This Article 
   
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Experimentation with Local Consensus Ontologies with Implications for Automated Service Composition
July 2005 (vol. 17 no. 7)
pp. 969-981
Agent technologies represent a promising approach for the integration of interorganizational capabilities across distributed, networked environments. However, knowledge sharing interoperability problems can arise when agents incorporating differing ontologies try to synchronize their internal information. Moreover, in practice, agents may not have a common or global consensus ontology that will facilitate knowledge sharing and integration of functional capabilities. We propose a method to enable agents to develop a local consensus ontology during operation time as needed. By identifying similarities in the ontologies of their peer agents, a set of agents can discover new concepts/relations and integrate them into a local consensus ontology on demand. We evaluate this method, both syntactically and semantically, when forming local consensus ontologies with and without the use of a lexical database. We also report on the effects when several factors, such as the similarity measure, the relation search level depth, and the merge order, are varied. Finally, experimenting in the domain of agent-supported Web service composition, we demonstrate how our method allows us to successfully autonomously form service-oriented local consensus ontologies.

[1] R.E. Anderson, “Social Impacts of Computing: Codes of Professional Ethics,” Social Science Computing Rev., vol. 2, pp. 453-469, 1992.
[2] M.B. Blake, “Agent-Oriented Compositions Approaches to Service-Base Cross-Organizational Workflow,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 40, no. 1, pp 31-50, July 2005.
[3] M.B. Blake, “B2B Electronic Commerce: Where Do Agents Fit In?,” Proc. AAAI-2002 Workshop Agent Technologies for B2B E-Commerce, pp. 1-8, July 2002.
[4] M.B. Blake, “An Agent-Based Cross-Organizational Workflow Architecture in Support of Web Services,” Proc. WETICE2002: The 2002 Workshops Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises, pp. 176-182, 2002.
[5] H. Chapulsky, E. Hovy, and T. Russ, Progress on an Automatic Ontology Alignment Methodology. ANSI Ad Hoc Group on Ontology Standards, 1997.
[6] P. Ciancarini, R. Tolksdorf, and F. Zambonelli, “Coordination Middleware for XML-Centric Applications,” Proc. 16th ACM Symp. Applied Computing, Mar. 2002.
[7] K. Decker, K. Sycara, and M. Williamson, “Middle-Agents for the Internet,” Proc. 15th Int'l Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence, Aug. 1997.
[8] D. Dejing, D. McDermott, and Q. Peishen, “Ontology Translation by Ontology Merging and Automated Reasoning,” Proc. EKAW Workshop Ontologies for Multi-Agent Systems, Sept. 2002.
[9] T. Finin, Y. Labrou, and J. Mayfield, “KQML as an Agent Communication Language,” Software Agents, J. Bradshaw, ed., MIT Press, 1997.
[10] GRAPPA: A Java Graph Package, http://www.research.att.com/johnGrappa/, 2004.
[11] P. Grefen, K. Aberer, Y. Hoffner, and H. Ludwig, “CrossFlow: Cross-Organizational Workflow Management in Dynamic Virtual Enterprises,” Int'l J. Computer Systems Science & Eng., vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 277-290, 2000.
[12] T. Gruber, “The Role of Common Ontology in Achieving Sharable, Reusable Knowledge Bases,” Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proc. Second Int'l Conf., J.A. Allen, R. Fikes, and E. Sandewall, eds., pp. 601-602, Cambridge, Mass.: Morgan Kauffman, 1991.
[13] D. Haverkamp and S. Gauch, “Intelligent Information Agents: Review and Challenges for Distributed Information Sources,” J. Soc. for Information Science, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 304-311, Apr. 1998.
[14] G. Kiczales, J. Lamping, A. Mendhekar, C. Maeda, C.V. Lopes, J. Loingtier, and J. Irwin, “Aspect-Oriented Programming,” Proc. European Conf. Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP), June 1997.
[15] D. Kotz and R.S. Gray, “Mobile Agents: The Future of the Internet,” ACM Operating Systems Rev., vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 7-13, Aug. 1999.
[16] I. Levenshtein, “Binary Codes Capable of Correcting Deletions, Insertions, and Reversals,” Cybernetics and Control Theory, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 707-710, 1966.
[17] A. Maedche and S. Staab, “Comparing Ontologies— Similarity Measures and a Comparison Study,” Inst. AIFB, Univ. Karlsruhe, internal report, 2001.
[18] D. McDermott, M. Burstein, and D. Smith, “Overcoming Ontology Mismatches in Transactions with Self-Describing Service Agents,” Proc. Int'l Semantic Web Workshop, July 2001.
[19] D. McGuinness, “Conceptual Modeling for Distributed Ontology Environments,” Proc. Eighth Int'l Conf. Conceptual Structures Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues (ICCS 2000), Aug. 2000.
[20] S.A. McIlraith, T.C. Son, and H. Zeng, “Semantic Web Services,” IEEE Intelligent Systems, pp. 46-53, 2001.
[21] G.A. Miller, “WordNet: A Lexical Database for English,” Comm. ACM, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 39-41, 1995.
[22] N. Noy and M. Musen, “PROMPT: Algorithm and Tool for Automated Ontology Merging and Alignment,” Proc. 17th Nat'l Conf. Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000), 2000.
[23] The Penman Project, “The Penman Documentation,” technical report, USC/Information Sciences Inst., Marina del Rey, Calif., 1989.
[24] N.M. Sadeh, D.W. Hildum, and D. Kjenstad, “Agent-Based E-Supply Chain Decision Support,” J. Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, vol. 13, no. 3, 2003.
[25] SOAP, http://www.w3.org/TRsoap12-part0/, 2004.
[26] L. Stephens and M.N. Huhns, “Consensus Ontologies Reconciling the Semantics of Web Pages and Agents,” IEEE Internet Computing, pp. 92-95, Sept. 2001.
[27] K. Sycara and D. Zeng, “Dynamic Supply Chain Structuring for Electronic Commerce among Agents,” Intelligent Information Agents: Cooperative, Rational and Adaptive Information Gathering on the Internet, M. Klusch, ed., Springer Verlag, 1999.
[28] The DARPA Agent Markup Language Homepage, http:/www.daml.org, 2004.
[29] Universal Description, Discovery and Integration (UDDI), http:/www.uddi.org/, 2004.
[30] W.E. Walsh, M.P. Wellman, and F. Ygge, “Combinatorial Auctions for Supply Chain Formation,” Proc. Second ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce, pp. 260-269, 2000.
[31] Web Services, http://www.w3.org/2002/wsdesc/, 2004.
[32] G. Wiederhold, “An Algebra for Ontology Composition,” Proc. 1994 Monterey Workshop Formal Methods, US Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey Calif., pp. 56-61, Sept. 1994.
[33] A.B. Williams, T. Krygowski, and G. Thomas, “Using Agents to Reach an Ontology Consensus,” Proc. First Int'l Joint Conf. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 2002.
[34] A.B. Williams, A. Padmanabhan, and M.B. Blake, “Local Consensus Ontologies for B2B-Oriented Service Composition,” Proc. Second Int'l Joint Conf. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 2003.
[35] WSDL, http://www.w3.org/TRwsdl, 2004.

Index Terms:
Index Terms- Ontologies in agent-based information systems, agent-mediated electronic commerce.
Citation:
Andrew B. Williams, Anand Padmanabhan, M. Brian Blake, "Experimentation with Local Consensus Ontologies with Implications for Automated Service Composition," IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 969-981, July 2005, doi:10.1109/TKDE.2005.109
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.