MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177132231 · doi:10.5430/air.v5n1p14

Non-deterministic planning methods for automated web service composition

2015· article· en· W2177132231 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Intelligence Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Social FundEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceWeb serviceTask (project management)ImplementationProbabilistic logicVariety (cybernetics)Service (business)Automated planning and schedulingWeb modelingWorld Wide WebSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceSystems engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web service composition (WSC) is the task of generating new composite web services that exhibit functionalities not supported by any single web service. In its simplest form this is achieved by linking existing web services in sequence. More complex forms link services in parallel or use alternative paths. WSC can be considered a planning task, with the web services being the planning operators and the initial state and the goals being provided by the user. Particularly, since web services operate in a stochastic environment, their output is not predictable, and the problem is formulated as a non-deterministic planning one. This article presents a critical, comprehensive and up-to-date review of the literature concerning alternative non-deterministic planning methods, including probabilistic planning, determinization methods, planning in the belief state space and translation based methods. Furthermore, the article reviews existing implementations of WSC systems, employing a variety of planning approaches, and discusses the degree in which the current achievements from the non-deterministic planning field have been adopted successfully. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first review of its kind, one that provides a thorough introduction to the vast area of automated web service composition.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.291
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it