1. Using Common Sense Reasoning to Enable the Semantic Web Sakda Chaiworawitkul, Alex Faaborg

2. Introduction The generally accepted user interface for the Semantic Web is an agent capable of natural language processing… Hey funky blue head, go buy me concert tickets!

3. Introduction In our proposal, we had a mock screen shot of a fail soft design:

4. Introduction Our project is a hybrid of both approaches

5. Introduction We have built an IE explorer bar capable of two way communication with the user You talk to it It talks to you

6. Part 1: Searching Web Services You talk to it Using Common Sense Reasoning for Query Expansion

7. Common-sense in Locating Web Service Problems WS is projected to be ubiquitous within this 10 years Locating web services can fall to the same pitfall as searching for web resources “Getting what I really want” is no longer an easy task Traditional keyword search technique cannot fulfill the needs Example: What is the population of Bulgaria? * Tourism Bulgaria (1999): 8.5 million (no date) Memory Government slide presentation (no date) 8,948,649 (1985 census), govt est 8,989,172 (1990) est expected to be wrong CIA Fact Book: 7,705,945 (July 2001 est) European Union (no date): Approx 8 million World Bank (no date) Population: 8 million (2000) Gazetteer 8487.3 (1992) 7973.7 (2001) 7946 (2003) *Adopted from Goble, C. (presentation at 1 st European Summer School on Ontological Engineering and the Semantic Web (SSSW – 2003) – Cercedilla, Spain

8. Common-sense in Locating Web Service How common-sense helps? Get related context from the input search query Expand the search query more efficiently than keyword matching (With high potential) The search result is well-customized to the user – if you have local-level or personal-level common-sense Where is the opportunity to approach? Metadata, metadata, & metadata WS is SELF-DESCRIBED (Web Service Description Language: WSDL) and can be published through UDDI (Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration)Web Service Description Language: WSDLUniversal Description, Discovery, and Integration These features are standardized Both standards allow WS to be annotated for querying!! So we have a repository which is dumb but we have to use them SMARTLY This is where the common-sense comes to play

9. Overview of our approach Common-sense Expand Common-sense in Locating Web Service

10. Only Expansion is enough Common-sense in Locating Web Service Users should be acknowledged of from where the services are selected and how The WSs that match users need should be able to use at hand  No need to go there and invoke them manually The resulting WSs may not be available, users should not be responsible for invoking dead services Common -sense

11. Common-sense in Locating Web Service Common -sense Common-sense  reasonably expand the query NLP: Extract out only parts of query (naïve rules: Verb, Adj, Adv, and Noun) Fail-soft: Use of words extracted from NLP to search OMCS Net: Inference for related context to feed into UDDI

12. Common-sense in Locating Web Service Common -sense Discovery: Polling WSs WSDL Ping WS: Check whether it is alive or not Distinguish ‘alive’ and ‘dead’ WSs on interface

13. Dynamic invocation of service Common-sense in Locating Web Service Common -sense From WSDL, we interrogate and create a proxy object on the fly User chooses the method to invoke  input interface is rendered dynamically The callback is shown to the user on the interface from the proxy object

14. Common-sense in Locating Web Service Demonstration of user interface Search field (Natural language) Search result panel Inference result from OMCS Alive WS (t-model name) Dead WS (t-model name) WS description WSDL URI

15. Common-sense in Locating Web Service Demonstration of user interface Back to search result Methods exposed in the selected WS Input arguments of the selected method (dynamically rendered) Return result from the WS

16. Common-sense in Locating Web Service Issues UDDI is not a strict standard for WS publishing  Many search results are not WSs WSDL standard allows documentation of everything, e.g. web methods, arguments, services  But the current APIs from vendors does not provide a means to do so  Personalized search result for WSs is still difficult Personalize WS search result can possibly be achieved by associating search results with personal or global common-sense However, the issue of whether this feedback should be of global or personal level is to be solved Dynamic composition of WS requires NOT ONLY knowledge of physical world but also those of programming world  type mismatching

17. Part 2: Detecting Tasks It talks to you Using Common Sense Reasoning to Determine Context

18. Detecting Tasks From Spinning the Semantic Web Fensel, Hendler, Lieberman, Wahlster XMLHTML XHTML UPML OWL RDF RDFS Intelligent Services

19. Detecting Tasks It [the agent] will "know" all this without needing artificial intelligence on the scale of 2001's Hal or Star Wars's C-3PO. Instead these semantics were encoded into the Web page when the clinic's office manager (who never took Comp Sci 101) massaged it into shape using off-the-shelf software for writing Semantic Web pages Tim Berners-Lee on the Semantic Web: Scientific American - The Semantic Web

20. Detecting Tasks A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be a utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self- delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. Cory Doctorow on Metadata: http://www.well.com/~doctorow/metacrap.htm

21. Detecting Tasks From Spinning the Semantic Web Fensel, Hendler, Lieberman, Wahlster XMLHTML XHTML UPML OWL RDF RDFS Intelligent Services

22. Detecting Tasks

23. Questions

24. Common-sense in Locating Web Service Appendix: Sample WSDL Document