2004
DOI: 10.1080/10864415.2004.11044308
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A System for Principled Matchmaking in an Electronic Marketplace

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
72
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
72
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite many recent works deal with the problem of modeling and inventorying e-services, both from the technical perspective (e.g., [9]) and from the formal one (i.e., [18]), the approaches proposed so far are not entirely satisfactory. Given a knowledge representation language (i.e., a Semantic Web language), it is always possible to build a classification model of available services (a so-called service ontology), but most of such kind of approaches (e.g., [15]) essentially ignore dynamic features. Several planning-based approaches (e.g., [13]) share with our framework the emphasis on the operational nature, but while these ones aim at verifying if the available services are sufficient to achieve a specific goal, we are essentially interested in the characterization of the suitability of a set of available services for a class of abstract goals, not only ground ones.…”
Section: Scenario and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite many recent works deal with the problem of modeling and inventorying e-services, both from the technical perspective (e.g., [9]) and from the formal one (i.e., [18]), the approaches proposed so far are not entirely satisfactory. Given a knowledge representation language (i.e., a Semantic Web language), it is always possible to build a classification model of available services (a so-called service ontology), but most of such kind of approaches (e.g., [15]) essentially ignore dynamic features. Several planning-based approaches (e.g., [13]) share with our framework the emphasis on the operational nature, but while these ones aim at verifying if the available services are sufficient to achieve a specific goal, we are essentially interested in the characterization of the suitability of a set of available services for a class of abstract goals, not only ground ones.…”
Section: Scenario and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A logical subsumes match assures the requester that her acceptable service instances are also acceptable to the provider: kb ∪ S ∪ R |= R S [5]. Prominent examples of monolithic logic-based matchmakers are RACER [13] and MaMaS 4 [14]. Alternatively, structured logic-based profile matching makes additional use of parameterized service descriptions provided by most semantic service description languages such as OWL-S, WSML and SAWSDL.…”
Section: Logic-based Semantic Service Profile Matchingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter introduces the mediator concept (Linche and Schmid, 1998) as an integrated catalogue to mediate the distributed catalogues through a merger called Q-Calculus (i.e., a common product description frame, which is a formal language for description and classification of objects). Modern automated mediation approach often applies technologies of multi-agent systems (e.g., Dani et al, 2007;Gates and Nissen, 2001) and ontology systems (e.g., w3.org/TR/owl-ref/) to construct an e-marketplace as a matchmaking system (e.g., Noia et al, 2003;Veit, 2004) or a brokering system (e.g., Antoniou et al, 2007;Du et al, 2004;Hämäläinen et al, 1996;Segev and Beam, 1999) between various e-business systems. However, mediation systems based on agent and ontology technologies have a serious problem such that the new system is still domain-wide and the activity inference must have fully supported rules, otherwise the semantic consistency cannot be maintained between heterogeneous systems.…”
Section: Semantic Integration Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%