Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two trends are emerging in the World Wide Web (WWW). The first is the proliferation of Web Services -- self-contained, Web-accessible software applications and associated distributed systems architectures. The second is the emergence of the the vision for a next-generation WWW that is computer interpretable. Today's Web was designed primarily for human use. To enable reliable, large-scale automated interoperation of Web services, their properties and capabilities must be understandable to a computer program. In this talk we briefy overview our ongoing work to develop a declarative language for describing Web services on the Semantic Web, contrasting it with emerging industrial Web service and Semantic Web standards. Our declarative representation of Web services enables automation of a wide variety of tasks including Web service discovery, invocation, interoperation, composition, simulation, verification and monitoring.To address the problem of automated Web service composition, we propose automated reasoning techniques based on the notion of generic procedures and customizing user constraint. To this end, we adapt and extend a logic programming language to enable programs that are generic, customizable and usable in the context of the Web. We combine these with deductive synthesis techniques to generate compositions of Web services. Further, we propose logical criteria for these generic procedures that define when they are knowledge self-sufficient and physically self-sufficient. To support information gathering combined with search, we propose a middle-ground interpreter that operates under an assumption of reasonable persistence of key information. Our implemented prototype system is currently interacting with services on the Web.Parts of this work were done in collaboration with Tran Cao Son and Honglei Zeng. The notion of semantic Web services is introduced in [3]. The origins of OWL-S, the OWL (Ontology Web Language) ontology for Web services are described as DAML-S in [1]. Up-to-date work on OWL-S can be found at [5]. Research on automated Web service composition can be found in [3, 2], with research on analysis, simulation and verification of Web services discussed in [4].
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.661 | 0.465 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".