1. Universität Innsbruck Leopold Franzens  Copyright 2007 DERI Innsbruck www.deri.at Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Semantic Web Services Challenge Srdjan Komazec DERI Innsbruck – University of Innsbruck

2. 2 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Agenda Introduction Working group Methodology Overview of past workshops Latest scenario –Description –UNIFI (ISO 20022) Payments Standard Initiation –Developed artifacts –Case study Conclusions

3. 3 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Introduction Universität Innsbruck Leopold Franzens Technical Fair  Copyright 2006 DERI Innsbruck www.deri.at Semantic Web Service Challenge December 11 th, 2007

4. 4 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Introduction The goal –To develop a common understanding of various technologies intended to facilitate the automation of mediation, choreography, discovery and composition for SWS The intent –To explore trade-offs among existing approaches –To discover uncovered parts of problem space –To provide a forum for discussion based on common application

5. 5 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Working group Universität Innsbruck Leopold Franzens Technical Fair  Copyright 2006 DERI Innsbruck www.deri.at Semantic Web Service Challenge December 11 th, 2007

6. 6 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Working group Leader –Michal Zaremba Members –Omair Shafiq –Graham Hench –Srdjan Komazec

7. 7 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Methodology Universität Innsbruck Leopold Franzens Technical Fair  Copyright 2006 DERI Innsbruck www.deri.at Semantic Web Service Challenge December 11 th, 2007

8. 8 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Methodology Each workshop treats some part of SWS problem space based on “real world” scenario. A scenario consists of –description of its purpose and details, and evaluation details, –set of real Web Services, –a means to control objectivity if a solution fulfills the scenario description, and –test case that proofs the task can be fulfilled (i.e. a sample solution).

9. 9 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Methodology SWS Challenge Levels Provided set of challenge problems Problems build upon initial problem with added –General level problems –Complexity level problems LevelDescription 0Mediation Scenario (static) 1Mediation Scenario (adopting to changes in systems) 1aData Mediation 1bProcess Mediation 2 Simple Discovery (single invocation based on service description) 2aShipment coverage (countries, cities semantics) 2bShipment price and weight calculations (arithmetic) 2c Shipment constraints on pick-up time and delivery (temporal semantics) 2dShipment unit conversion (semantics of measures) 3 Composite Discovery (multiple invocations required for complete discovery) 3a discovery 2 including request for quote and a order operation 3b discovery 3a including a request for multiple packages that has to be split 3cdiscovery 3b including a dynamic currency conversion Table 1 – SWS Challenge Levels

10. 10 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Methodology Evaluation Criteria Level of success Description 0 Minimal and automatically determined by system. The system adequately invokes the requisite web services measured by legality of messages exchanged. 1 Whether the code had to be changed. 2 Only data had to be changed. 3 There were no change to the system at all. Table 2 – Evaluation Criteria Table

11. 11 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Methodology Each team submission’s claims are evaluated by having the workshop participants mutually examine the code changes of the submission. Submissions are ranked by difficulty of moving from one problem level or sub-level to another. All solutions are documented and participants are encouraged to ”steal” from each other in order to understand which approaches work best for what kind of problems.

12. 12 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Overview of past workshops Universität Innsbruck Leopold Franzens Technical Fair  Copyright 2006 DERI Innsbruck www.deri.at Semantic Web Service Challenge December 11 th, 2007

13. 13 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Overview of past workshops Workshops WorkshopDateObjective StanfordMarch 2006 Focus on interoperability problems of existing systems with the aim to show how semantic Web technologies can help to overcome the need for manual development of mediation systems. BudvaJune 2006 Introduces changes in description of previous scenario in order to investigate extend and kind of changes in a corresponding solution which are evaluated [1] according to the evaluation criteria [2]. [1] [2] AthensNovember 2006 Explores and evaluates different solutions for the Web Service discovery problem [3]. [3] InnsbruckJune 2007 Introduces competing preferences and simple compositions to the discovery problem [4]. [4] StanfordNovember 2007 Tackles the Web Service composition [1] [1] http://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Workshop_Budva#Evaluationhttp://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Workshop_Budva#Evaluation [2] [2] http://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/SWS_Challenge_Levelshttp://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/SWS_Challenge_Levels [3] [3] http://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Workshop_Athenshttp://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Workshop_Athens [4] [4] http://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Workshop_Innsbruckhttp://sws-challenge.org/wiki/index.php/Workshop_Innsbruck Table 3 – Workshops

14. 14 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Overview of past workshops Participants and results Table Evaluation Results Problem Level PoliMi - Cefriel DERI AT& DERI IEFSU Jena University of Dortmund LSDIS Labs IBM - Max Maximilien 0: Static mediation√√√√√ 1a: Changes data mediation√√√√√ 1b: Changes process mediation√√√√√ 1c: Mediation/integration for payment authorization√√√ 2a: Discovery based on Destination√√√√ 2b: Discovery based on Destination and Weight√√√√ 2c: Discovery based on Destination, Weight and Price√√√√ 2d: Discovery involving simple composition√√ 2e: Discovery including temporal reasoning√√ 3a: Discovery based on clear defined product specifications - Goal A1√√√ 3a: Discovery based on clear defined product specifications - Goal A2√√√ 3b: Discovery 3B - Additionally specify preferences - Goal B1√√√ 3b: Discovery 3B - Additionally specify preferences - Goal B2√ 3c: Discovery 3C Composition of services - Goal C1 (unrelated composition)√√√ 3c: Discovery 3C Composition of services - Goal C2 (correlated composition)√ 3c: Discovery 3C Composition of services - Goal C3 (unrelated but global condition) √√ 3c: Discovery 3C Composition of services - Goal C4 (unrelated with global condition and preferences) √√ Table 4 – Participants and results

15. 15 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Latest scenario Universität Innsbruck Leopold Franzens Technical Fair  Copyright 2006 DERI Innsbruck www.deri.at Semantic Web Service Challenge December 11 th, 2007

16. 16 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Latest scenario Description Extension of Purchase Order Mediation scenario Primary goal is to investigate use of various technologies intended to facilitate the automation of service compositions in the context of dynamic environment behavior Scenario also includes –Data Mediation –Process Mediation

17. 17 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Latest scenario Description Figure 1 – Scenario overview

18. 18 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Latest scenario UNIFI (ISO 20022) Payments Standard Initiation UNIversal Financial Industry message scheme Supported by major players in the market (SWIFT, TWIST, etc.) Should bridge the gap between RossettaNet enabled systems and financial institutions Payments Standards – Initiation – describes a set of Payments Initiation messages like –Customer Credit Transfer Initiation message –Payment Status Report

19. 19 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Latest scenario UNIFI (ISO 20022) Payments Standard Initiation Comes from RossettaNet Focus of scenario Figure 2 – Scenario supported by UNIFI Payments Standard - Initiation

20. 20 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Latest scenario UNIFI (ISO 20022) Payments Standard Initiation CustomerCreditTransferInitiationV02 - sent by the initiating party to the debtor agent. It is used to request movement of funds from the debtor account to a creditor account. PaymentStatusReportV02 - sent by an instructed agent to the previous party in the payment chain. It is used to inform this party about the positive or negative status of an instruction.

21. 21 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Latest scenario Developed artifacts The scenario implementation consists of a number of software artifacts under the test bed umbrella: –supporting database relations, –Web Service implementations, –web pages for testing and managing services and participant solutions, and –implementation of dummy integrator (hardcoded, without intelligent behavior which relies on semantic annotations).

22. 22 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Latest scenario Case Study MsgId:token_123456 Amount:2560 requestId:token_123456 AccountNumber: IE29AIBK93115212345678 SwiftCode:AB10009 CurrencyCode:EUR AuthorizationCode: nil ResponseCode:AUTHREQUIRED AuthorizationCode: AB123456 ResponseCode:PROCESSED FirstName:Arnold LastName:Black ResponseCode:ACCEPTED PaymentStatusCode:PI_ACCEPTED

23. 23 Technical Fair December 11th, 2007 Conclusions Identified problems –Methodology –Infrastructure and support Web Service infrastructure Collaboration infrastructure Evaluation and debug infrastructure New scenarios needed!!!