Navigation
A Personalized Approach to Experience-Aware Service Ranking and Selection
A Service Distribution Protocol For Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
A Service Distribution Protocol For Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
Adaptive Portals: Adapting and Recommending Content and Expertise
Adaptive Treemap Based Navigation Through Web Portals
An Extended Analysis of an Interest-Based Service Distribution Protocol for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks
Book Chapter: Comparison: Handling Preferences with DIANE and miAamics
Book Chapter: Semantic Service Discovery with DIANE Service Descriptions
Book Chapter: Service Discovery with SWE-ET and DIANE – An In-depth Comparison By Means of a Common Scenario
Book Chapter: Status, Perspectives, and Lessons Learned
Book Chapter: SWS Challenge Scenarios
Evaluating Semantic Web Service Matchmaking Effectiveness Based on Graded Relevance
On the Empirical Evaluation of Semantic Web Service Approaches: Towards Common SWS Test Collections
On the Evaluation of Semantic Web Service Frameworks
Ontology-Based Multidimensional Personalization Modeling for the Automatic Generation of Mashups in Next-Generation Portals
OPOSSum – An Online Portal to Collect and Share Semantic Service Descriptions
OPOSSum – An Online Portal to Collect and Share SWS Descriptions (Best Demo Award!)
Personalized Recommendation of Related Content Based on Automatic Metadata Extraction
Proceedings of the 20. Workshop on Foundations of Databases (Grundlagen von Datenbanken)
Recommending Background Information and Related Content in Web Portals using Unstructured Data Analysis
Service Availability, Success Ratio, Prevalence, Replica Allocation Correctness, Replication Degree, and Effects of Different Replication/Hibernation Behavior Effects of the Service Distribution Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks -A Detailed Study-
Towards an Automatic Service Composition for Generation of User-Sensitive Mashups
Towards Standard Test Collections for the Empirical Evaluation of Semantic Web Service Approaches
Using Context Information to Evaluate Cooperativeness
W3C SWS Challenge Testbed Incubator Methodology Report
Book Chapter: Comparison: Handling Preferences with DIANE and miAamics
Title: | Book Chapter: Comparison: Handling Preferences with DIANE and miAamics |
---|---|
Authors: | Ulrich Küster, Birgitta König-Ries, Tiziana Margaria, Bernhard Steffen |
Source: | Semantic Web Service Challenge - Results from the First Year; Charles Petrie, Holger Lausen, Michal Zaremba, Tiziana Margaria (Eds.) |
Place: | Semantic Web and Beyond, Vol. 8, Springer, ISBN: 978-0-387-72495-9 |
Date: | 2008-12-01 |
Type: | Book Chapter |
Abstract: |
In this chapter we compare the DIANE and miAamics solutions to service discovery along a specific feature supported by those solutions: preferences. Although quite different in their theoretical and technical background, both techniques have in fact the ability to express user preferences, that are used internally to rank the evaluation results. These preferences are used here to incorporate functional aspects as defined by the SWS Challenge tasks, but they can also be used to express non-functional properties like quality aspects. Here we take a closer look at how preferences are realized in the two different approaches and we briefly compare their profiles. |
File: | SWSCBookChapter16Draft.pdf |
URL: | http://www.springer.com/computer/database+management+&+information+retrieval/book/978-0-387-72495-9 |
BibTex: |
@INCOLLECTION{KKMS08, author = {Ulrich K\"uster and Birgitta K\"onig-Ries and Tiziana Margaria and Bernhard Steffen}, title = {Comparison: Handling Preferences with {DIANE} and {miAamics}}, booktitle = {Semantic Web Service Challenge - Results from the First Year}, publisher = {Springer}, year = {2008}, editor = {Charles Petrie and Holger Lausen and Michal Zaremba and Tiziana Margaria}, abstract = {In this chapter we compare the DIANE and miAamics solutions to service discovery along a specific feature supported by those solutions: preferences. Although quite different in their theoretical and technical background, both techniques have in fact the ability to express user preferences, that are used internally to rank the evaluation results. These preferences are used here to incorporate functional aspects as defined by the SWS Challenge tasks, but they can also be used to express non-functional properties like quality aspects. Here we take a closer look at how preferences are realized in the two different approaches and we briefly compare their profiles.} } |