‹header›

‹date/time›

Click to edit Master text styles

Second level

Third level

Fourth level

Fifth level

‹footer›

‹#›

use of semantic web technologies (DAML+OIL) for b2b e-commerce

very often DAML+OIL used to markup static pages (static markup). here different use: DAML+OIL used as an information exchange format between agents.

intro on b2b e-commerce. need for automation.

flexibility and openness: from direct and expensive 1-1 connections (ex EDI) to suppliers being linked to a large number of customers. but this is not enough: in EDI, negotiation of terms and conditions done in advance. hence need for automated business interactions in a fluid environment

EDI: easy to automate (less paperwork, faster transactions, …) BUT technology lock-in with small number of partners Electronic Markets: Flexible, leading to better deals BUT not automated, more labour intensive than EDI Agent Mediated Electronic Commerce: flexible and automated BUT technology not yet widely accepted

main point: automation (negotiation and fulfilment)

mention work on contract

this work is only about matchmaking and negotiation

examples of matchmaking: centralised (UDDI), p2p

notion of market mechanism (examples: one to one bargaining, auctions, request for quotes)

market mechanism defines the rules of the game.

Architecting for reuse: split between strategies and protocols

•strategies define which actions the agent makes (and typically stays private) •protocols define the messages and interactions between the agents (shared)

Example of protocol and strategy for an English auction.

Very often, systems are implemented with hard-coded strategies and protocols.

Quote standardization efforts (FIPA).

This work is about protocols.

Architecting for reuse only conveys the computational / componentization aspect

advertiser and seeker are just roles and might be played by the same entity at different times or even at the same time (e.g. broker)

show how this covers different types of matchmaking systems

information model: advertisements and queries

explain how DAML+OIL satisfied these requirements (last one is next slide)

We propose to describe the advertisements and the queries in DAML+OIL.

Since DAML+OIL is a Description Logic, we use the DL notation.

operation used for the matchmaking: satisfiability check.

refinement of the matchmaking process (1, 2 and 3 are subtypes of 4). in terms of operation, all can be reduced to satisfiability checks (or subsumption checks).

need to order the results: advertisements such as “I am selling things” or “I provide services” are as good a match as a very specific advertisement. An ordering of 1 then 2, 3,4 would encourage to publish more specific advertisements.

basic ordering based on similarity. problem with that: most similar does not imply best value for the seeker. preferences allow to discriminate results based on other factors: relative importance of attributes (delivery data is more important, then color,…), choice of trading partner (preferred partner or network of partners), credit rating, …

explain the idea of negotiation rules

admission rules

protocol enforcement

agreement formation rules

use of DAML+OIL to represent these

interest in the operational aspect

negotiation rules:

•admission rules

•proposal validity

•protocol enforcement

•agreement formation

•updating status and informing participants

•lifecycle of negotiation

•

complex negotiations, not just price and quantity

explain how DAML+OIL satisfies these requirements.

complex negotiations, not just price and quantity.

true barring protocol enforcement: the proposal is declared valid only after checking with the protocol.

matching buyer proposals with seller proposals only.

note about DAML-S: in this work, only DAML-S profile to be considered.

DAML-S profile: 2 lists of classes, inputs and outputs.

Here we have used a different modelling style: inputs and outputs are modelled as properties of the main class.

More general (ex: use of roles).

note about first point: not really DAML+OIL (XML syntax of FaCT for matchmaking and lisp for negotiation)

problem is not operational aspects but rather expressivity of the language.