in

- WSML Vizualizer Plug-in

- Abstract Mapping Language Plug-in

- Abstract Mapping Language Text Editor Plug-in

- WSMX Management Plug-in

Papers

182


Xia Wang, Tomas Vitvar, Mick Kerrigan and Ioan Toma: A QoS

aware Selection Model for Semantic Web Services, Proceedings of

the 4th International Conference on Service Oriented Computing

(ICSOC), December, 2006, Chicago, USA (Awaiting Publication)

Adrian Mocan, Emilia Cimpian and Mick Kerrigan: A Formal Model

for Ontology Mapping Creation, Proceedings of the 5th International

Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), November 2006, Athens,

Georgia, USA (Awaiting Publication)

Mick Kerrigan: WSMOViz: An Ontology Visualization Approach

for WSMO, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on

Information Visualization (IV), July, 2006, London, England

Mick Kerrigan: Web Service Selection Mechanisms in the Web

Service Execution Environment (WSMX), Proceedings of the 21st

Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC), Apr, 2006,

Dijon, France

Tomas Vitvar, Mick Kerrigan, Arnold van Overeem, Vassilios

Peristeras and Konstantinos Tarabanis: Infrastructure for the

Semantic Pan-European E-government Services, Proceedings of the

2006 AAAI Spring Symposium on The Semantic Web meets

eGovernment (SWEG), Mar, 2006, Stanford University, California,

USA

Mick Kerrigan: The Need for a Manual Web Service Selection

Mechanism in the Web Service Execution Environment (WSMX),

Proceedings of the 1st CIMRU, DERI, HP Research Seminar (CDH),

Dec, 2005, Galway, Ireland

Mick Kerrigan: The WSML Editor Plug-in to the Web Services

Modeling Toolkit, Proceedings of the 2nd WSMO Implementation

Workshop (WIW), Jun, 2005, Innsbruck, Austria.

Emilia Cimpian and Mick Kerrigan: WSMX Process Mediation,

Proceedings of the 2nd WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW),

Jun, 2005, Innsbruck, Austria.

Book Chapters

Michal Zaremba, Mick Kerrigan, Adrian Mocan and Matt Moran:

Web Services Modeling Ontology. In: Jorge Cardoso and Amit Sheth

(eds.) Semantic Web Services, Processes and Applications.

Theses

183


Mick Kerrigan (Masters Thesis), WSMOViz: An Ontology

Visualization Approach for the Web Service Modeling Ontology

(WSMO), National University of Ireland Galway (NUIG), March,

2006

Mick Kerrigan (Bachelors Thesis), I-Spy A 2nd Generation Meta

Search Engine, University College Dublin (UCD), April, 2001

Tutorials

Liliana Cabral, Mick Kerrigan and Maciej Zaremba: Semantic Web

Service Systems, European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC),

June, 2006, Budva, Montenegro

Mick Kerrigan, Adrian Mocan and Michal Zaremba: Applying

Semantics to Service Oriented Architecture, OASIS Symposium

"The Meaning of Interoperability" May, 2006, San Francisco,

California, USA

Semantic Web Service Systems and Tools, 4th International

Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Nov, 2005, Galway, Ireland

Posters/Demos

Jos de Bruijn and Mick Kerrigan: Tools for the Web Services

Modeling Language (WSML), International Conference on Rules

and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web (RuleML), Nov,

2005, Galway, Ireland

184


5.4.2.5. Adrian Mocan

Name

Adrian Mocan

Entry date February 2006

Cluster Semantic Execution Environment – SEE

Objective - Data Mediation - Leader

- Developer Tools - Leading the work on the Ontology Mapping

Plug-in

Projects 1 SemanticGov (FP6-2004-IST-4-027517)

The main workpackages DERI Innsbruck is involved are starting

only in the second half of 2006. As I am the responsible person from

DERI Innsbruck side in this project I will probably be involved in

most of them (at least for coordination purposes). Please finnd a least

tasks and deliverables in this workpackages below:

Tasks

- Task 3.1 Application of WSM* to SemanticGov services version 1

- Task 3.2 Development of Mediator Support version 1

- Task 3.3 Application of WSM* to SemanticGov services version 2

- Task 3.4 Development of Mediator Support version 2

- Task 5.1 Design of the SemanticGov software components

- Task 5.2 Implementation of the SemanticGov software components

v1

- Task 5.3 Implementation of the SemanticGov software components

v2

Deliverables

- D3.1 SemanticGov Architecture v.1

- D3.2 SemanticGov Architecture v.2

- D3.3 Analysis of Mediator Requirements and Mediator

Implementation

- D5.1 Design and development of SemanticGov software

components v.1

- D5.2 Design and development of SemanticGov software

components v.2

Tasks

- Task 2.4.13 Data Mediation in Semantic Web Services

185


Research topic

Deliverables

- D2.4.13. Data Mediation in Semantic Web Services (report +

prototype)

My research work has taken place so far in the context of Semantic

Web Services. I was actively involved in WSMX design and

development even from the beginning of this working group. My

interests in WSMX are related to integration problems (data and

process mediation, lifting and lowering, grounding) as well as in

work-flow related aspects (choreography and orchestration). As

WSMX is a reference implementation for WSMO, another point of

interest for me is to keep an eye on the conceptual work done in

WSMO as well as on the development of WSML.

Out of the research work done in WSMX (or SEE), Service Oriented

Architecture has become as well an appealing research topic for me.

In the last couples of months through the OASIS SEE TC,

SemanticGov project and the SEE cluster in general, I was involved

in the work regarding on Semantic Service Oriented Architecture (or

Semantic Enabled Service Architecture - SESA). This work tries to

give shape to a new architecture that fully benefits of the advantages

of the semantics and fully exploits the best practices coming from

industry.

While the research interests presented above define the context in

which I carry on my work, my main interest, and the one my PhD

thesis will be based upon, is Data Mediation. Data mediation has

been a well explored area (e.g. in the data base communities) but in

the context of Semantic Web and Semantic Web services it brings

new challenges as well as new opportunities.

Data heterogeneity remains a problem even in the context of

Semantic Web and Semantic Web Services. That is, different

conceptualization of the same domain (i.e. ontologies) might be used

in describing the data used by various parties, making the

interchange of such data impossible. In this context, the advantage

compared with previous attempts in solving data mismatches is that

ontologies better described the data to be mediated. As such, the

ontologies offer the means to solve the heterogeneity problems at the

schema level and to use the bindings on the actual data during runtime

processes. The schema mapping process can fully benefit from

the semantic descriptions present in the ontologies, transforming a

manual and error-prone task, in a semi-automatic (machine assisted)

or even an automatic one.

As presented above this work is been carried out as part of WSMX.

The main requirement of such a component is to automatically

perform semantic transformations of the incoming data from a form

of representation used by the source in the representation required by

the target. Due to the fact that this mediation scenario is performed in

186


Progress

towards PhD

semantic environment, one of the main assumptions was that all the

data passed through the system is semantically described. From a

more technical point of view, this means that data to be mediated is

represented by instances of the ontology used by the source party and

accordingly, the mediated data would be expressed in terms of the

target ontology.

Another element that influenced the design decisions of WSMX Data

mediation component has been the business orientation of the

framework: WSMX has intended to act in a business environment

and all the outputs of the framework in general and of its components

in particular are expected to be 100% accurate. As a consequence,

the output of the data mediator have to be correct and in concordance

with users expectations. The data mediation in WSMX includes two

phases: a design-time and a run-time phase. The design-time phase

deals with finding and resolving the mismatches between the

ontologies used to describe the exchanged data, while the run-time

phase uses these findings in performing the actual transformation on

the data. The first phase is covered by a semi-automatic mapping tool

that allows the domain expert to create mappings between ontologies

and to make them available for further usages. The mapping tool is a

semi-automatic one because it assists the human domain expert in his

work by offering suggestion and guidance in obtaining the desired

result. The second phase is performed by the actual WSMX Data

Mediation component that uses the mappings created during designtime

and apply them on the incoming data. Such an approach assures

that as long as correct mappings are available data mediation can be

automatically and correctly performed inside the WSMX framework.

The thesis focuses on a set of strategies and enhancements of the

classical approach towards ontology mapping tools and run-time

mediation components. It also proposes a formal model that unites

the conceptual models of the design-time and run-time tools,

improving and making more explicit the process of translating the

domain expert inputs (placed in a graphical interface) to the logical

formalism that is to be executed by the run-time tool.

Most of the work I have done in this direction, is captured in the

implementation of the graphical mapping tool or of the run-time

component. Still, there are project deliverables and publications

(unfortunately more deliverables and less publications) that give a

conceptual overview of this work. Those deliverables and

publications will represent a starting point for the actual content of

the thesis document.

The first cut of the formal model has been finished but it still has to

be extended and fully synchronized with the conceptual model

behind the design-time and run-time mediation solutions. Another

important point is to concretely prove the usefulness of this formal

model, other then validation of and aws detection in the conceptual

187


model of this mediation solution.

The list below summarizes the work-status of the three main aspects

presented above:

- Early work on state of the art

- Scattered documentation and conceptual level descriptions

- Quite well advance implementation but no evaluation yet

- First cut of the formal model; it still needs a better motivation and

to be further extended

Implementations WSMT Ontology Mapping Tool - available at:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmt

Publications

WSMX Data Mediation Component - available at:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx

Book Chapters

Michal Zaremba, Matthew Moran, Adrian Mocan, Emilia Cimpian,

Mick Kerrigan: Web Service Modeling Ontology. In Cardoso, J. and

Amit Sheth (eds.), Semantic Web Services, Processes and

Applications, 2006, Springer, ISBN: 0-38730239-5

Dimitru Roman, Jos de Bruijn, Adrian Mocan, Ioan Toma, Holger

Lausen, Jacek Kopecky, Dieter Fensel, John Domingue, Stefania

Galizia, Liliana Cabral: Semantic Web Services - Approaches and

Perspectives. In J. Davies, P. Warren, and R. Studer (eds.), Semantic

Web Technologies: Trends and Research in Ontology-based

Systems, June, 2006.

Workshop and Conference Papers

T. Vitvar, A. Mocan, V. Peristeras. Pan-European E-Government

Services on the Semantic Web Services, Workshop on E-

Government: Barriers and Opportunities, May 2006, Edinburgh,

Scotland

M. Stollberg, E. Cimpian, A. Mocan, D. Fensel. A Semantic Web

Mediation Architecture. Canadian Semantic Web Working

Symposium (CSWWS 2006), June 2006, Québec city, Canada

A. Mocan, E. Cimpian. Mapping Creation Using a View Based

Approach. 1 st International Workshop on Mediation in Semantic

Web Services (Mediate 2005), December 2005, Amsterdam,

Netherlands

E. Cimpian, A. Mocan. WSMX Process Mediation Based on

Choreographies. 1 st International Workshop on Web Service

188


Choreography and Orchestration for Business Process Management

(BPM 2005), September 2005, Nancy, France

K. Verma, A. Mocan, M. Zaremba, A. Sheth, J. A. Miller: Linking

Semantic Web Service Efforts, In Proceedings of the ICWS 2005

Second International Workshop on Semantic and Dynamic Web

Processes (SDWP 2005). Orlando, Florida, 2005.

A. Haller, E. Cimpian, A. Mocan, E. Oren, C. Bussler. WSMX - A

Semantic Service-Oriented Architecture, International Conference on

Web Services (ICWS 2005), 12-15 July, 2005, Orlando, Florida,

USA

M. Moran, A. Mocan. Towards Translating between XML and

WSML based on mappings between XML Schema and an equivalent

WSMO Ontology. 2nd WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW

2005), 6-7th June, 2005, Innsbruck, Austria

M. Moran, M. Zaremba, A. Mocan and C. Bussler. Using WSMX to

bind Requester & Provider at Runtime when Executing Semantic

Web services, In Proceedings of the 1st WSMO Implementation

Workshop (WIW2004). Frankfurt, Germany, 2004.

Posters

M. Moran, A. Mocan. WSMX – An Architecture for Semantic Web

Service Discovery, Mediation and Invocation. 3rd International

Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2004), 7-11 November 2004,

Hiroshima, Japan

A. Mocan, M. Zaremba; Mediation in Web Service Modeling

Execution Environment (WSMX), Information Integration on the

Web Workshop (iiWeb2004), Conference on Very Large Data Bases

VLDB2004, August 2004.

189


5.4.2.6. Omair Shafiq

Name

Omair Shafiq

Entry Date January 2006

Cluster Semantic Executive Environment - SEE

Objective Storage & Communication

Projects TSC Project – Past and Current Work

Work Package 1 – TSC Framework

D1.3: Specification of Mediation, Discovery and Data Models for

Triple Space

Computing

T1.3: Specify how discovery and mediation works in TSC

Work Package 2 – Interoperability and Architecture

D2.3: Design of Mediation and Query Engine components for

Triple Spaces

T2.1: Design of the mediation and query engine components.

T2.3: Overall Architecture Design.

Work Package 4 – Case Study / Application of TSC in WSMX

(leading the work package)

D4.1: Integration of WSMX and TSC

T4.1: Define the integration of WSMX in Triple Space Computing

and vice versa

D4.2: WSMX/TSC Prototype

T4.2: Develop a WSMX Triple Space prototype

T4.3: Evaluation and Validation of TSC technologies

TripCom Project – Future work (as TripCom project starts)

Work Package 2 - Triple Space Knowledge Representation

D2.1: Representing RDF semantics in tuples

T1.1: Specification of representation of RDF triple semantics in

tuples

D2.2: Specification of Triple Space ontology

T2.2: Specification of representation of Triple Spaces through an

ontology


Work Package 4 - Triple Space and Semantic Web services

D4.1: Architectural integration of triple spaces with web service

infrastructures

T4.1: Deployment of Web service infrastructure in a Triple Space

D4.2: TripCom Grounding for Semantic Web Services

T4.2: Mapping of Web service communication into a Triple Space

D4.3: Methodology for adopting Semantic Web Services in a

Triple Space environment

T4.5: Analysis of approaches for the mapping of data, message,

and protocol mediation in a Triple Space

T4.3: Implementation of Web service registry mechanisms in a

Triple Space

D4.4: Methodology for augmenting Semantic Web Services with

WS-* standards

T4.4: Analysis of WS-* standards and how they map into a Triple

Space

environment

D4.5: Triple Space integration with respect to WSMX (a semantic

web services

platform)

T4.6: Integration and evaluation of Triple Space within WSMX

Work Package 5 - Security and Trust

D5.1: Requirement analysis and state-of-the-art

T5.1: Requirement analysis and state-of-the-art of Web security

and trust in distributed systems

D5.2: Definition of security and trust support model for the

reference architecture.

T5.2: Definition of security and trust support model for the Triple

Space.

Work Package 6 - Triple Space Architecture and Component

Integration

D6.2: Triple Space reference architecture.

T6.2: Identification of all components of the architecture including

requirements on and responsibilities of the components

D6.3: Platform API specification for interaction between all

components.

T6.3: Evaluation, selection and definition of necessary extensions

of existing space middleware technologies

Grisino Project – Future work (as a part of M12 of the project,

September/October

Work Package 3 – Semantic Web Services and Grid

D3.2: Design and Specification of Integrated Services (SWS and

191


Research topic

Grid Services)

T3.1: Survey and gathering of requirements for SWS and Grid

based infrastructure

The main focus of my research topic is to fulfill requirements of

TSC, TripCom and Grisino projects along with the WSMX/SEE

development plan, details given in section 1.1. Along with this, I am

also working on related ideas, details given in section 1.2, 1.3 and

1.4.

1.1 Triple Space Computing for WSMX (Projects: TSC and

TripCom)

The Triple Space Computing has been realized as a middleware for

communication and coordination middleware for different semantic

web applications using RDF triples. Aim of my research is to use the

Triple Space Computing middleware (we call Triple Space Kernel)

for communication and coordination in Web Service Execution

Environment (WSMX). It will address several issues that how and

where exactly the TSC Kernel should be accommodated in the

WSMX and then used for communication and coordination within

the platform services of one WSMX node and for different WSMX

nodes forming a WSMX cluster.

1.1.1 For communication and coordination within a WSMX

In order to encapsulate Triple Space Kernel inside WSMX, a number

of issues are needed to be solve, i.e. (1) RDF storage in the Resource

Manager of WSMX, (2) Interfacing Triple Space Kernel with

Resource Manager to provide persistent storage of triples, (3)

Interfacing Triple Space Kernel with Execution Manager (WSMX

core) to enable it manage the other WSMX components (platform

services) communication via triple space and (4) Interfacing Triple

Space Kernel with Communication Manger to provide triple space

grounding for communication and coordination of service requestors

with WSMX via triple space.

1.1.2 For communication and coordination of multiple

interconnected WSMX nodes forming a WSMX cluster

The next step after encapsulating Triple Space Kernel in WSMX is to

enable coordination of different TS Kernels (using extended CORSO

as TS-CORSO) to realize inter WSMX communication and

coordination to form a WSMX cluster to support distributed service

discovery, selection, composition etc. Different Triple Space Kernels

residing in each WSMX node will coordinate with other kernels

(using its coordination layer) to provide a single virtual space for

different WSMX nodes to communicate with each other and in

asynchronous manner thus helps decoupling the components with

reference to time, space and location.

192


1.2 Potential of W in Grid Computing for Semantic Grid

(Projects: Grisino)

The aim of this research is to show the viability of Semantic Web

Services and Triple Space Computing to realize the Semantic Grid

vision and fulfill its core requirements, i.e. (1) Dynamic formation

and management of Virtual Organizations, (2) Service negotiation

and contract formation, (3) Metadata and semantic annotation and (4)

Communication infrastructure for semantics in Grid.

The goal to find out conceptual correlation between WSMO/L/X and

OGSA and its concrete realization by comparing and relating WSMX

with Grid Toolkits (i.e. Globus Grid Toolkit) to make them stand

together.

Moreover, Triple Space Computing is not just limited to Semantic

Web Services, but also for Semantic Grid due to some similarity in

the nature of requirements of both.

1.3 Software Agents interoperation with Semantic Web Services

In context of recent updates in roadmap of Software Agents

community to adapt Web standards, the aim of this research is to

align Software Agents and Multi Agent Systems specifications with

that of Semantic Web Services as Software Agents are being

foreseen as potential user of Semantic Web Services in order to

interact with semantic descriptions of SWS to autonomously

discover, select, compose, invoke and execute the services based on

user requirements. The goal is to fulfill a communication gap among

both by making Multi Agent Systems adapt SWS standards. The

even more important goal is to come up an EU or Austrian funding

proposal out of it by proposing a roadmap to achieve this, i.e. an

initial proposition of set of tasks at work package level could be (1)

Requirements specifications, (2) Conceptual Analysis of both

(Software Agents and Semantic Web Services), (3) Design and

specification of SWS and MAS Interoperability Architecture, (4)

Prototype Implementation, (5) Case Study for Software Agents

interaction with Semantic Web Services and (6) Project

dissemination and management plans.

Progress

towards PhD

1.4 A Geographical Monitoring Service for Web Service Monitoring

Execution Environment

It is a short term research where I intend to supervise a UIBK UG

student (if allowed to do so) to develop a “geographical monitoring

service for WSMX” which monitors and visualizes monitoring

information of inter WSMX communication of multiple

interconnected WSMX nodes deployed widely across the globe.

I am in the initial phase of my PhD where my goal is to learn and

familiarize myself as much as possible with the WSMO/L/X

193


concepts and technologies (which can be considered as literature

review).

In order to make my literature review useful for on-going activities in

DERI and specifically SEE cluster, I

• Identified viability of the Triple Space Computing in

Semantic Grid research, paper in 3 rd Semantic Grid

Workshop at Global Grid Forum 16 (GGF).

• With the discussions and inputs from all SEE members,

carried out a detailed comparison of WSMX with OWL-S

execution environments and prepared a conference

publication out of it which is under review at ASWC 2006.

• Contributed in writing a book chapter with other SEE

members to provide WSMX/SEE components functionality

definitions and details.

• Contributing in Execution Semantics deliverable of OASIS

SEE Technical Committee along with members from Open

University and DERI Galway.

My area of contribution in SEE research and development plan (as

being SEE cluster member and being involved in TSC and TripCom

projects) is to provide WSMX with Triple Space Computing support.

Along with this, I am working on putting more stuff in my (above

mentioned) research topics. With this, I will able to finalize a

mutually agreed PhD thesis topic (that could add maximum possible

value to our on-going research and development, specifically SEE

cluster) in next two to three months.

Implementations Triple Space Kernel in WSMX

The objective is to develop a prototype of integration of Triple Space

Kernel in Web Service Execution Environment (WSMX) as one of

the major outcomes of TSC project.

Currently, I am working on the architectural integration of WSMX

with Triple Space Computing where I propose the interfacing of

Triple Space Kernel with Execution Manager, Communication

Manager and Resource Manager. It further describes that how

exactly the Triple Space Kernel will be used for communication and

coordination within a WSMX node and among multiple WSMX

nodes forming a WSMX cluster followed by a case study about

processing of execution semantics, communication of external

service requesters with WSMX and invocation of external services

over the triple space.

In short, this work will provide detailed and concrete guidelines

(recipe) for implementation of the “WSMX with TSC” prototype. It

can be used in the “Semantic Web Services Architecture and

Information Model” as working draft of OASIS Semantic Execution

Environment (SEE) Technical Committee. The reference

implementation is

For further programming support, Graham Hench and Michael Luger

194


Publications

have shown interest to join me in developing the prototype.

Omair Shafiq, Ioan Toma, Reto Krummenacher, Thomas Strang,

Dieter Fensel, "Using Triple Space Computing for communication

and coordination in Semantic Grid", 3rd GGF Semantic Grid

Workshop, Global Grid forum 16 (GGF16), February 2006, held at

Athens Greece.

Omair Shafiq, Emilia Campian, Matthew Moran, Adrian Mocan,

Brahmananda Sapkota, Michal Zaremba, Dieter Fensel, “A

comparison between WSMX and OWL-S environment” in 1st Asian

Semantic Web Conference (ASWC 2006), to be held in September

2006, Beijing China. (Submitted)

Johannes Riemer, Francisco Martin-Recuerda, Ying Ding, Martin

Murth, Brahmananda Sapkota, Reto Krummenacher, Omair Shafiq,

Dieter Fensel and Eva Kühn, Triple Space Computing: Adding

Semantics to Space-based Computing in 1st Asian Semantic Web

Conference (ASWC 2006), to be held in September 2006, Beijing

China. (Submitted)

Book Chapter:

Michal Zaremba, Emilia Cimpian, Mick Kerrigan, Adrian Mocan,

Omair Shafiq, Matthew Moran, Christoph Bussler, Semantic B2B

Integration, SpringerLink Chapter. OASIS SEE TC on-going Working

Draft:

John Domingue, Barry Norton, Omair Shafiq, Maciej Zaremba,

Semantic Execution Environment (SEE) Execution Semantics

deliverable, An OASIS SEE Technical Committee working draft.

Proposals for Workshop and Tutorial organization:

Contributing to organize workshops and giving tutorials is an

interesting experience which I want to have. So far, I got a chance to

learn this by helping Ying in writing two workshop proposals:

Semantic Web Applications Workshop proposal in ASWC 2006,

Beijing China.

EASTWEB Semantic Web education and training Workshop

proposal in ASWC 2006, Beijing China.

195


5.4.2.7. Adina Sirbu

Name

Adina Sirbu

Entry date October 2005

Cluster Semantic Execution Environment - SEE

Objective Discovery

Projects 1. ASG

I am currently working on the refinement of the WSML/Flora-2

reasoner prototype used within the project. The second version of

this prototype is part of the ASG deliverable D1.I-6 (WSML reasoner

engine implementation 2nd release).

The tasks are mainly solicited by ASG component C-2, and refer to

the deployment of the prototype (providing a maven build for it and

Linux, MacOS and Solaris support), the overall interaction with the

prototype (for example allowing stateless interaction with the

reasoner) and specific tasks related to the discovery extension of this

prototype (for example: identification of services with semantically

equivalent specifications, implementation of an internal mechanism

to handle services with negative effects and so on).

2. DIP

Responsible for implementation of the Discovery module prototype.

This prototype will follow the specification in DIP deliverable D4.8

and will be used for the DIP deliverable D4.14 (Discovery module

prototype). It will be part of the WSMX Discovery module; the level

is discovery based on simple descriptions of services.

Research topic

3. SemBiz

I will take over WP2 (Semantic Business Process Querying,

Discovery, and Composition), and correspondingly the deliverables:

D2.1: State of the Art and Requirements on Semantic Querying,

Discovery, and Composition

D2.2: Semantic Business Process Querying, Discovery, and

Composition Framework

D2.3: Prototype Implementation

To a certain extent, my first months here have been an adaptation

period. I am trying to be open to all subjects that are currently under

research within the DERI community, and also to familiarize myself

with the work that is being done/has already been done by the team.


Progress

towards PhD

However, in order to prevent a too scattered approach to a PhD, I

have chosen the area of service discovery as main interest. The main

drive became understanding the conceptual solutions to this problem,

with a special interest to the WSMO Discovery solution and the

different steps involved in the process of locating services: goal

discovery, web service discovery and service discovery. When

referring to web service discovery, the theoretical specification of the

approaches (keyword-based, lightweight, heavyweight) leaves place

for much interpretation, especially when it comes to designing a

running prototype. However, because of my recentness in this field, I

cannot yet define a research problem that is at the same time worthy

of a PhD and also solvable within three years of research work.

By implementing specifications for different discovery engines, I am

learning the flaws and the tradeoffs of such proposals. I see my

approach so far as learning by doing. My goal is, after gaining

enough knowledge and experience, to design a solution that is

theoretically valid but that is also feasible.

From my current position, I see two main difficulties in the future

progress towards a PhD. One of them will be to decide when the

critical amount of knowledge and experience has been reached. The

other will be to make sure that my PhD proposal actually brings

enough novelty to the area. In these problems the research

community will play an important role. By that I understand keeping

in touch with related research through articles, research seminars,

and informal conversations with people that have already contributed

to the subject. But I assume the key role will be played by a

supervisor, and more precisely his opinion on the worthiness and

attainability of my solution.

Implementations ASG – I have collaborated to the first release of the WSML/Flora-2

reasoner engine (included in ASG deliverable D1.I-4). Currently,

I am responsible for integrating the reasoner in the ASG

platform. This implies continuously refining the prototype and

providing support for all implementation issues.

DIP – Implementing the Discovery module prototype (included in

DIP deliverable D4.14) based on the specifications in DIP

deliverable D4.8. This prototype will be part of the WSMX

Discovery component, corresponding to discovery at the level of

simple descriptions of services.

Publications

No publications so far

197


5.4.2.8. Zhixian Yan

Name

Zhixian YAN

Entry date August 2006

Cluster SEE (Semantics Execution Environment)

Objective Making Semantics Real

Projects SemBiz (Semantic Business Process Management for flexible

dynamic value chains)

Research topic Semantic Web Service, Semantic Business Process Management

Progress Just a beginner!

towards PhD

Implementations

Publications


5.4.3. Senior Researchers

Senior Researchers

No Name Topic

8 Michal Zaremba

5.4.3.1. Michal Zaremba

Name

Michal Zaremba

Entry date February 2006

Cluster SEE

Objective My role is to provide the coordination focal point for the rest of the

team. I am co-chairing OASIS SEE Technical Committee, which

specifies functionality and interface for SEE components and

execution semantics of the whole system.

Figure 5.4.3.1.1. SESA architecture

Projects

Since its settling on Austrian soil, SEE cluster has got involved in

many projects. While I am personally not involved in all of them, an

enormous portion of my time is consumed at this stage by advising

my researchers on how to deal with problems and how to progress in

these projects and to prepare new project proposals (NFN, SUN

Excellence Center etc).

1. SUPER

As it is still before kick-off meeting, I can only at this stage say in

which workpackages SEE cluster is involved not me personally, as I

199


still do not have a detailed plan with division of work per each

person:

WP1 SBPM Ontology WP2 SP life Cycle (SEBIS cluster is

responsible to lead WP1, but SEE cluster takes the responsibility for

D1.4)

WP4 BP Mediation WP5 Modeling Analysis Tools

WP5 Modeling Analysis Tools

WP6 SBPM Execution Engine

WP11 Community, Standards

WP12 Dissemination (shared - both clusters take care; SEBIS cluster

takes care of D12.3)

Deliverables for SEE cluster (I will be probably directly only

involved in D1.4 and D12.3, but quite possible I will also have to

take care of Architecture, which is at this stage assigned to Galway)

D1.4 Process Ontology Query Language (SEE cluster)

D6.3 Process Ontology Reasoner (SEE cluster)

D12.3 Dissemination Strategy and SDK Activities (SEE cluster)

2. DIP

Deliverables which I am involved:

D6.11 Semantic Web Services Architecture and Information Model

D6.14 Semantic Web Services Architecture and Information Model

D9.7 GIS Prototype v 1.0

D9.13 SWS Enhanced GIS Prototype (WSMX) v.2.0

D9.14 SWS Enhanced GIS Prototype (WSMX) Final Version

3. SemBiz

We resubmitted SemBiz proposal

D11 - BPMO Requirements Analysis and Design

D12 - BPMO version 1

D13 - BPMO version 2

4. SEEMP

No direct involvement yet. I promised Mick to join some of the

meetings.

5. ASG

Helping Emilia and Adina to run this project

6. TripleSpace

No direct involvement. I am helping Omair and Reto to figure out on

how to use results of this project in WSMX.

200


7. AsiaLink

At this stage responsible for organization of Demo Session during

ASWC2005. In the future participating in exchanges.

8. Tripcom

No direct involvement. I am helping Omair and Reto to figure out on

how to use results of this project in WSMX.

Research topic

9. SemGov

No direct involvement. Advising Adrian. Helping with organization

of some events e.g. WSMO/WSML/WSMX tutorial for SemGov

project partners.

Enterprises’ information systems have been the subject of great

changes in the last number of years. In order to adjust to the more

dynamic demands of business, a new concept/paradigm has been

introduced to replace traditional monolithic applications, namely the

service. Information systems have to be re-tailored to fit this

paradigm, with new applications being developed as services or old

legacy systems being exposed via service interfaces. By this (and

other auxiliary changes) the information system as a whole becomes

a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). Such an approach offers a set

of advantages that come with SOA’s (loose coupling between

components, well defined interfaces, peer-to-peer interactions, etc)

but it doesn’t solve all the interoperability problems that existed with

classical applications. Inside of a particular SOA, independent

services offering the same functionality should be seamlessly

interchangeable with each other. Such services can have different

vendors, and as a consequence, different peculiarities; hard-coded

adapters to enable this plug-in and plug-out mechanism would be

quite expensive especially when such points of adaptation have to be

maintained and updated on frequent basis.

My research in DERI is going to focus on the infrastructure for a

Common Service Layer. By making the semantics a central player,

the already recognized benefits of SOA can be enhanced to a level

where flexible and dynamic solution towards organizing, managing

and handling business interaction can be developed. In this SOA,

semantics will be used in describing both the services offered by

enterprises and the requests of parties interested in consuming their

capabilities. Also the data to be exchanged between the business

partners can be unambiguously semantically described in terms of

ontologies. Following the SOA principle, the infrastructure will

consists of independent components, each of them performing a

discrete piece of functionality, interconnected by an event driven

mechanism. The infrastructure for a Common Service Layer

represents a framework capable of managing all the aspects related to

201


Progress

towards Habil

semantically enhanced Web services, to enable their discovery,

selection, composition, mediation and execution. This infrastructure

will become an information system built according to the SOA

principles that allows business entities to advertise and expose their

own services or to consume other partners’ services, giving the

illusion of a heterogeneity free environment

No progress toward Habil has been undertaken yet. Michal has just

accomplished and defended his Ph.D. two years ago. His previous

work was in area of a registry based approach to e-business in the

agri-food sector. Thesis deals mainly with the integration and

heterogeneity issues across virtual supply chains. The thesis

reviewed existing technologies for integration and proposed an

innovative solution involving ebXML specification and especially

ebXML registry/repository standards, which was adjusted to specific

conditions shaping agri-food industry in Ireland. All the functionality

of the delivered toolkit was analysed from the perspective of the

requirements of the selected end-user – an Irish manufacturer from

the beverages sector. This work has not been further continued as

thesis accomplished.

Implementations Web Services Execution Environment

• Web Services Execution Environment (WSMX) is a sample

implementation of the Web Services Modelling Ontology

(WSMO). WSMX Core is a release of the compiled core of

WSMX, along with a set of mock up components that

implement the different interfaces in the WSMX Integration

API.

• Role in the project: project leader

• Number of developers: 20

• Website: http://www.wsmx.org;

http://sourceforge.net/projects/wsmx

WSMX Integration API

• The WSMX Integration API is a collection of libraries required

for the integration of loosely coupled components with the

main WSMX system. Components must implement interfaces

from the provided infomodel to make this integration possible.

• Role in the project: project leader

• Number of developers: direct 4; indirect around 30 contributors

• Website:

https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=113321

&package_id=154563

ebXML registry/repository – free ebXML (past)

• The goal of the ebxmlrr project was to deliver a functionally

complete reference implementation for the OASIS ebXML

Registry specifications as defined by the OASIS ebXML

202


Registry Technical Committee

• Role in the project: developer

• Number of developers: 40

• Website: http://ebxmlrr.sourceforge.net/;

http://sourceforge.net/projects/ebxmlrr

Semantic Agent (past)

• The goal of the Semantic Agent (2003) was to build a simple

semantic agent toolkit exchanging semantic information in

peer-to-peer network

• Role in the project: project leader

• Number of developers: 5

MOMENT Key Performance Indicator Toolkit (past)

• The goal of the Moment project was to apply a methodology to

support rapid establishment and efficient operations of new

Extended Enterprise. Delivered Key Performance Indicator

Toolkit was a visualization tool to represent in various forms

key data generated through supply chains.

• Role in the project: software development leader

• Number of developers: 2

• Website: http://moment.nuigalway.ie

Publications M. Burstein, C. Bussler, M. Zaremba, T. Finin, M. Huhns, M.

Paolucci, A. Sheth, S. Williams: A Semantic Web Services

Architecture. IEEE Internet Computing. Vol. 9, No. 5, September,

October 2005

M. Zaremba, M. Moran, M. Kerrigan, A. Mocan, book chapter on

Web Services Modeling Ontology in Semantic Web Processes and

Their Applications edited by Jorge Cardoso and Amit Sheth; to be

published by Springer

M. Zaremba, C. Bussler: Towards Dynamic Execution Semantics in

Semantic Web Services, In Proceedings of the Workshop on Web

Service Semantics: Towards Dynamic Business Integration,

International Conference on the World Wide Web (WWW2005).

Chiba, Japan, 2005.

M. Zaremba, M. Moran. Enabling Execution of Semantic Web

Services: WSMX Core Platform, In Proceedings of the 1st WSMO

Implementation Workshop (WIW2004). Frankfurt, Germany, 2004.

K. Verma, A. Mocan, M. Zaremba, A. Sheth, J. A. Miller: Linking

Semantic Web Service Efforts, In Proceedings of the ICWS 2005

Second International Workshop on Semantic and Dynamic Web

Processes (SDWP 2005). Orlando, Florida, 2005

203


T. Haselwanter, Maciej Zaremba and Michal Zaremba. Enabling

Components Management and Dynamic Execution Semantic in

WSMX. WSMO Implementation Workshop 2005 (WIW 2005), 6-7

June, Innsbruck, Austria.

S. Arroyo, C. Bussler, J. Kopecký, R. Lara, A. Polleres, M. Zaremba,

Web Service Capabilities and Constraints in WSMO. W3C

Workshop on Constraints and Capabilities for Web Services.

Redwood Shores, CA, USA, 2004.

E. Oren, A. Wahler, B. Schreder, A. Balaban, M. Zaremba, and M.

Zaremba, Demonstrating WSMX: Least Cost Supply Management,

1st WSMO Implementation Workshop, Frankfurt, Germany, 2004.

L. Vasiliu, M. Zaremba, M. Moran, C. Bussler ; Web-Service

Semantic Enabled Implementation of Machine vs. Machine Business

Negotiation,; 2004 IEEE International Conference on E-Commerce

Technology (CEC 2004), San Diego, USA.

A. Mocan, M. Zaremba; Mediation in Web Service Modeling

Execution Environment (WSMX), Information Integration on the

Web Workshop (iiWeb2004), Conference on Very Large Data Bases

VLDB2004, August 2004.

M. Moran, M. Zaremba, A. Mocan and C. Bussler. Using WSMX to

bind Requester & Provider at Runtime when Executing Semantic

Web Services, In Proceedings of the 1st WSMO Implementation

Workshop (WIW2004). Frankfurt, Germany, 2004.

Tutorials

The Fifth International Conference on Semantic Web Services

(ISWC2005), November 2005, Galway, Ireland - Semantic Web

Services Systems and Tools

The Fifth International Conference on Web Engineering (ICWE

2005), July 2005, Sydney, Australia – Semantic Web Services: A

Conceptual Model, Language and Execution Environment

2nd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2005), May 2005,

Crete, Greece – Semantic Web Services Tutorial

204


The Fourth International Conference on Semantic Web Services

(ISWC2004), November 2004, Hiroshima, Japan - OWL-S and

WSMO

OASIS Symposium on the Future of XML Vocabularies, New

Orleans, USA, April 24, 2004 - http://www.oasispen.org/events/symposium_2005/

NetObjectDays 2004, 27 September 2004, Erfurt, Germany – The

Web Services Modeling Ontology - WSMO

11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence:

Methodology, Systems, and Applications (AIMSA 2004), 01

September 2004, Varna, Bulgaria – The Web Services Modeling

Ontology – WSMO

205


6. Ubiquitous Services Cluster (UbiServ)

In the following we describe the UbiServ cluster in general terms, in terms of the

objectives it takes care, in terms of the project it takes care, and in terms of its members.

6.1. General Description

Name

Acronym

Web site

Leader

Team

Objectives

Projects

Mission

Major

Ubiquitous Services

UbiServ

http://ubiserv.deri.org

Thomas Strang

Senior Researchers:

Michael Jäger

Axel Polleres

Thomas Strang

Junior Researchers:

Jacek Kopecky

Reto Krummenacher

Ioan Toma

Students:

-

(5) Adaptation, (9) Grounding, (14) Storage & Communication

Grisino, SWING, TripCom

Ubiquitous Computing is the most recent evolution step in an evolution

chain characterizing different eras of internetworked computer systems.

Building on the properties of Mobile Computing and Distributed

Computing systems, Ubiquitous Computing systems are further

characterized by at least three salient properties: context-awareness, adhoc

networking as well as smart sensors and devices. From a service

perspective, enhancements in the three respective research areas should

enable a transition from the mobile services paradigm which is “any

service for any person at any time and anywhere (at any cost)” to the more

desirable ubiquitous services paradigm which is “the right service for the

right person at the right time and at the right place (and with the right

price)”.

In our cluster we elaborate on the challenges of services in the emerging

field of Ubiquitous Computing. This includes research on service

description, discovery, distribution, deployment, composition and

execution in Ubiquitous Computing environments. An important aspect is

the area of ontology-based context modelling and retrieval as a key

enabler of context-aware service discovery and execution technology in

Ubiquitous Computing environments.

Everything related to teaching

206


tasks and

deliverables

(Project related tasks to be taken from PhD student's input)

6.2. Objectives

• (5) Adaptation,

• (9) Grounding,

• (14) Storage & Communication

6.2.1. Adaptation

Nr 6

Title Adaption

Mission After discovering a set of potentially useful services, the Semantic

statement Execution Environment (SEE) needs to check whether the services can

actually fulfill the user's concrete goal and under what conditions. Those

that cannot fulfill the goal are removed from the list of discovered

services. This step is required as it is not feasible for a service to provide

an exhaustive semantic description. Giving the Amazon bookstore

service as an example, it is not feasible for Amazon to update the

semantic description of their Web service every time a new book is

available or an existing book is changed, therefore we must check that

Amazon actually currently has a copy of the book requested by the user,

and at an acceptable price. The process of checking whether and under

what conditions a service can fulfill a concrete Goal is called negotiation

in SEE, and it also encompasses so-called filtering.

Once a list of Web services than can fulfill the user's concrete goal is

prepared, the SEE must then choose one of the services to invoke. It is

important that this selection is tailored to the user's needs, as for

example while one user may require high quality another may prefer low

price. This process is called selection.

Web site

Leader

Cluster

Team

Negotiation, filtering and selection are tasks of the Adaptation

http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=Adaptation

Ioan Toma

Ubiquitous Services

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Jacek Kopecky (Negotiation)

Ioan Toma (NFP, Filtering, Selection)

207


Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Future Steps

Students:

-

Possibly Grisino for NFP/Filtering, none yet for Negotiation

Negotiation is not an explicit part of any DERI project as far as I know,

I'm looking into incorporating negotiation into SUPER.

NFP/Filtering: WSMO D28.4

measurable results are the following functionalities:

* checking which of the discovered Web services can fulfill the

user's concrete goal

* finding out the non-functional properties related to the concrete

goal, e.g. the currently applicable price of the service

* potentially also dynamic negotiation of such properties, e.g. the

best trade-off between quality of service and the respective price

* filtering discovered Web services based on user's NFP constraints

* selecting the most suitable Web service (or ordering them

according to suitability) with respect to the preferences of the user

Negotiation (Jacek): I plan to write and submit a paper defining the

scope of my negotiation research based on what I know about the topic

so far, and that should be done before end of May 2006. The further

measurable results and time lines will be defined by in the paper.

Publications

Software

releases

NFP/Filtering (Ioan):

1. Develop the prototype for WSMX based on NFP using keywords.

(initial version by mid of May)

2. Define an ontology for NFP. Here I already have some

formalization of David O'Sullivan in OWL for his set of NFP. I

will create the WSML version. (by end of April)

3. Use a WSML reasoner to perform a cleverer filtering. (first version

of this prototype by end of June)

4. With respect to WSMO D28.4, probably iterations every 2 weeks,

continuing along what is described in the Future Work section.

5. There may be NFP/Filtering-related tasks in the Grisino project

None so far

Negotiation (Jacek): implementation plan will be created after the scope

is defined, either in the planned publication or in any project

deliverables.

NFP/Filtering (Ioan): currently only as indicated in the roadmap points.

208


6.2.2. Grounding

Nr 9

Title Grounding

Mission Apart from discovering Web services and composing them, the

statement Semantic Execution Environment (SEE) also needs to communicate

with the services — send the necessary request messages and receive the

responses. All such external communication will be taken care of by this

component.

Web site

Leader

Cluster

Team

Because internal communication within the SEE uses semantic data and

practically all currently deployed Web services use their specific XML

formats, the External Communication component needs to translate

between the involved data forms. This translation is also known as data

grounding. Above that, this component also needs to support concrete

network protocols (HTTP, SOAP, other bindings) to be able to exchange

messages with the Web service.

http://wiki.wsmx.org/index.php?title=External_Communication

Jacek Kopecky

Ubiquitous Services

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Adrian Mocan (Data grounding)

Jacek Kopecký (Grounding)

Students:

-

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

Future Steps

I take this as Innsbruck-specific, therefore I don't include anything about

Matthew Moran who also works on data grounding.

DIP for grounding and W3C standardization work.

TripCom for triple-space grounding.

Possibly additional sources in Galway for Matthew

1) WSMO D24.2

2) Membership in W3C WS-Description working group and Semantic

Annotations for WSDL working group

Measurable results are the following functionalities:

* data grounding — two-way transformations between semantic data

within SEE and the XML data used in external communication

* network protocol binding — based on the WSDL description of

the target Web service, the best supported protocol binding will be

selected for communication

* triple-space grounding for communication with Web services using

209


TripleS

Data Grounding (Adrian): plan unknown, Matthew is the leader of that

part of the WSMO deliverable D24.2, Adrian wants to help there;

Matthew hasn't provided any concrete dates in recent email exchange.

Network Protocol Grounding (Jacek): this part is done, we will work

with choreography implementation to validate that it works, and for

requirements on the component from the other components.

Publications

Software

releases

Triple Space Grounding (Jacek): work scheduled for 2007 in Tripcom

J. Kopecký, D. Roman, M. Moran, and D. Fensel: Semantic Web

Services Grounding. In Proceedings of the International Conference on

Internet and Web Applications and Services (ICIW'06), Guadeloupe,

French Caribbean, February 23-25, 2006.

Any data mediation publications by Adrian Mocan, but they are not

directly related to the component.

All as described in the current status

6.2.3. Storage & Communication

Nr 14

Title Storage

Mission The storage component(s), plural on purpose, shall provide repositories

statement to store “objects” needed to ensure successful processing of user request

to SEE. There might be need for different storages tailored to the

particular needs: Web service descriptions, goals, mediation rules,

workflows, and execution semantics.

It is already known that the Execution Management component requires

repositories for ontologies and data instances (service descriptions in

particular). The idea is to use a Triple Space infrastructure to do so.

The mission of the Storage Component team is thus to find out which

means of storage are required and in what way these requirements can

be fulfilled in the easiest and simplest way to provide optimal service to

the application layer components and the vertical services.

Web site http://wiki.wsmx.org/?title=Storage

Leader Reto Krummenacher 1

Cluster UbiServ

1 temporary until Michael Jäger is joining DERI Austria

210


Team

Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Omair Shafiq

Reto Krummenacher

Students:

-

Contributing

projects

Current

Status

And hopefully various other members that know the requirements per

component/service better.

TSC:

Triple Space Computing (TSC)

FIT-IT

http://tsc.deri.at

Triple Space Communication (TripCom) EC STREP

http://www.tripcom.org

YARS:

DERI Lión

SFI

http://lion.deri.ie

dip

EC IP

http://dip.semanticweb.org

There are currently two efforts pursued at DERI (Galway and Innsbruck)

directly related with storage: YARS, as RDF Store and TSC, as

persistent communication and coordination middleware. These efforts

will be continued and improved.

As mentioned in the mission statement, the current plan is to use TSC as

storage infrastructure in SEE. Of particular interest is the use of TSC in

combination with the Execution Management component. It is however

subject to current investigations, if there is at all any use for a rather

sophisticated Triple Space or, if a database (tailored to the needs of

ontologies and SEE objects) would not rather do the job. TSC as project

with the aim for a middleware for the Semantic Web and Web services

is continued primarily independent of SEE and in parallel (also as part of

the TSC project: D4.1) we will look at optimal solutions for the use of

TSC within SEE. Current suggestions taken from the WSMX

deliverable D21 (Fig.1) have to be reconsidered to pay tribute to the

advantages of space-based computing: decoupling of processes/services

and coordination of services.

211


Figure 6.2.3.1. TSC and WSMX in WSMX D21 from June 2005.

In fact, the current proposition of having the coordination done by the

Execution Manager (who communicates with the various components)

and of using the space only for storage and in parallel to the components

heavily contradicts the idea of space-based computing. We therefore

rather suggest having the space reside between all the components

linked together for a given WSMX, possibly residing on different

physical entities.

212


Future Steps

A major tasks for the upcoming weeks it to determine what type of

storage and in what way the storage should become part of SEE. It is

hard to say how we could measure its success or even when we could be

ready with parts or the whole of it. Moreover, as long we are continuing

with the idea of having TSC as storage component of WSMX, we have

to find the most reasonable and in consequence the right way to interlink

WSMX components by use of the space infrastructure. As mentioned

above we are reconsidering the ideas presented in the WSMX WG

deliverable D21.v0.1 WSMX Triple-Space Computing to fully pay

tribute to the advantages of space based computing. These ideas (Fig. 2)

need however further discussion with all members of the SEE cluster.

Publications

Figure 6.2.3.1. Proposition for fully distribute TSC-WSMX integration

YARS:

Andreas Harth, Stefan Decker. Optimized Index Structures for Querying

RDF from the Web. 3rd Latin American Web Congress, Buenos Aires -

Argentina, October 31 - November 2 2005.

Andreas Harth, Hannes Gassert. On Searching and Displaying RDF

Data from the Web. Poster ESWC 2005.

Andreas Harth, Matteo Magni, Stefan Decker. Scalable Distributed RDF

Storage Infrastructure. DERI Líon Deliverable 1.02, 2005.

213


TSC:

Reto Krummenacher, Francisco Martin-Recuerda, Martin Murth,

Johannes Riemer, Ying Ding, and Dieter Fensel: Triple Space

Computing: A framework for the new communication paradigm. Poster

Session of the 3rd European Semantic Web Conf. (ESWC 2006), Budva,

Montenegro, 11-14 June, 2006 (forthcoming).

Reto Krummenacher, Thomas Strang, and Dieter Fensel: Triple Spaces

for an Ubiquitous Web of Services. W3C Workshop on the Ubiquitous

Web, Tokyo, Japan, March 9-10, 2006.

Omair Shafiq, Ioan Toma, Reto Krummenacher, Thomas Strang, and

Dieter Fensel: Using Triple Space Computing for communication and

coordination in Semantic Grid. In Proc. of the 3rd Semantic Grid

Workshop in conj. with the 16th Global Grid Forum, Athens, Greece,

February 13-16, 2006.

Brahmananda Sapkota, Edward Kilgarriff, and Christoph Bussler: Role

of Triple Space Computing in Semantic Web Services. In Proc. of the 8th

Asia Pacific Web Conf (APWEB 2006), Harbin, China, January 16-18,

2006.

Reto Krummenacher, Martin Hepp, Axel Polleres, Christoph Bussler,

and Dieter Fensel: WWW or What Is Wrong with Web Services. In Proc.

of the 2005 IEEE European Conf on Web Services (ECOWS 2005),

Växjö, Sweden, November 14-16, 2005.

Reto Krummenacher, Jacek Kopecky, and Thomas Strang: Sharing

Context Information with Semantic Spaces. Workshop on Context-

Aware Mobile Systems (CAMS 2005), Ayia Napa, Cyprus, October 30-

31, 2005.

Reto Krummenacher, and Thomas Strang: Ubiquitous Semantic Spaces.

In Conference Supplement to the 7th Int'l Conf on Ubiquitous

Computing (UbiComp 2005), Tokyo, Japan, September 11-14, 2005.

Francisco Martin-Recuerda: Towards CSpaces: A new perspective for

the Semantic Web. In Proc. of the 1st Int'l IFIP/WG12.5 Working Conf

on Industrial Applications of Semantic Web (IASW 2005), Jyväskylä,

Finland, August 25-27, 2005.

Christoph Bussler: A Minimal Triple Space Computing Architecture. In

Proc. of the 2nd WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW 2005),

Innsbruck, Austria, June 6-7, 2005.

214


Software

releases

YARS @ DERI Galway

• Conjunctive Queries

• Keyword-based queries using LUCENE

• Native Storage in Berkley DB (2-phase commits)

• JDBC-like Java API

• RESTful HTTP API (language independent)

• Scoped negation queries

• Recursive query processing

• Remote context

TSC work in progress

• Implementation TSC API

• Test platform for TSC conceptual models

• Running over YARS

TSC project prototype

• Implementation starting now

• Prototype required in early 2007

6.3. Projects

Here we have the following projects:

• GRISINO

• SWING

• TripCom

6.3.1. GRISINO

Name

Acronym

Funding line

Cluster

Leader

Objective

Website

Team

Grid Semantics and Intelligent Objects

GRISINO

FFG, FIT-IT

UBISERV

Ioan Toma

Discovery, Adaptation

http://grisino.salzburgresearch.at/

Senior Researchers:

215


-

Junior Researchers:

Tobias Bürger

Ioan Toma

Omair Shafiq

Students:

Jürgen Umbrich

Mission The aim of GRISINO is to combine three leading edge technology

strands which complement each other, for the definition of intelligent

and dynamic business processes:

• Semantic Web Services as the future standard for the declaration of

web-based semantic processes.

• Knowledge content objects as the unit of value which can be

manipulated by semantic web services.

• Grid Computing as a pervasive service distribution infrastructure for a

future, ambient intelligence space.

person*mon Total 27 per month 1

ths budget

Duration 24 months 03/06 – 02/08

Major tasks • WP1: Conceptual Analysis

• WP3: SWS & GRID

• WP6: Dissemination

Deliverables • D1.1.1 State of the Art in SWS, GRID and "Intelligent" Objects

- Can they meet? (Ioan)

• D1.2.1 Requirements and Design of a Common Infrastructure

for GRID, SWS and Intelligent Objects. (Ioan)

• D2.3.1 Experimentation Testbed: Requirements, Design, Test

cases, and Test results. (Ioan, Jürgen)

• D3.2.1 Design and Specification of Integrated Services (Ioan,

Omair)

• D3.4.1 GCI Test Bed (prototype) with integrated services (Ioan,

Jürgen)

• D4.1.1 Design and Specification of KCO-to-SWS Mapping

(Ioan, Tobias)

• D4.3.1 GCI with access to KCOs via semantic web services

(Ioan, Tobias)

• D5.2.1 Design Specification of the Semantic Search Application

(Ioan)

• D.6.2.1 Research Papers (Ioan, Omair)

• D.7.2.1Periodic project management report (Ioan with help of

Leonarda)

216


6.3.2. SWING

Name Semantic Web Services Interoperability for Geospatial Decision Making

Acronym SWING

Funding line IST-FP6

Cluster UBISERV

Leader Dumitru Roman 1

Objective Ontologies, Applications, Developer tools, Discovery, Composition

Website http://www.swing-project.org/

Team Senior Researchers:

-

Mission

Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

Junior Researchers:

Dumitru Roman

Students:

-

+ one more person needed to work part time

The mission is to develop an open, easy-to-use Semantic Web Service

framework of suitable ontologies and inference tools for annotation,

discovery, composition, and invocation of geospatial web services;

evaluate the appropriateness of this framework by developing a

geospatial decision-making application that can dynamically find and

provide interoperable semantic web services

Total 39,5 per month 1

Duration 36 months 03/06 – 02/09

Major tasks Technical coordinator of the project

• WP7 Dissemination and Exploitation (lead)

• WP1 Application

• WP2 Semantic Discovery and Execution

• WP3 Geospatial Ontology

• WP4 Semantic Annotation

• WP6 Development Environment

Deliverables • D7.1 Public Web Site

• D7.2 Workshop academic community

1 temporary until Michael Jäger is joining DERI Austria

217


• D7.3 Workshop user community

• D7.4 Open Source

• D7.5 Information dissemination plan

6.3.3. TripCom

Name Triple Space Communication

Acronym TripCom

Funding line IST-FP6

Cluster UBISERV

Leader Reto Krummenacher 1

Objective Storage

Website http://www.tripcom.org/

Team Senior Researchers:

-

Junior Researchers:

Reto Krummenacher

Omair Shafiq

Mission

Students:

-

The mission of TripCom is to take a significant move towards a new era

of the Internet. TripCom aims at truly Web-enabled Web services that

will communicate via persistent publication of information.

Realizing this vision and a new technology is the mission of TripCom

with the result of the integrating Tuple Space, Semantic Web (triple),

and Web service technologies. To this end, we on the one hand plan to

improve Tuple Space technology by adding semantics and means to

structure and relate tuples in a scalable and linkable Triple Space

architecture. On the other hand we plan to improve Web service

technologies by adopting the flexible and powerful asynchronous

communication model of Tuple Spaces. Furthermore we plan to

improve business data exchange standards by use of our new technology

and demonstrate the usefulness of this approach in several practical use

cases. Finally, we plan to establish a proper security and trust model for

the Triple Space to ensure safe communication and data handling, as

1 temporary until Michael Jäger is joining DERI Austria

218


Budget (in

terms of

m*m)

well as distributed trust models. As the result of the project the

combination of these building blocks could give ground to a novel

Semantic Web service paradigm.

Total 111 Per months 3

Duration 36 months 04/06 – 03/09

Major tasks • WP 1 Storage

• WP 2 Triple Space Knowledge Representation

• WP 3 Triple Space Interaction

• WP 4 Triple Space and Semantic Web Services

• WP 5 Security and Trust

• WP 6 Triple Space Architecture and Component Integration

• WP 8b Use case e-Health

Deliverables

LFUI has the lead for the following deliverables:

• D2.2 Specification of Triple Space ontology

• D3.3 Semantic matching in distributed spaces

• D4.2 TripCom Grounding for Semantic Web Services

• D10.2 Periodic Progress Reports

• D10.5 Continuous Risk Management Plan

The involvement in other deliverables is not clear, as the final

distribution per deliverable per partner is not done yet. This decision is

expected to be taken during or shortly after the kick off meeting on

April 24/25, 2006.

219


6.4. Staff

Here we discuss student, junior, and senior researchers of the UbiServ cluster.

6.4.1. Student Researchers

No student researchers up to yet.

6.4.2. Junior Researchers

Junior Researchers

No Name Objective Cluster

12 Jacek Kopecky Grounding UbiServ

13 Reto Krummennacher Storage & Communication UbiServ

25 Ioan Toma Adaptation UbiServ

6.4.2.1. Jacek Kopecky

Name

Jacek Kopecky

Entry date May 2004

Cluster Ubiquitous Services

Objective Adaptation, Grounding

Projects current: DIP D2.4, versioning library implementation

upcoming: DIP D4.13, Aligning WSMO and WSMX with Existing

Policy Specifications

Research topic Semantic Web Service Negotiation: After discovering a set of

potentially useful services, a semantic user agent (e.g. WSMX) needs

to check whether the services can actually fulfill the user's concrete

goal and under what conditions. Those that cannot fulfill the goal are

removed from the list of discovered services. This step is required as

it is not feasible for a service to provide an exhaustive semantic

description. Giving the Amazon bookstore service as an example, it

is not feasible for Amazon to update the semantic description of their

Web service every time a new book is available or an existing book

is changed, therefore we must check that Amazon actually currently


Progress

towards PhD

has a copy of the book requested by the user, and what the price is.

So negotiation is the process of checking whether and under what

conditions a service can fulfill a concrete Goal.

Grounding our semantic technologies in Web and Web Service

standards: Automation of the use of Web Services requires semantic

descriptions. Currently deployed Web services, on the other hand,

are generally described only on the level of syntax, using standard

XML languages that capture only limited and unconnected models of

some Web service aspects. Even with semantic descriptions, certain

tasks require that semantic processors have access to the information

in the syntactic descriptions; for example to invoke a discovered

service, the client processor needs to know how to serialize the

request message. Grounding defines the links between the semantic

and the syntactic description levels.

My PhD dissertation should be on the topic of Semantic Web Service

Negotiation. I plan to write and submit a paper defining the scope of

my negotiation research based on what I know about the topic so far,

and that paper should be written before end of June 2006.

Implementations Currently ongoing:

1) DIP Versioning library over WSMO4J, also in use in DOME and

possibly WSMT

2) Processor for mapping WSDL documents into RDF (mostly for

W3C)

Publications

Planned:

1) Negotiation and grounding components in WSMX, to be defined

Conference Papers:

J. Kopecký, D. Roman, M. Moran, and D. Fensel: Semantic Web

Services Grounding. In Proceedings of the International Conference

on Internet and Web Applications and Services (ICIW'06),

Guadeloupe, French Caribbean, February 23-25, 2006.

Chapters in Books:

D. Roman, J. de Bruijn, A. Mocan, I. Toma, H. Lausen, J. Kopecký,

D. Fensel, J. Domingue, S. Galizia, and L. Cabral:Semantic Web

Services - Approaches and Perspectives. In J. Davies, P. Warren, and

R. Studer (eds.), Semantic Web Technologies, to appear, 2005.

Workshops:

R. Krummenacher, J. Kopecký, and T. Strang: Sharing Context

Information with Semantic Spaces. In Proceedings of the Workshop

221


on Context-Aware Mobile Systems (CAMS 2005), Ayia Napa,

Cyprus, Greece, October 30-31, 2005.

S. Arroyo, Ch. Bussler, J. Kopecký, R. Lara, A. Polleres, and M.

Zaremba: Web Service Capabilities and Constraints in WSMO. In

W3C Workshop on Constraints and Capabilities for Web Services.

Redwood Shores, CA, USA, October 12-13, 2004.

Others:

J. de Bruijn, Ch. Bussler, J. Domingue, D. Fensel, M. Hepp, U.

Keller, M. Kifer, B. König-Ries, J. Kopecký, R. Lara, H. Lausen, E.

Oren, A. Polleres, D. Roman, J. Scicluna, and M. Stollberg: Web

Service Modeling Ontology (WSMO), W3C Member Submission,

June 3, 2005.

222


6.4.2.2. Reto Krummenacher

Name

Reto Krummenacher

Entry Date October 2004

Cluster UbiServ

Objective Storage & Communication

Projects Project Deliverable/Task (P)ast, (C)urrent,

(F)uture

TSC Interaction Model P

Space/ Storage P

Organisation

Data Model P

Semantic Matching/ P

Templates

Query ENGINE C

(YARS) binding

QE implementation F

and validation

Project Coordination P C F

TripCom

Work planning for P C

DERI IBK

KR (TS Ontology) F

Interaction Model F

eHealth Use Case F

Research topic Ubiquitous Computing model, where technology recedes into the

background of our lives is one of the most promising computing

paradigms. However, the arrival of ubiquitous computing will call

upon ‘many persons + many computers’ interactions. There will be

an enormous peer-to-peer network of information and service

providers and consumers. Taking away parts of the machine

interaction from the users to let it recede into the background

requires more complex interaction models on computer level. Many

new challenges come along with this futuristic vision that are

relevant for my research topic: adaptation strategies, client thickness

(mobility), context awareness, balancing proactivity and

transparency, and information flow across layers and services.

The goal of the research will be to address these challenges from a

Triple Space Computing research point of view and to combine it


with existing technologies from the Ubiquitous Computing and

Distributed Systems communities to provide a middleware for highly

dynamic, mobile and complex systems of services. Research, wise

this implies in consequence the definition and implementation of a

space infrastructure as a whole and in particular of so-called TS

Kernels residing on every participating node (Fig. 1).

Figure 6.4.2.2.1. TS Kernel architecture with Context Engine

The goal is to use context information in the space to process the

information available, and thus to ensure at least local scalability, i.e.

using the context information (e.g. user, device and service

descriptions, preferences and needs) to coordinate, replicate and

distribute the information proactively to the right peers within the

network of involved nodes. This raises two core questions that have

to be addressed:

Q1. How to model context information?

Q2. How to interpret and thus use the context information for the

organisation and reasonable proactivity of the space?

These are questions directly addressed by a TS kernel

implementation containing a Context Engine that was added to Fig. 1

compared to its counterpart defined in the TSC project3. The Context

Engine (Q2) is envisioned to make use of a reasoner binding, most

likely in form of a rule reasoner that is able to process so called

context rules (Q1). In consequence, context information would need

to be encoded in form of rules, facts and queries that compose the

Knowledge Base of the Context Engine.

As mentioned in the beginning I see “disappearing computing” as the

future of computer science with respect to human computer

interaction and its co-existence. Therefore the communication and

coordination infrastructure for machines has to be heavily improved,

as more and more tasks will be performed by applications that reside

224


Progress

towards PhD

in a tremendous network of small devices and services invisible for

the human users. The Context Engine (Q2) is seen to be a tool to

address some of these issues; in particular an answer to the

proactivity problems based on Semantic Web and Triple Space

technology.

The current focus of my research work and thus of my path toward a

PhD is still restricted to the fundamental questions of Triple Space

Computing [3]. This is on the one hand due to my involvement in

TSC related projects and on the other of course, as the basics of

semantically enriched communication and coordination spaces have

to be defined prior to possible extensions. As basics I would consider

the various conceptual models that were subject to recent and current

project work: data model, data encoding, space organisation, and

native interface layering (TS kernel) to name the most prominent.

These technologies are part of TSC, as it is well known: technical

facts are available in form of deliverables and minor publications

(forthcoming) already.

More precise ideas for my PhD thesis based on Triple Space

Computing still consist of mostly conceptual ideas [1]. The current

goal is thus to more and more address the questions in the previous

section with respect to context-awareness and proactivity. This is

necessary in order to bring forward a middleware that allows simple

and flexible improvement of ubiquitous computing application as

e.g. mentioned in [2] by considering available context information

about and from all users (consumers and producers) of the space

infrastructure. Furthermore it is a desire to increasingly consider

(Mobile and Ubiquitous) Web technology to come up with a global

web for machines as e.g. described in [4]. The context-aware

middleware was named TSC (ubiquitous TSC) in [4] or Ubiquitous

Semantic Spaces in [1] and is the extended version of TSC that is

planned to result from my PhD. I could imagine that many of the

TSC ideas will penetrate into the eHealth Use Case of the TripCom

project (Work package 8b in which I will be involved) and viceversa.

Current topics that I have actively or more passively on my agenda

are the definition of models for context rules (including or

juxtaposed) to e.g. the modelling of so-called non-functional

properties in WSMO. In consequence and possibly in parallel I have

to look at how to bind the (rule) reasoning efforts from the WSML

working group to the space infrastructure (through the Context

Engine). The facts drawn from inferred data will be the core output

from the Context Engine of the Coordination Layer (Fig. 2) and the

necessary added value to improve the coordination and

communication of services in ubiquitous computing environments.

Obviously I focus here on the use of the Context Engine in the scope

of the proposed TSC infrastructure. It should however be noted that

225


similar technologies could also enter the SEE architecture at some

point. The current discussions going on around non-functional

properties show that there are additional issues relevant to decisionmaking

in discovery, selection or composition than semantic

descriptions of and reasoning with the functional and behavioural

properties of services. In that sense my interest in context modelling,

rules and reasoning for a space-based middleware could be

generalized to improve the value of the Semantic Execution

Environment.

[1] R. Krummenacher, and Th. Strang: Ubiquitous Semantic Spaces. In Conference

Supplement to the 7th Int-l Conf on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp 2005),

Tokyo, Japan, September 11-14, 2005.

[2] R. Krummenacher, J. Kopecký, and Th. Strang: Sharing Context Information

with Semantic Spaces. Workshop on Context Aware Mobile Systems (CAMS

2005), Ayia Napa, Cyprus, October 30 31, 2005.

[3] R. Krummenacher, M. Hepp, A. Polleres, Ch. Bussler, and D. Fensel: WWW or

What Is Wrong with Web Services. In Proc. of the 2005 IEEE European Conf on

Web Services, Växjö, Sweden, November 14-16, 2005.

[4] R. Krummenacher, Th. Strang, and D. Fensel: Triple Spaces for a Ubiquitous

Web of Services. W3C Workshop on the Ubiquitous Web, Tokyo, Japan, March 9-

10, 2006.

Implementations Since my active contribution to wsmo4j, in particular in form of the

Logical Expression API (wsmo4j extension), is finished, I have no

more official DERI implementation output. The API was integrated

into wsmo4j and therewith I finished my active participation in the

wsmo4j project.

Thereafter I recently did some prototype and test implementations for

TSC and helped to improve and debug the latest versions of YARS.

This tests and prototypes were used as primary proof of concept of

the ideas in D1.3 and D2.1 of the TSC project and also to check the

work of my bachelor students. Initial ideas that I got out of this are

now used to drive forward the implementation of the TSC prototype

officially due late this year.

Publications R. Krummenacher, and Th. Strang: Ubiquitous Semantic Spaces. In

Conference Supplement to the 7th Int-l Conf on Ubiquitous

Computing (UbiComp 2005), Tokyo, Japan, September 11-14, 2005.

R. Krummenacher, J. Kopecký, and Th. Strang: Sharing Context

Information with Semantic Spaces. Workshop on Context-Aware

Mobile Systems (CAMS 2005), Ayia Napa, Cyprus, October 30-31,

2005.

R. Krummenacher, M. Hepp, A. Polleres, Ch. Bussler, and D.

Fensel: WWW or What Is Wrong with Web Services. In Proc. of the

2005 IEEE European Conf on Web Services, Växjö, Sweden,

November 14-16, 2005.

226


R. Krummenacher, Th. Strang, and D. Fensel: Triple Spaces for a

Ubiquitous Web of Services. W3C Workshop on the Ubiquitous

Web, Tokyo, Japan, March 9-10, 2006.

R. Krummenacher, F. Martin-Recuerda, M. Murth, J. Riemer, Y.

Ding, and D. Fensel: Triple Space Computing: A framework for the

new communication paradigm. Poster Session of the 3rd European

Semantic Web Conf. (ESWC 2006), Budva, Montenegro, 11-14

June, 2006 (forthcoming).

O. Shafiq, I. Toma, R. Krummenacher, Th. Strang, and D. Fensel:

Using Triple Space Computing for communication and coordination

in Semantic Grid. In Proc. of the 3rd Semantic Grid Workshop in

conj. With the 16th Global Grid Forum, Athens, Greece, February

13-16, 2006.

S. Arroyo and R. Krummenacher: A Choreographed Approach to

Ubiquitous and Pervasive Learning. In M. Lytras and A. Naeve

(eds.): Ubiquitous and Pervasive Knowledge and Learning

Management: Semantics, Social Networking and New Media to their

full potential. Idea Group Publishing, 2007 (forthcoming).

227


6.4.2.3. Ioan Toma

Name

Ioan Toma

Entry date April 2004

Cluster Ubiquitous Services

Objective Discovery and Adaption

Projects GRISINO (Grid semantics and intelligent objects)

The aim of GRISINO is to combine three leading edge technology

strands which complement each other, for the definition of intelligent

and dynamic business processes: (1) Semantic Web Services as the

future standard for the declaration of web-based semantic processes,

(2)Knowledge content objects as the unit of value which can be

manipulated by semantic web services. (3) Grid Computing as a

pervasive service distribution infrastructure for a future, ambient

intelligence space. In GRISINO I will mainly be involved in the

following work packages:

(1) WP1: Conceptual Analysis (2) WP3: SWS & GRID and (3) WP6:

Dissemination. My interest is on WP3 where the task is to develop a

detailed linkage between SWS and GRID based services. I will be

involved in the following deliverables:

- D1.1.1 State of the Art in SWS, GRID and "Intelligent" Objects -

Can they meet?

- D1.2.1 Requirements and Design of a Common Infrastructure for

GRID, SWS and Intelligent Objects

- D2.3.1 Experimentation Testbed: Requirements, Design, Test

cases, and Test results.

- D3.2.1 Design and Specification of Integrated Services

- D3.4.1 GCI Test Bed (prototype) with integrated services

- D4.1.1 Design and Specification of KCO-to-SWS Mapping

- D4.3.1 GCI with access to KCOs via semantic web services

- D5.2.1 Design Specification of the Semantic Search Application

- D.6.2.1 Research Papers

Research topic My general research interests are: Semantic Web Services and

Semantic Grid. More precisely I am/was involved in the following

research activities:

- Non-functional properties for Web services: [4]

This research is trigger by the following questions: (1) how to model


non-functional aspects of services? (2) how to specify non-functional

aspects of services? and (3) how to perform discovery, filtering and

selection based on non-functional aspects? (discovery, filtering and

selection as a use case)

- Service Discovery:

Reasoning support for discovery

In the ASG project I was involved in the development of WSML

reasoner based on Flora-2 system that supports discovery and

composition of services in ASG.

WSMX discovery

As part of WSMX I was developing a keyword-based discovery

mechanism that considers the non-functional descriptions of WSMO

goals and services. Keywords provided by the requester in the nonfunctional

descriptions of the goal or axioms used to formalize that

goal are matched against the correspondent keywords in the

descriptions of the services. Any non-functional property that takes a

string value (e.g. dc:Subject etc.) can be consider when doing the

matching. Two different kind of matching are supported: a total

match and a partial match.

Discovery for P2P, Grids and Web services

In [5], [7], [2], [1] we have proposed different approaches for

realizing service discovery in distributed environments like: P2P,

Grids and Web services. The focus was in developing robust and

scalable architectures for service discovery in distributed

environments.

- Applying semantic technologies to Grid

Modeling services for Semantic Grid: Some initial ideas on how to

apply Semantic Web Services solutions to semantically describe

services in Grid environment were proposed in [6].

Progress

towards PhD

Resource ontology In [3] we have proposed a Grid resource ontology

that can provide better support for resource matching in Grids.

In my PhD I plan to provide a solution on how to model and how to

specify non-functional properties of services based on semantic

technologies. Non-functional properties are an important aspect of

services with a similar importance as the other services aspect:

functional and behavior. One could realize the importance of nonfunctional

properties especially in the context of some critical service

related tasks like: discovery, filtering, negotiation, selection and

229


substitution. In the field of software components and networking

different models for non-functional properties have been proposed.

However applying them in service-based settings requires remodelling

especially when we consider the interaction, dynamic and

context aspects when using a service. Moreover some other questions

have to be answered:

- What is the level of abstraction we use when we model nonfunctional

properties; how detailed or specific they must be?

- How dose dynamic nature of non-functional properties influence

the way we model and describe them.

- How to model non-functional properties such that conflicts and

competition between them are captured as well?

Having such a model developed a formal language for specifying

non functional descriptions is required. Probably as part of WSML I

plan to contribute to the development of language support based on

logical formalisms to model NFPs and context information. As an

exemplification of what can be done with semantic descriptions of

services non-functional properties I plan to design and implement a

discovery mechanism, that includes filtering and selection. Both

syntactic and semantic solutions will be considered.

The progress I done so far towards realizing the goals described

above is limited. Currently I'm mainly trying to get more familiar

with the area of non-functional properties ("reading phase"). With

respect to discovery the implementation that I have done has to be

further developed and adapted for non-functional properties.

[1] Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, and

Ioan Toma. WWW or What is Wrong with Web service

discovery. In Position paper at the W3C Workshop on

Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services, Innsbruck, Austria,

6 2005.

[2] Brahmananda Sapkota, Laurentiu Vasiliu, Ioan Toma, Dumitru

Roman, and Chris Bussler. Peer-to-Peer Technology Usage in

Web Service Discovery and Matchmaking. In Proceedings of the

6th International Conference on Web Information Systems

Engineering, New York City, USA, 11 2005.

[3] Mumtaz Siddiqui, Thomas Fahringer, Jürgen Hofer, and Ioan

Toma. Grid Resource Ontology and Correlation. In Proceedings

of the 2nd International Conference on Grid Services

Engineering and Management, Erfurt, Germany, 9 2005.

[4] Ioan Toma and Douglas Foxvog. Non functional properties for

web services. Working draft, Digital Enterprise Research

Institute (DERI), March 2004. Available from

230


http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d28/d28.4/v0.1/.

[5] Ioan Toma, Kashif Iqbal, Matthew Moran, Dumitru Roman,

Thomas Strang, and Dieter Fensel. An Evaluation of Discovery

approaches in Grid and Web services Environments. In

Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Grid

Services Engineering and Management, Erfurt, Germany, 9

2005.

[6] Ioan Toma, Dumitru Roman, Kashif Iqbal, Jürgen Hofer, Dieter

Fensel, and Stefan Decker. Towards Semantic Web Services in

Grid Environments. In Proceedings of the 1st International

Conference on Semantic, Knowledge and Grid, Beijing, China,

11 2005.

[7] Ioan Toma, Brahmananda Sapkota, James Scicluna, Juan Miguel

Gomez, Dumitru Roman, and Dieter Fensel. A P2P Discovery

mechanism for Web Service Execution Environment. In

Proceedings of the 2nd International WSMO Implementation

Workshop (WIW 2005), Innsbruck, Austria, 6 2005.

Implementations WSMX keywords-based discovery

WSML/Flora-2 reasoner

Publications Conference papers:

Dieter Fensel, Ioan Toma, Dumitru Roman: Towards a Semantically

enabled Service Oriented Architecture. In Proceedings of the

Semantic2005 Conference - Semantic Systems in the Knowledge

Society - Challenges & Opportunities, Vienna, Austria, November

2005.

Ioan Toma, Dumitru Roman, Dieter Fensel: Modeling Semantic Web

Services in ASG: The WSMO-based Approach. In Proceedings of

the Semantic2005 Conference - Semantic Systems in the Knowledge

Society - Challenges & Opportunities, Vienna, Austria, November

2005.

Ioan Toma, Dumitru Roman, Kashif Iqbal, Jürgen Hofer, Dieter

Fensel, Stefan Decker: Towards Semantic Web Services in Grid

Environment. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on

Semantic, Knowledge and Grid, Beijing, China, November 2005.

Brahmananda Sapkota, Laurentiu Vasiliu, Ioan Toma, Dumitru

Roman, Chris Bussler: Peer-to-Peer Technology Usage in Web

Service Discovery and Matchmaking. In Proceedings of the 6th

International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering,

New York City, USA, November 2005.

231


Ioan Toma, Kashif Iqbal, Matthew Moran, Dumitru Roman, Thomas

Strang and Dieter Fensel: An Evaluation of Discovery approaches in

Grid and Web services Environments. In Proceedings of the 2nd

International Conference on Grid Services Engineering and

Management, Erfurt, Germany, September 2005.

Mumtaz Siddiqui, Thomas Fahringer, Jürgen Hofer, and Ioan Toma:

Grid Resource Ontology and Correlation. In Proceedings of the 2nd

International Conference on Grid Services Engineering and

Management, Erfurt, Germany, September 2005.

Michael Stollberg, Dumitru Roman, Ioan Toma, Uwe Keller,

Reinhold Herzog, Peter Zugmann, and Dieter Fensel: Semantic Web

Fred - Automated Goal Resolution on the Semantic Web. In

Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System

Science, January 2005.

Ioan Alfred Letia and Ioan Toma: Using Neural Network ensemble

based on genetic algorithms to optimise a Semantic Perceptron Net,

CSCS-14 14th International Conference on Control Systems and

Computer Science Bucharest, Romania, July 2003 pg. 120-126

Toderean Gavril, Ioan Toma, Chira Gabriela, Vescan Radu, Jurca

Cristian and Inclezan Alin: GPS Real-Time Car Navigation System,

AQTR-THETA13, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, May 2002 pg.363-369

Workshop papers:

Omair Shafiq, Ioan Toma, Reto Krummenacher, Thomas Strang, and

Dieter Fensel: Using Triple Space Computing for communication

and coordination in Semantic Grid. In Proc. of the 3rd Semantic Grid

Workshop in conj. with the 16th Global Grid Forum, Athens, Greece,

February 13-16, 2006

Axel Polleres, Ioan Toma and Dieter Fensel: Modeling services on

the Semantic Grid}. In Proceedings of the Semantic Grid Dagsthul

Seminar, Dagstuhl, Germany, June 2005.

Ioan Toma, Brahmananda Sapkota, James Scicluna, Juan Miguel

Gomez, Dumitru Roman, and Dieter Fensel: A P2P Discovery

mechanism for Web Service Execution Environment. In Proceedings

of the 2nd International WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW

2005), Innsbruck, Austria, June 2005.

232


Juan Miguel Gomez, Armin Haler, Ioan Toma, Brahmananda

Sapkota and Christoph Bussler: B2B Conversations based on the

WSMX architecture. WSMO Implementation Workshop (WIW

2005), Innsbruck, Austria, June 2005.

Dieter Fensel, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres and Ioan

Toma: WWW or What is Wrong with Web service discovery.

Position paper at the W3C Workshop on Frameworks for Semantics

in Web Services, June 9-10, 2005, Innsbruck, Austria.

Poster papers:

Ioan Toma, Kashif Iqbal and Dumitru Roman: Adaptive Services

Grid. Poster paper at the 4th International Semantic Web Conference

(ISWC 2005), November 6-11, 2005, Galway, Ireland.

Chapters in Books:

Dumitru Roman, Jos de Bruijn, Adrian Mocan, Ioan Toma, Holger

Lausen, Jacek Kopecky, Dieter Fensel, John Domingue, Stefania

Galizia, and Liliana Cabral: Semantic Web Services - Approaches

and Perspectives. In J. Davies, P. Warren, and R. Studer (eds.),

Semantic Web Technologies: Trends and Research in Ontologybased

Systems, June, 2006 (forthcoming).

Standardization Documents:

Christoph Bussler, Emilia Cimpian, Dieter Fensel, Juan Miguel

Gomez, Armi Haller, Thomas Haselwanter, Mick Kerrigan, Adrian

Mocan, Matthew Moran, Eyal Oren, Brahmanada Sapkota, Ioan

Toma, Jana Viskova, Tomas Vitvar, Maciej Zaremba and Michal

Zaremba: Web Service Execution Environment (WSMX). W3C

Member Submission 4 April 2005.

Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Michael Kifer, Jacek Kopecký, Rubén

Lara, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, Dumitru Roman, James Scicluna

and Ioan Toma: Relationship of WSMO to Other Relevant

Technologies. W3C Member Submission 3 June 2005.

Technical Reports:

Daniel Bachlechner, Katharina Siorpaes, Dieter Fensel and Ioan

233


Toma: Web Service Discovery - A Reality Check, DERI, 2006

Deliverables:

Ioan Toma, Adina Sirbu, Sven Groppe, Jürgen Umbrich and Jinghua

Groppe. WSML reasoner engine implementation 1st release, ASG

(Adaptive Services Grid), 2006.

Dumitru Roman, Ioan Toma, Adina Sirbu, Sven Groppe, Sanaullah

Nazir. Collection of semantic specifications for ASG services, ASG

(Adaptive Services Grid), 2006.

Dumitru Roman, Ioan Toma and Tomasz Kaczmarek. Requirements

analysis on service specification language, ASG (Adaptive Services

Grid), 2005.

Dumitru Roman, Ioan Toma and Tomasz Kaczmarek. Requirements

analysis on service specification language, ASG (Adaptive Services

Grid), 2005.

Dumitru Roman and Ioan Toma. Requirements analysis on ASG

interface, ASG (Adaptive Services Grid), 2005.

Kashif Iqbal, Ioan Toma, Bernhard Tausch and Ville Tormala.

Requirements analysis for Service and Resource Matchmaking, ASG

(Adaptive Services Grid), 2005.

Ioan Toma, Kashif Iqbal, Bernhard Tausch, Jarno Heikkila and

Dumitru Roman. Evaluation of current effort in Service and

Resource Matchmaking, ASG (Adaptive Services Grid), 2005.

Jos de Bruijn, Dieter Fensel, Tomasz Kaczmarek, Marek

Kowalkiewicz, Reto Krummenacher, Holger Lausen, Michael Kifer,

Axel Polleres, Livia Predoiu, Dumitru Roman, Ioan Toma. Service

description language, ASG (Adaptive Services Grid), 2005.

Tomasz Kaczmarek, Marek Kowalkiewicz, Dumitru Roman, Ioan

Toma, Karol Wieloch, Wojciech Zalech. Comparison of current Grid

and Web service description efforts}, ASG (Adaptive Services Grid),

2005.

Matthew Moran, Ioan Toma. Evaluation of current service interface

efforts, ASG (Adaptive Services Grid), 2005.

Jörg Barthold, Bernard Tausch, Pasi Tiitien, Ioan Toma, Dumitru

234


Roman, Jarno Heikkilä, Sergiy Nikitin. Evaluation of existing

approaches in registries, ASG (Adaptive Services Grid), 2005.

Pasi Tiitien, Anton Naumenko, Sergiy Nikitin, Jörg Barthold, Ioan

Toma, Dumitru Roman, Bernard Tausch. Requirement Analysis on

service registries}, ASG (Adaptive Services Grid), 2005.

Sinuhe Arroyo, Ioan Toma, Dumitru Roman, Christian Drumm,

Marin Dimitrov, Murray Spork, Gabor Nagypal, John Domingue and

Jan Henke. D3.1 Report on State of the Art and Requirements

analysis, WP 3 – Service Ontologies and Service Description, DIP

(Data, Information and Processes), 2004.

Ioan Toma, Michael Stollberg, Jos de Bruijn, Axel Polleres, Ruben

Lara. D2 SWF Language Evaluation and Comparison}, SWF

(Semantic Web Fred), 2004.

Michael Stollberg, Ioan Toma, Uwe Keller, Bernhard Keimel, Peter

Zugmann. SWF Use Case, SWF (Semantic Web Fred), 2004.

Michael Stollberg, Ioan Toma, Uwe Keller, Peter Zugmann,

Bernhard Keimel. SWF Architecture, Tools and Mechanisms, SWF

(Semantic Web Fred), 2004.

Ioan Toma, Dumitru Roman, Kashif Iqbal. D25.1 WSMO and Grid,

WSMO (Web Service Modeling Ontology), 2004.

Ioan Toma. D28.4 Non-functional properties in Web services,

WSML (Web Service Modeling Language), 2006.

Uwe Keller, Rubén Lara, Axel Polleres, Ioan Toma, Michel Kifer,

Dieter Fensel. D5.1 WSMO Web Service Discovery, WSML (Web

Service Modeling Language), 2004.

Rubén Lara, Walter Binder, Ion Constantinescu, Dieter Fensel, Uwe

Keller, Jeff Pan, Elena Paslaru, Marco Pistore, Axel Polleres, Ioan

Toma, Paulo Traverso, Michal Zaremba. D2.4.2 Semantics for Web

Service Discovery and Composition, KnowledgeWeb, 2004.

Uwe Keller, Rubén Lara, Holger Lausen, Axel Polleres, Livia

Predoiu, Ioan Toma. D5.2 WSMO Discovery Engine, WSML (Web

Service Modeling Language), 2004.

Enrica Dente, Jacek Kopecky, Francisco Jose Martin-Recuerda

Moyano, Dumitru Roman, Ioan Toma. Integrating WSMX with

Tuple and Triple Space Computing, WSMX (Web Service Modeling

235


Execution Environment), 2004.

6.4.3. Senior Researcher

Senior Researchers

No Name Topic

5 Dr. Michael Jäger

6 Dr. Axel Polleres

7 Univ.-Prof. Dr. Thomas Strang Reasoning

6.4.3.1. Michael Jäger

Name

Entry date

Cluster

Objective

Projects

Research topic

Progress

towards

PhD/Habil

Implementations

Publications

Michael C. Jaeger

October, 2006 (planned)

SEE

Clarifying links between the ISO RM-ODP and state-of-the-art

distributed systems

Open Distributed Systems

PhD submission in progress, planned submission first week of Sept.

planned defense until end of 2006.

6.4.3.2. Axel Polleres

Name

Dr. Axel Polleres

Entry date Oktober 2003

Cluster Ubiquitous Services

Objective Integration of Rules and Ontologies, Rule Based/Logic Programming

based Description of Web Services, Answer Set Programming,

Integration of SPARQL and Rules

Projects BIT (activity completed),

TripCom, KWeb, W3C RIF WG (ongoing)

ExpertFinder (not yet funded)

Research topic Ontologies, Rules, Semantic Web Service Description

236


Progress

towards

PhD/Habil

On track towards Habil. Since PhD established recognized position

in a for me completely new research community (SW/SWS) with

numerous publications, gained teaching experience, community

activities (organizing workshops, managed W3C member

submissions, etc.) already.

Habil planned within two years from now.

Goals:

• Several journal articles (minimum 3, one of which solo

author) since these are still too few,

• Successful completion of the TripCom project, where I plan

to stay active.

• More progress with the RIF WG.

• Joint project (e.g. FP7) of URJC and the DERI Innsbruck

RSWS cluster), probably based on the ExpertFinder initiative

Open issue:

Whether to do the Habilitation in Innsbruck or in Madrid (Mainly

administrative issue)

Implementations The DLV K planning system,

SPAR 2 QL (LP-based SPARQL Engine, ongoing)

Publications http://www.polleres.net/publications.html

bibtex file upon request.

237


6.4.3.3. Thomas Strang

Name

Thomas Strang

Entry date October 2004

Cluster Ubiquitous Services

Objective involved in

(5) Discovery, (6) Adaptation, (10) Grounding, (14) Storage and

Communication via cluster members

Projects Teaching

Research topics • Ubiquitous and Pervasive Computing, Context-Awareness

• Service Discovery and Service Execution, Service

Frameworks

• Web Services, Semantic Web, Semantic Web Services

• Smart Mobile Devices

• Short Range and Ad-hoc Networks

• Distributed Systems, Distribution Platforms

• Communications

Progress

towards Habil

So far, nothing really substantial beside the publications and some

conference chairing has been done towards a habil. Simply no time!

:(

If there would be some time, I would focus towards something

entitled "Service Discovery Techniques on different levels of

abstractions".

Implementations Couldn't touch a compiler for about 1.5 years due to lack of time...

(Well, in fact I started a compiler 3 times or so to check some code

snippets for a lecture, but I assume that doesn't count...)

Publications Strang, Thomas; Meyer zu Hörste, Michael; Lemmer, Karsten

(2006): The new European Satellite Navigation System Galileo as a

kernel for a Railway Collision Avoidance System. In: Proceedings,

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ortung und Navigation (DGON),

International Symposium on Certification of GNSS Systems and

Services (CERGAL 2006), Braunschweig, Germany, 2006-04-04 -

2006-04-05

Strang, Thomas; Meyer zu Hörste, Michael (2006): Galileo as a

kernel for Railway Collision Avoidance System. In: Proceedings,

NavAge 2006, Prague, Czech Republic, 2006-03-28 - 2006-03-29


Krummenacher, Reto; Strang, Thomas; Fensel, Dieter (2006): Triple

Spaces for a Ubiquitous Web of Services. In: Online Proceedings,

W3C Workshop on the Ubiquitous Web, Tokyo, Japan, 2006-03-09 -

2006-03-10

Shafiq, Omair; Toma, Ioan; Krummenacher, Reto; Strang, Thomas;

Fensel, Dieter (2006): Using Triple-Space Computing for

communication and coordination in Semantic Grid. In: Proceedings

of 3rd Semantic Grid Workshop at the 16th Global Grid Forum, 3rd

Semantic Grid Workshop at the 16th Global Grid Forum, Athens,

Greece, 2006-02-13 - 2006-02-16

Strang, Thomas (2006): Geographische Authentifikation und

Signatur. In: GI e.V. [Hrsg.]: Proceedings der 3. Jahrestagung

Fachbereich Sicherheit in der Gesellschaft für Informatik (Sicherheit

2006), Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), P-77, S. 192 - 200, 3.

Jahrestagung Fachbereich Sicherheit in der Gesellschaft für

Informatik (Sicherheit 2006), Magdeburg, Deutschland, 2006-02-20

- 2006-02-22, ISBN 3-88579-171-4, ISSN 1617-5468

Strang, Thomas (2005): Invited Talk: Semantic Web - Grounding a

Vision. CMS Day, Bolzano (Italy), 2005-11-11

Stollberg, Michael; Strang, Thomas (2005): Integrating Agents,

Ontologies, and Semantic Web Services for Collaboration on the

Semantic Web. In: Proceedings of the AAAI-FSS05, 1st

International Symposium on Agents and the Semantic Web (AAAI-

FSS05), 1st International Symposium on Agents and the Semantic

Web (AAAI-FSS05), Arlington, Virginia, USA, November 3 - 6,

2005

Krummenacher, Reto; Kopecky, Jacek; Strang, Thomas (2005):

Sharing Context Information with Semantic Spaces. In: Meersman,

Robert; Tari, Zahir; Herrero, Pilar [Hrsg.]: Proceedings, Lecture

Notes in Computer Science, LNCS 3762, Springer-Verlag, S. 229 -

232, Workshop on Context-Aware Mobile Systems (CAMS 2005) as

part of OnTheMove Fedarated Conferences (OTM 2005), Agia

Napa, Cyprus, 2005-10-30 - 2005-11-04, ISBN 3-540-29739-1,

ISSN 0302-9743

Strang, Thomas; Meyer zu Hörste, Michael; Gu, Xiaogang (2005):

Sicherer Schienenverkehr mit GALILEO. In: DLR-PD [Hrsg.]:,

Verkehrstechnischer Tag, S. 51 - 58 2. Verkehrstechnischer Tag des

DLR: Mobil sein - mobil bleiben, Berlin, Germany, 2005-09-28,

ISSN 1861-552X

239


Krummenacher, Reto; Strang, Thomas (2005): Ubiquitous Semantic

Spaces. In: Adjunct Proceedings, 7th International Conference on

Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp 2005), Tokyo, Japan, 2005-09-11

- 2005-09-14

Zukunft, Detlef; Giszczak, Adam; Meyer zu Hörste, Michael;

Noack, Thoralf; Strang, Thomas; Lenz, Barbara; Schäfer, Ralf-Peter;

Schlingelhof, Marius (2005): Exposé GALILEO im Verkehr -

Anwendungspotential und DLR-Expertisen. In: DLR

Programmdirektion Verkehr [Hrsg.]: Exposé GALILEO im Verkehr

- Anwendungspotential und DLR-Expertisen

(2005): Location- and Context-Awareness. Strang, Thomas;

Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia [Hrsg.]:, Lecture Notes in Computer

Science, LNCS 3479, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 378 S.,

International Workshop on Location- and Context-Awareness

(LoCA 2005), Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany, 2005-05-12 - 2005-05-

13, ISBN 3-540-25896-5, ISSN 0302-9743

Strimpakou, Maria; Roussaki, Ioanna; Anagnostou, Miltos; Pils,

Carsten; Angermann, Michael; Robertson, Patrick (2005): Context

Modelling and Management in Ambient-aware Pervasive

Environments. In: Strang, Thomas; Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia

[Hrsg.]: LoCA 2005: Int. workshop on Location- and Context-

Awareness, LoCA 2005, Wessling, Deutschland, 2005-05-12

(2005): Advances in Pervasive Computing. Adjunct Proceedings of

the Third International Conference on Pervasive Computing.

Ferscha, Alois; Mayrhofer, Rene; Strang, Thomas; Dey, Anind;

Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia; Butz, Andreas; Schmidt, Albrecht

[Hrsg.]:, Österreichische Computer Gesellschaft (OCG), 204 S.,

Pervasive 2005, Munich, Germany, 2005-05-08 - 2005-05-13, ISBN

3-85403-191-2

Angermann, Michael; Robertson, Patrick; Strang, Thomas (2005):

Issues and Requirements for Bayesian Approaches in Context Aware

Systems. In: Strang, Thomas; Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia [Hrsg.]:

LoCA 2005: Int. workshop on Location- and Context-Awareness,

LoCA 2005, Wessling Deutschland, 2005-05-12

Dammann, Armin; Del Sorbo, Filomena; Plass, Simon; Raulefs,

Ronald; Robertson, Patrick; Rosati, Laura; Sand, Stephan; Schnell,

Michael; Strang, Thomas; Kaiser, Stefan (2005): Survey on EU

Research Activities in Terrestrial Wireless and Mobile Satellite

Communications. In: Kaiser, Stefan; Dammann, Armin [Hrsg.]:

240


Strang, Thomas (2005): Invited Talk: To know where to go -

Semantics in eTourism. ENTER 2005, Innsbruck/Austria, 26 - 28

January, 2005, Innsbruck/Austria

Stollberg, Michael; Strang, Thomas; Fensel, Dieter (2005):

Automated Collaboration on the Semantic Web. International

Transactions on Computer Science and Engineering, 17 (1)

Strang, Thomas (2005): Invited Talk: Challenges of Designing

Services for Smart Mobile Devices. IT Seminar, Sydney/Australia,

23. February 2005

Strang, Thomas (2005): Invited Talk: Context Modelling for

Ubiquitous Computing. Basser Seminar, Sydney/Australia, 9.

February 2005

Strang, Thomas (2005): Invited Talk: SoftLocations. Scientific

Colloquium, Sydney/Australia, 17. February 2005

Toma, I.; Iqbal, K.; Moran, M.; Roman, D.; Strang, Thomas; Fensel,

D. (2005): An Evaluation of Discovery approaches in Grid and Web

services Environments. In: Tagungsband Net.ObjectDays, 2nd

International Conference on Grid Service Engineering and

Management (GSEM 2005), Erfurt, Germany, September 19-22,

2005, ISBN 3-9808628-4-4

Toma, Ioan; Iqbal, Kashif; Moran, Matthew; Roman, Dimitru;

Strang, Thomas; Fensel, Dieter (2005): An Evaluation of Discovery

approaches in Grid and Web services Environments. In: Proceedings

of the Net.ObjectDays 2005, 2nd International Conference on Grid

service Engineering and Management (GSEM 2005), Erfurt,

Germany, 2005-09-19 - 2005-09-22, ISBN 3-9808628-4-4

Strang, Thomas (2004): Invited Talk: Are we already at the dead end

of context modelling and retrieval? KI 2004 Workshop on Context

Modelling and Retrieval (MRC 2004), Ulm, Germany, 2004-09-20 -

2004-09-21

Wendlandt, Kai; Robertson, Patrick; Angermann, Michael; Strang,

Thomas; Kammann, Jens; Wasel, Christian; Dorsch, Thaddäus

(2004): Experiences from Ramping Up an Environment for Mobile

Information Access. In: University of Strathclyde [Hrsg.]:

Proceedings Mobile and Ubiquitous Information Access Workshop

(MUIA), MobileHCI04, Glasgow, Scotland, 2004-09-13 - 2004-09-

16

241


Strang, Thomas; Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia (2004): A Context

Modeling Survey. In: Workshop Proceedings, First International

Workshop on Advanced Context Modelling, Reasoning And

Management at UbiComp 2004, Nottingham, England, September 7,

2004, Nottingham, UK

Strang, Thomas (2004): Service-Interoperabilität in Ubiquitous

Computing Umgebungen. Dissertation, S. 168, LMU München

(Informatik), ISBN 3-8007-2823-0

Strang, Thomas; Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia; Frank, Korbinian (2003):

CoOL: A Context Ontology Language to enable Contextual

Interoperability. In: Stefani, Jean-Bernard; Demeure, Isabelle;

Hagimont, Daniel [Hrsg.]: Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer

Science, LNCS 2893, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, S. 236 - 247, 4th

IFIP WG 6.1 International Conference on Distributed Applications

and Interoperable Systems (DAIS 2003), Paris, France, 2003-11-17 -

2003-11-21, ISBN 3-540-20529-2, ISSN 0302-9743

Strang, Thomas; Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia; Frank, Korbinian (2003):

Integration Issues of an Ontology based Context Modelling

Approach. In: Isaias, Pedro; Karmakar, Nitya [Hrsg.]: Proceedings

of ICWI2003, S. 361 - 368, IADIS International Conference

WWW/Internet 2003, Algarve, Portugal, 2003-11-05 - 2003-11-08,

ISBN 972-98947-1-X

Strang, Thomas; Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia; Frank, Korbinian (2003):

Applications of a Context Ontology Language. In: IEEE - COMSOC

[Hrsg.]: Proceedings of SoftCOM 2003, S. 14 - 18, 11th

International Conference on Software, Telecommunications and

Computer Networks (SoftCOM 2003), Split, Dubrovnik, Croatia and

Ancona, Venice, Italy, 2003-10-07 - 2003-10-10, ISBN 953-6114-

64-X

Strang, Thomas; Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia; Roeckl, Matthias (2003):

Highlevel Service Handover through a Contextual Framework. In:

Kaefer, Johannes; Zuendt, Maximilian [Hrsg.]: Proceedings of the

8th summit on Mobile Multimedia and Communications, Center for

Digital Technology and Management (CDTM), S. 405 - 410, 8th

International Workshop on Mobile Multimedia Communications

(MoMuC 2003), Munich, Germany, 2003-10-05 - 2003-10-08, ISBN

3-9808842-9-5

Strang, Thomas (2003): Invited Talk: Service Interoperabilität in

Ubiquitous Computing Umgebungen. Wissenschaftliches

Colloquium, Munich, Germany, 2003-07-24

Strang, Thomas; Steingaß, Alexander (2003): Einrichtung zur

242


Navigation einer Person in unbekanntem Terrain, insbesondere in

Gebäuden, unter Zuhilfenahme einer Karte. Deutsches Zentrum für

Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V. DE 101 47 691 C 1

Strang, Thomas (2003): Invited Talk: Trends in Mobile Computing -

From Mobile Phone to Context-Aware Service Platform. 38. DFN

Betriebstagung, Berlin, Germany, 2003-03-04 - 2003-03-04

Strang, Thomas; Linnhoff-Popien, Claudia (2003): Service

Interoperabilität auf Kontextebene (Contextual Service

Interoperability). In: Proceedings of XMIDX2003, Lecture Notes in

Informatics (LNI), P-24, GI e.V., S. 95 - 102, Workshop XML-

Technologien für Middleware / Middleware für XML-

Anwendungen, Berlin/Germany, 2003-02-17 - 2003-02-18, ISBN 3-

88579-353-9, ISSN 1617-5468Strang, Thomas (2003): Towards

Autonomous Services for Smart Mobile Devices. In: Chen, Ming-

Syan; Chrysanthis, Panos K.; Sloman, Morris; Zaslavsky, Arkady

[Hrsg.]: Proceedings of MDM 2003, “Lecture Notes in Computer

Science”, LNCS 2574, Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, S. 279 - 293,

4th International Conference on Mobile Data Management,

Melbourne, Australia, 2003-01-21 - 2003-01-24, ISBN 3-540-00393-

2, ISSN 0302-9743

Strang, Thomas; Linnhof-Popien, Claudia (2003): Service

Interoperability on Context Level in Ubiquitous Computing

Environments. In: Proceedings, International Conference on

Advances in Infrastructure for Electronic Business, Education,

Science, Medicine, and Mobile Technologies on the Internet,

L'Aquila, Italy, 2003-01-06 - 2003-01-12, ISBN 88-85280-75-7

Strang, Thomas (2003): Technischer Bericht IB 554-03/02:

Vergleich von Wissensmodellen., IB 554-03/02

Sakarelis, Ioannis; Strang, Thomas; Dorsch, Thaddaeus; Robertson,

Patrick (2002): Contract Based Late Security Binding. In: VDE

[Hrsg.]: Proceedings of EURESCOM Summit 2002, EURESCOM

Summit 2002, Heidelberg/Germany, 21 - 24 October 2002,

Heidelberg/Germany

Angermann, Michael; Kammann, Jens; Kühndel, Frank; Robertson,

Patrick; Strang, Thomas; Wendlandt, Kai (2002): The Heywow

System for Location Based Services: Combining Navigation,

Distributed Services and Intelligent Mobile Devices., VDE VDE -

Kongress Networlds, Dresden, Germany, 2002-10-01

Strang, Thomas (2002): Towards Autonomous Context-Aware

Services for Smart Mobile Devices. Wissenschaftliches Colloquium,

243


München, 2002-03-12

Angermann, Michael; Kammann, Jens; Kühndel, Frank; Robertson,

Patrick; Strang, Thomas; Wendlandt, Kai (2002): Ortsbezogene

mobile Dienste über heterogene Netze - Teil 1.

Nachrichtentechnische Zeitschrift, 55 (4), NTZ

Angermann, Michael; Kammann, Jens; Kühndel, Frank; Robertson,

Patrick; Strang, Thomas; Wendlandt, Kai (2002): Ortsbezogene

mobile Dienste über heterogene Netze - Teil 2.

Nachrichtentechnische Zeitschrift, 55 (5), NTZ

Strang, Thomas; Meyer, Melanie (2002): Agent-Environment for

Small Mobile Devices. In: HPOVUA - HP OpenView University

Association [Hrsg.]: HPOVUA: Electronic Proceedings, 9th HP

OpenView University Association (HP-OVUA) Workshop, June 11-

13, 2002 - via video conference, multiplace video conference

Strang, Thomas (2001): Invited Talk: Heywow - Eine innovative

Plattform für Mobile Dienste. Wissenschaftliches Kolloquium des

DLR, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany, 2001-09-17

Wendlandt, Kai; Kammann, Jens; Strang, Thomas (2001): Mobile

services over short range communication. In: Proceedings of

Commercial Radio Sensor and Communication Technology

Workshop, Universitätsverlag Rudolf Trauner (Linz), CRSCT01,

Linz, Austria, 2001-08-23

Strang, Thomas (2001): Technical Report: Bluetooth integration into

CLDC/MIDP., DLR-IB 554-01/06, 8 S.

Angermann, Michael; Kammann, Jens; Robertson, Patrick; Steingaß,

Alexander; Strang, Thomas (2001): Software Representation for

Heterogeneous Data Sources Within A Probabilistic Framework. In:

Proceedings LOCELLUS 2001, International Symposium on

Location Based Services for Cellular Users, Munich/Germany, Feb.

2001, München

Angermann, Michael; Kammann, Jens; Robertson, Patrick;

Steingass, Alexander; Strang, Thomas (2001): Software

Representation for Heterogeneous Location Data Sources Within A

Probabilistic Framework. In: Proceedings, International Symposium

on Location Based Services for Cellular Users, Munich, Germany,

Feb 2001

Angermann, Michael; Kammann, Jens; Strang, Thomas (2001): Eine

Plattform für den M-Commerce. Technik in Bayern, Januar 2001,

Verein Deutscher Ingenieure, S. 18

244


Dorsch, Thaddaeus; Robertson, Patrick; Sakarelis, Ioannis; Strang,

Thomas; Schiek, Ulrich (2001): Security Aspects of the Multimedia

Car Platform. In: HHI [Hrsg.]: Workshop on Multiradio Multimedia

Communications (MMC 2001), Workshop on Multiradio

Multimedia Communications, Berlin, 22. - 23. November 2001,

Berlin

Strang, Thomas; Angermann, Michael (2000): Invited Talk:

Heywow - A service platform for the needs of people on the move.

5th Jini Community Meeting, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2000-

12-10 - 2000-12-11

245


7. Beyond Research: Teaching, Business Development, and General Mangement

The following section adds further activities of DERI beyond its focus on research. These

activities are related to teaching, business development, and general management

7.1 Teaching

7.1.1. General Description

DERI is incorporated in the faculty of Mathematics, Computer Science and Physics

(MIP) as the counterpart of the Institute of Computer Science (IFI) since January 2006.

According to the organizational structure of the University of Innsbruck, DERI is a

Research Institute which implies a shift of the trichotomy of research, teaching and

administration of a regular institute towards a focus on research.

However, DERI commits itself to contribute to teaching for several reasons, including the

fact that only a substantiated education will lead to qualified researchers in the future.

Furthermore, teaching is a first class opportunity to effectively transfer the knowledge

gained in academic research into the companies eventually hiring students when they

reached their degrees, which is exactly the objective of the support programmes of the

“Tiroler Zukunftstiftung” and TransIT.

As of August 2006, the following DERI employees have teaching duties according to

their contract who contribute on all levels of teaching (Bachelor Program, Master

Program, PhD Program).

Teaching

Name

Dieter Fensel

Thomas Strang

Michal Zaremba 3

Reto Krummenacher

Ioan Toma

Dumitru Roman

Francois Scharffe

Professor

Professor

0.5 K1

K2

K2

K2

K2

On top of that, the following DERI employees offer or have recently offered lectures to

UIBK students as freelancers which is awarded by the institute of computer science in

particular because of their expertise in the field of their lectures.

3 contract to be given to Ying Ding with start of WS 2006/2007 in October 2006

246


Freelancers

Name

Martin Hepp

Ying Ding

David O`Sullivan (DERI Galway)

Jos de Bruijn

Jacek Kopecky

Cristina Feier

A recent development with strong impact to teaching will be the introduction of new

curricula which are expected to become effective in WS 2007/2008. The Curriculum

Committee, where DERI was also represented, has been taking this opportunity to

completely revise the bachelor and master curricula. A few key points of the new

curricula are

• a common first semester for all bachelor students in MIP

• only one Bachelor thesis instead of two

• Master program will be no longer organized in streams (one stream per

group), but in modules

Beside the Bachelor and Master curricula, DERI is also involved in defining and

establishing a new master course in Information Systems (“Wirtschaftsinformatik'”) at

the Innsbruck University School of Management.

Most of our PhD students and all of the PostDocs provide supervision of bachelor 4 and

master theses.

Bachelor and Master Theses

Title Tutor Student Type Status

Web Data

Extraction and

Reconditioning

Reasoning with

Ontologies

Semantic

frameworks for

Grid and Web

Services

Reasoning with

Ontologies

Survey on Web

Service Discovery

Holger Lausen Alex Stolz Bachelor Completed

Uwe Keller Doris Silbernagl Bachelor Completed

Ioan Toma Stefan Pröll Bachelor Completed

Uwe Keller

Uwe Keller

Christoph

Steinach

Andreas

Parschalk

Bachelor Completed

Bachelor Completed

4 According to the current computer science curriculum, each student has to submit 2 Bachelor theses and 1

Master thesis

247


WSMX Axel Polleres Thomas

Haselwanter

Wikis und Blogs Axel Polleres Manuela

Weitlanter

AI Planning and Axel Polleres Hannes

Web Services

Tammerle

AI Planning and Axel Polleres Britta

Web Services

Tautermann

Web Service Holger Lausen Katharina

Development

Siorpaes

Bachelor Completed

Bachelor Completed

Bachelor Completed

Bachelor Completed

Bachelor Completed

A survey on Web

Service

Composition

Katharina

Siorpaes

Bachelor Completed

A survey on Web

Service

Composition

Kathrin Prantner

Bachelor Completed

Transactions and

Flow in Web

Services

Dynamic website

and communication

efforts

Comparison of

Web Service

Development

Environments

Inferencing and

Reasoning with

Ontology Web

Language (OWL)

Web Service for

XIMS

Dumitru Roman Uzochukwu Ejike Bachelor Completed

Axel Polleres Stefan Kirchmair Bachelor Completed

Holger Lausen Stefan Brugger Bachelor Completed

Holger Lausen Michael Felderer Bachelor Completed

Holger Lausen

Britta

Tautermann

Bachelor Completed

248


Ubiquitous

Computing vs.

Privatsphäre am

Beispiel von

Location Based

Services

WSML-DL

Reasoner

Thomas Strang Melanie Plattner Bachelor Completed

Holger Lausen

Nathalie

Steinmetz

Bachelor Completed

Combining First-

Order Logic and

Logic Programs

Semantic Web and

e-Tourism:

Investigating

opportunities and

downfalls of

applying Semantic

Web technology in

e-tourism

Location-based

Authentication for

Mobile Devices

Jos de Bruijn Michael Felderer Master Completed

Ying Ding

Katharina

Siorpaes

Master

Completed

Thomas Strang Matthias Pressnig Bachelor Assigned

Social Network

Analyzer

Thomas Stang

Daniel

Bachlechner

Bachelor Assigned

Visualizing WSML

using an UML

Profile

Holger Lausen Martin Tanler Bachelor Assigned

Online Evaluation

System

Thomas Strang

Benedikt

Pfurtscheller

Bachelor Assigned

Online Evaluation

System