Semantic Annotation for Process Models: - Department of Computer ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

44 CHAPTER 3. STATE OF THE ART 3.2.6 OWL-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services OWL-S is a language for specifying the Web service ontology, based on OWL, which augments current Web services architecture with semantic metadata [186]. The motivations of the applications of OWL-S are automatic Web services discovery, automatic Web services invocation and automatic Web service composition and interoperation [198]. Three essential types of knowledge about a service can be described with OWL- S: advertising information for prospective clients by ServiceProfile, process model by ServiceModel, and transport protocols by ServiceGrounding. A process represented by the ServiceModel is a specification of the ways that a client may interact with a service. The process ontology is a set of concepts and relationships which are used to represent a ServiceModel. The process ontology modeled in OWL classes, properties and axioms is shown in Figure 3.7. Figure 3.7: The process ontology of OWL-S [198] In the process ontology of OWL-S, the operational/functional perspective is represented through process classes, parameter classes, their subclasses, and their relations. Distinguished subclasses of process — atomic process, simple process and composite process depict the structural perspective. A set of control constructs connecting processes support the control perspective. The organizational perspective is included by specifying the class participant in a process. The data transaction perspective is implicitly represented through the effect (the class result) of a process. The resources perspective is not specified in the process ontology although it might be inferred by
3.2. SEMANTIC INTEROPERABILITY AND PROCESS ONTOLOGIES 45 linking the parameters to a resource class which is defined separately from the process ontology. The Intelligent Software Agents Lab at Carnegie Mellon University has played a critical role in the development of OWL-S from its very conception. In addition, the Softagent Group has also developed the most complete and integrated set of OWL-S development tools, the OWL-S IDE. However, OWL-S is criticized to suffer conceptual ambiguity, lack concise axiomatization, be designed too loosely and offer an overly narrow view on Web services [106]. 3.2.7 WSMO (Web Service Modeling Ontology) WSMO is a conceptual model for describing various aspects related to Semantic Web services. The objective of WSMO and its accompanying efforts is to solve the application integration problem for Web services by defining a coherent technology for Semantic Web services [210]. WSMO provides ontological specifications for the core elements of Semantic Web services. The representation of WSMO follows the MOF (Meta-Object Facility) [124] specification, and the MOF constructs Class, sub-Class, Attributes and type are used in the definition of WSMO. Every construct of WSMO is called a WSMO element. There are five top-level elements: annotations, ontologies, Web services, goals and mediators. WSMO does not contain the constructs to represent any of the process perspectives, but only provide interface to describe the functionality of the Web service. A twofold view on the operational competence of the Web service is provided: choreography decomposes a capability in terms of interaction within the Web service; orchestration decomposes a capability in terms of functionality required form other Web services. The process of Web services composition is excluded from WSMO. Another important feature of WSMO is that it introduces the elements Goal and Mediator. Goal can represent an objective of the execution of a Web service. Mediator is exploited to overcome interoperability problems between different WSMO elements. For example, a wgMediator (Web service to goal Mediator) links Web services to goals, indicating that the Web service (totally or partially) fulfills the goal to which it is linked. Such a mediator may explicitly state the difference between the two entities and map different vocabularies through the use of ooMediators (ontology to ontology Mediators) [209]. 3.2.8 POP* (Process, Organization, Product and others) POP* methodology is one of the research contributions of the EU project ATHENA [139]. The overall objective of ATHENA is to enable enterprise to seamlessly interoperate with others. The POP* methodology aims to develop a set of core modeling methodology elements for capturing collaborative enterprises design and management. It offers a model exchange device by providing a common format along with a mapping methodology to define the mappings from the various enterprise modeling languages to the common format. The POP* methodology includes a common format as the exchange format — the POP* meta-model containing a set of basic modeling constructs. There are five dimensions included in POP*, namely the Process, Organization, Product, Decision and Infrastructure dimensions [138].
Page 1 and 2:
Yun Lin Semantic Annotation for Pro
Page 3:
To MY BELOVED HUSBAND HAO DING AND
Page 6 and 7:
ii The proposed approach has been i
Page 8 and 9:
iv CONTENTS 3 State of the Art 31 3
Page 10 and 11:
vi CONTENTS 7.5.2 Semantic reasonin
Page 12 and 13:
viii CONTENTS H PSAM Annotation Res
Page 14 and 15: x LIST OF FIGURES 6.1 System module
Page 16 and 17: xii LIST OF FIGURES
Page 18 and 19: xiv LIST OF TABLES
Page 20 and 21: xvi PREFACE My tremendous gratitude
Page 23 and 24: Chapter 1 Introduction Business pro
Page 25 and 26: 1.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RESEARCH
Page 27 and 28: 1.4. APPROACH AND SCOPE 7 1.4.1 Sem
Page 29 and 30: 1.6. MAJOR CONTRIBUTIONS 9 1.6 Majo
Page 31 and 32: Chapter 2 Problem Setting In this c
Page 33 and 34: Figure 2.1: Zachman Enterprise Arch
Page 35 and 36: 2.2. MODELING BASIS 15 meta-model o
Page 37 and 38: 2.3. INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND SEMANT
Page 43 and 44: 2.4. SEMANTIC INTEROPERABILITY 23 3
Page 45 and 46: 2.5. BUSINESS PROCESS MODEL 25 2.5
Page 47 and 48: 2.6. PROCESS KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT 2
Page 49 and 50: 2.7. SUMMARY 29 • Creation or imp
Page 51 and 52: Chapter 3 State of the Art This cha
Page 53 and 54: 3.1. PROCESS MODELING LANGUAGES 33
Page 55 and 56: 3.1. PROCESS MODELING LANGUAGES 35
Page 57 and 58: Table 3.1: Modeling constructs of d
Page 59 and 60: 3.2. SEMANTIC INTEROPERABILITY AND
Page 61 and 62: 3.2. SEMANTIC INTEROPERABILITY AND
Page 63: 3.2. SEMANTIC INTEROPERABILITY AND
Page 67 and 68: Representation primitives Process P
Page 69 and 70: 3.3. GOAL MODELING 49 From the surv
Page 71 and 72: 3.4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION METHODS AN
Page 79 and 80: 3.6. SUMMARY 59 In the goal modelin
Page 81: Part II Design and Application 61
Page 84 and 85: 64 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
Page 104 and 105: 84 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION proce
Page 106 and 107: 86 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION in a
Page 108 and 109: 88 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION • i
Page 110 and 111: 90 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION 5.5 G
Page 112 and 113: 92 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION
Page 114 and 115:
94 CHAPTER 6. PRO-SEAT (PROCESS SEM
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
100 CHAPTER 6. PRO-SEAT (PROCESS SE
Page 122 and 123:
102 CHAPTER 6. PRO-SEAT (PROCESS SE
Page 124 and 125:
104 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 149 and 150:
Chapter 8 Quality Evaluation of the
Page 151 and 152:
8.2. SETTING FOR THE QUALITY EVALUA
Page 153 and 154:
8.2. SETTING FOR THE QUALITY EVALUA
Page 155 and 156:
8.3. QUALITY ANALYSIS 135 to those
Page 157 and 158:
8.3. QUALITY ANALYSIS 137 annotatio
Page 159 and 160:
8.3. QUALITY ANALYSIS 139 • G1 -
Page 161 and 162:
8.5. SUMMARY 141 3. Semantic annota
Page 163 and 164:
Chapter 9 Validation of Applicabili
Page 165 and 166:
9.1. VALIDATION DESIGN 145 - RE3.3
Page 167 and 168:
9.2. SWRL FORMULATION 147 Table 9.1
Page 169 and 170:
9.2. SWRL FORMULATION 149 RE3.2 RE3
Page 171 and 172:
9.3. APPLICABILITY VALIDATION IN AN
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
9.4. DISCUSSION ON RESULTS OF THE V
Page 181 and 182:
9.4. DISCUSSION ON RESULTS OF THE V
Page 183:
Part IV Synopsis 163
Page 186 and 187:
166 CHAPTER 10. CONCLUSIONS AND FUT
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 193 and 194:
Appendix A BPMN This chapter presen
Page 195 and 196:
A.3. CONNECTING OBJECTS 175 Figure
Page 197 and 198:
A.6. BPMN META-MODEL TREE IN METIS
Page 199 and 200:
Appendix B EEML 2005 The language v
Page 201 and 202:
B.2. RECOURSES MODELING DOMAIN 181
Page 203 and 204:
Appendix C SCOR SCOR — Supply Cha
Page 205 and 206:
C.2. LEVEL 2 TOOLKIT 185 Level 1 Me
Page 207 and 208:
C.3. LEVEL 3 PROCESS ELEMENTS 187 F
Page 209 and 210:
Appendix D Algorithm for Semi-Autom
Page 211 and 212:
191 Algorithm 1 Goal Annotation Alg
Page 213 and 214:
Algorithm 4 Goal Annotation Algorit
Page 215 and 216:
195 Algorithm 6 Goal Annotation Alg
Page 217 and 218:
Appendix E GUI of Pro-SEAT The prop
Page 219 and 220:
199 Figure E.3: Mapping meta-model
Page 221 and 222:
201 Figure E.5: Goal annotation UI
Page 223 and 224:
Appendix F Analysis of the Annotati
Page 225 and 226:
F.2. INTEGRATION APPLICATION BASED
Page 227 and 228:
F.2. INTEGRATION APPLICATION BASED
Page 229 and 230:
Appendix G Schema of PSAM and SWRL
Page 231 and 232:
G.1. PSAM IN OWL 211
Page 233 and 234:
G.2. RULE DEFINITIONS IN SWRL 213
Page 235 and 236:
G.2. RULE DEFINITIONS IN SWRL 215
Page 237 and 238:
Appendix H Annotation Results in Ex
Page 239 and 240:
H.2. ANNOTATION OF PM B1 219 xmlns:
Page 241 and 242:
H.3. ANNOTATION OF PM B2 221 Av
Page 243 and 244:
Bibliography [1] ALTOVA. What is th
Page 245 and 246:
BIBLIOGRAPHY 225 [26] Dov Dori. Why
Page 247 and 248:
BIBLIOGRAPHY 227 [52] Ian Horrocks.
Page 249 and 250:
BIBLIOGRAPHY 229 [78] John Krogstie
Page 251 and 252:
BIBLIOGRAPHY 231 [102] Diana Maynar
Page 253 and 254:
BIBLIOGRAPHY 233 [129] OASIS Cover
Page 255 and 256:
BIBLIOGRAPHY 235 [157] Colette Roll
Page 257 and 258:
BIBLIOGRAPHY 237 [185] Systems Thin
Page 259:
BIBLIOGRAPHY 239 [214] John.A. Zach
show all

Semantic Annotation for Process Models: - Department of Computer ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?