Cloud Service Discovery and Extraction:

A Critical Review and Direction for Future

Research

Abdullah Ali1,3(&), Siti Mariyam Shamsuddin1, Fathy E. Eassa2,

and Fathey Mohammed3
1
Faculty of Computing, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia
abdallah.almenbri@gmail.com
2
Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, King Abduaziz
University, Jaddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
3
Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, Taiz University,
Taiz, Yemen

Abstract. The advancement of cloud computing has enabled service providers

to provide users with diversified cloud services with different attributes and
costs. Finding a convenient service that satisfies users’ requirements based on
both functional and non-functional requirements has become a big challenge.
The existing studies on cloud service discovery have addressed this problem and
proposed solutions using different techniques. This paper reviews the existing
studies on cloud service discovery and covers current approaches, techniques
and models used. In addition, the limitations and weaknesses of the proposed
solutions are considered. As a result, research issues and gaps for future research
are revealed.

Keywords: Cloud service discovery
Approaches
Limitations

Review

1 Introduction

Rapid development of information technology has motivated many organizations and

enterprises to search for methods that keep operational cost low, increase the scala-
bility, improve performance, and have high efficiency in resource utilization [1].
Distributed systems, parallel computing, grid computing, virtualization, and other
technologies have evolved over the years. The inflexibility, high cost and deficiency of
scalability of these technologies are ineffective for business requirements. Recently,
cloud computing has emerged to meet business requirements by complement these
technologies and add new features to resources and application provisioning [2].
Cloud computing is a model that allows users to access to the hosted services
(hardware and software) available on the Internet where they are composed and vir-
tualized dynamically upon users’ need. There are two players in cloud computing,
cloud providers and cloud customers. The cloud providers keep enormous computing
resources (cloud services) in their large datacenters and rent these services to customers

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

F. Saeed et al. (Eds.): IRICT 2018, AISC 843, pp. 291–301, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99007-1_28
292 A. Ali et al.

as pay-per-use basis [3]. The majority of popular sites are hosted on a cloud, including
social networking, email, document sharing and online gaming. Since cloud services
have become very important for the companies, many cloud providers such as Amazon,
Google, Rackspace and Microsoft fight to get a foothold on provisioning customers by
different cloud services with different performance attributes and costs [4]. The
diversity on services description, non-uniformed naming conventions, and the
heterogeneous types and features of cloud services make the cloud service discovery a
hard problem [5]. The cloud customers have faced a problem of how to find the best
cloud service from the growing number of cloud providers that satisfy the Quality of
Service (QoS) requirements such as performance, cost and security [6]. Cloud service
discovery addresses a problem of returning a suitable service or a set of services that
match the specified requirements or objectives. Although various challenges related to
cloud computing have been addressed in active research including security, privacy and
trust management, cloud service discovery still a rudimentary area of research [7–10].
Several studies have been carried out on cloud services discovery based on different
approaches. These approaches differ in the environment of searching form central
repository [7, 11–13] or from the Web [14, 15]. In addition, different models were used
for discovering such as ontology model. Ontology is used for different purpose such as
similarity measuring and reasoning [16], and cloud services representation [5].
Ghazouani and Slimani [17] provided a review on approaches in addressing cloud
services discovery. They concentrated on the classification and comparison of previous
cloud services discovery approaches by taking into account type of delivery model, the
technique adopted, the obtained service representation, and the covered domain.
Alkalbani and Hussain [18] presented an overview of the current cloud service dis-
covery trends and challenges. They reviewed and classified the approaches according
to service discovery architecture and techniques including approach model/architecture,
service type, ontology representation (domain, language, and reasoning), dynamic
discovery model, evaluation model, user’s preferences techniques, data updates, and
public repositories. Moreover, Sun, Dong [19] surveyed cloud service selection
approaches, and analysed them from five perspectives: decision making techniques;
data representation models; parameters and characteristics of cloud services; contexts,
purposes. However, more investigation on the literature may promote the existing
techniques of cloud service discovery and reveal new insights for more innovative
solutions. This paper presents a critical review of cloud service discovery approaches
so that research issues and gaps can be revealed for future works. The next section
introduces cloud service discovery concepts. Then, the existing proposed solutions for
discovering the required cloud services are presented. Next, a discussion on the
reviewed studies and the proposed classification is presented. Finally, the study ends
with the conclusion.

2 Cloud Service Discovery

A service has a kind of relation between service providers and the end-users. Conse-
quently, service provisioning is the procedure of empowering the service clients to
access the predefined resources and enjoy the provisioned services [20, 21]. Basically,
 Cloud Service Discovery and Extraction 293

the key interaction between the client and the service provider depends on service
provisioning [22]. Similarly, service provisioning plays a significant role for both the
cloud provider and the cloud user. The cloud provider should provide the required
services as stated in the Service Level Agreement (SLA) including the QoS and
pricing. The services must meet the user’s requirements, such as on-demand avail-
ability, scalability, elasticity, security, and exact billing [6, 23]. One of the service
provisioning objectives is providing reasonable comparisons among the offered ser-
vices. As a result, the users can compare the various cloud service offerings according
to their needs and select the services based on several predefined dimensions [24].
The cloud services have attracted much attention in the recent years. Cloud pro-
viders offer a diversity of cloud services for customers including processing, storage
and other services [25]. It is becoming gradually more difficult for a user to select a
suitable service provider that will supply him or her the required services [26]. Service
discovery, which is principally related to web services has been intensively researched
in the past decade [27]. A great amount of work has been performed on services
descriptions and standardisation specifically on the area of service oriented architecture
and web services. For service description, the most outstanding language is Web
Service Definition Language (WSDL), which describes the service from technical view
including features of service, interface operations, binding and others [28]. This
description is not sufficient from business point of view for describing the services
delivered via the Internet such as the cloud services, which are business services.
Business service is concerned with the end to end delivery between a provider and a
customer depending on a particular period of time, cost, and SLA [29].
In order to discover suitable cloud services which are able to match specified
requirements or objectives, an automated discovery system is necessary to specify the
degree of similarity between a user service request and a service provider advertise-
ment. Matching decision can be based on several criteria and parameters related to
cloud services such as functional and non-functional requirements. The functional
requirements include service tasks to be provided, cost, constraints and others, whereas
non-functional requirements include service software applications, software compati-
bility constraints, hardware policy, service models (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS) and others. The
diversity on services description, the heterogeneous types and features of cloud services
and non-uniform naming conventions make the cloud service discovery as complex
problem [5].

3 Existing Cloud Service Discovery Solutions

There are several techniques, models, algorithms and methods are used to accomplish
the process of discovering cloud services. Chen, Bai [30] introduced registry approach
for discovering cloud services by extending WSDL to express the specific attributes of
cloud services. This description of cloud services is then distributed into a Universal
Description Discovery and Integration (UDDI) registry, which enables the automatic
discovery from a single location. Furthermore, Ankolekar, Burstein [31] used DARPA
Agent Markup Language for Services (DAML-S) to represent the cloud services,
semantically. Many researchers developed the relation between cloud providers and
294 A. Ali et al.

consumers by building cloud service broker system [11–13, 32]. These studies intro-
duced a cloud search engine named Cloudle which use agents for searching and
checking the similarities between query and cloud services based on the ontology. They
designed two ontologies CO-1 and CO-2. CO-1 contained only concepts whereas the
CO-2 included a set of cloud concepts as well as individuals of these concepts and the
relationship among those individuals. This engine had a database that stored the cloud
services provided by cloud service providers. It checked the similarities occurred
between cloud services in the database and requested query from users using this
ontology. Measuring the similarity is based on three kinds of methods which are data
property, concept, and object property. Availability of cloud services depends on the
registered services by the providers.
Kanagasabai [33] proposed a novel cloud broker by adopting a semantic service-
based approach (Web Ontology Language for Service (OWL-S)) and developed an
OWL-based matchmaking system for discovering complex constraint-based services
dynamically. However, shared ontology among cloud providers can be used for
translating the offered and requested services. Tahamtan, Beheshti [34] designed a
business ontology for cloud to help the organisation in searching for suitable cloud
services. A framework was designed that provided an integrated unified business
service and cloud ontology to assist businesses to search for the suitable cloud service
using querying abilities. The purpose of using unified ontology was recording the
needed business services by enterprise and built a link between the business functions
and provided services in the cloud space.
The SaaS discovery system proposed by Afify, Moawad [35] could establish SaaS
service attributes by utilising the SaaS ontology. Service filtering and ranking, service
registration as well as service discovery were the three major components included in
SaaS system. For matching process, a method was proposed which comprised of
ontology matching, semantic-based, and feature similarity matching. However, this
system did not support automatic discovering SaaS services and the cloud provider
need to subscribe in the system so that it could publish its services. Vasudevan,
Haleema [36] suggested a technique for improving the automatic discovery of services
by including the semantic representation onto the profile of cloud service. There was
different information where a service profile comprised of service name, price, and
other features. Each service profile was represented as separate ontology, which later
merged together to constitute as a global ontology. Parhi, Pattanayak [9] proposed a
framework based on ontology and multi agents to describe and discover cloud services.
The benefit of using ontology for cloud services description contributed in increasing
the related cloud services requested by customers.
Kang and Sim [32] presented a cloud service discovery system, which publishes the
cloud services addresses to make it available through search engine. Then, to extract
and retrieve the result based on appropriate information, the semantic filtering is
applied. To perform the semantic filtering, the cloud ontology is used for discovering
the relationship between required cloud services by advising the matching service.
Further, a search engine called Cloudle based on ontology was proposed by Kang and
Sim [37]. Various reasoning methods to identify the similarities among cloud services
were used. Service type, functions, time and prices were the information needed from
the user to be entered through system’s interface, where the search engine retrieved the
 Cloud Service Discovery and Extraction 295

matching service based on the user request using cloud ontology. Finally, the retrieved
services were sorted according to the price of time period established by the user. The
Cloudle search engine was improved by Sim [38]. The improvement involved a cloud
crawler which performed a search on the web for cloud services and stored them in the
Cloudle database instead of asking cloud providers to register their services in the
Cloudle’s database.
Cloud Service Discovery System (CSDS) was proposed by Han and Sim [39].
Agent and ontology were used to discover the cloud services. Google has been used to
search for the cloud services on the web. This mechanism was time consuming due to
the online search that occurred before matching process between query and retrieved
services. The CSDS was improved by Han and Sim [16]. The improvement concen-
trated on measuring the similarities among services. It used three reasoning methods;
similarity, equivalent, and numerical reasoning. However, this system is a time con-
suming because it based on Google to search for the cloud services before it starts to
check the similarities. Furthermore, Chang, Juang [14] proposed an intelligent service
discovery framework that integrated mobile agent with ontology and developed a
prototype to search for appropriate services in cloud environment. It was assumed that
the crawlers knew the structure of clouds data centres, such as the location, schema and
others, and had direct access to the data centres, but till now there are no standards for
cloud service naming convention and different services description [5]. Also, an
inference rule was defined which was executed by Jena inference engine. Results has
shown a high degree for precision and low degree for recall, which needs to be verified
by applying more evaluation.
A cloud crawler engine was designed by Noor, Sheng [7] which could crawl
numerous cloud portals by using cloud ontology. The description of cloud services
attributes was saved in repository that built dataset for cloud services. Nevertheless, this
dataset showed many shortages for example service name and URL, which represented
basic information and also data values were not associated with semantic meaning. As
a result, the information of this dataset did not provide benefit to the user or application.
Moreover, a platform was proposed by Rodríguez-García, Valencia-García [40] which
represented a semantic platform that annotated cloud services represented in natural
language descriptions using ontology. Further, Nabeeh, El-Ghareeb [15] proposed a
Cloud Service Discovery Framework (CSDF) based on software agents and web ser-
vices. The framework consists of many agents for achieving different tasks including
crawling, cloud services ontology analysing and reasoning, recommendation and other
tasks. Cloud services were recommended based on users’ profile, ranker and evaluator
reports. Nevertheless, the used ontology need to be extended to enhance the crawling
process and the framework was not evaluated. Furthermore, Mittal, Joshi [41] devel-
oped a prototype system, which automatically extracts the terms definitions and
measures for SLA documents written as a text. The extracted terms were saved as
Resource Description Framework (RDF) graph to represent the knowledge base. The
extraction was performed on SLA terms and did not provide users with ability to
compare among SLA of different providers for different cloud services.
Hamza, Aicha-Nabila [42] proposed a mobile agent-based approach for cloud
services discovery. An algorithm was proposed to compare the user request with the
service description based on keyword search and performed filtering for the retrieved
296 A. Ali et al.

services. The proposed approach based on the keyword matching which may not return
the required services, especially if they have different names on several providers.
Further, it did not cover all cloud services attributes such as cost. A search engine
called CB-Cloudle (centroid-based) was built by [4, 43]. It was based on crawlers in
discovering cloud services from different cloud providers and applied k-means clus-
tering algorithm to cluster the cloud services based on similarities and differences
between the groups of cloud services. The crawling was performed on most popular
cloud providers where each provider had its own crawler.
Wheal and Yang [10] developed a cloud services recommender system called
CSRecommender, which was a search engine and recommender system. The
CSRecommender system offered recommendation for the user from different cloud
services using collaborative and content-based methods and took into account the
similar users. The user would visit the CSRecommender website and search for the
cloud services; and the ranked cloud services based on ratings done by other users
would be returned. The recommender system was applied on a few cloud services.
Furthermore, it did not cover all types of cloud services and the accuracy was low.
Finally, A central repository for retrieving and storing the SaaS services was proposed
by Alkalbani, Shenoy [44] using an open source crawler engine. The repository was
applied only for SaaS services. It had some shortcomings regarding to service infor-
mation, where it provided the service name and URL only. The summary of related
works, main ideas and limitations for the existing solutions are listed in Table 1.

4 Discussion

Exploring the related literature shows that the proposed models, frameworks and
systems for discovering the cloud services have some limitations. These limitations
include time consuming, low performance in discovering Cloud services and lack of
standardization for representing Cloud services attributes. Moreover, the process of
extracting cloud service attributes represented in different formats and to be represented
in a standardized form such ontology was not manipulated. Most common models and
technologies used for the cloud services discovery process (searching, comparing and
representing) are ontology and agents. However, there is no standardised way to
describe and represent the cloud services attributes. The majority of existing works
deals with one format of represented cloud services attributes. By scanning of most
reputed cloud providers websites, different formats can be used for representing the
cloud services attributes such as HTML tables, JSON and text formats. There are few
studies which were conducted on extracting the cloud service attributes such as Chang,
Juang [14] and Mittal, Joshi [41], whereas the rest only discovered the Cloud services
without extracting the cloud service attributes. In addition, few studies represent the
retrieved attributes in an ontology form and deal with different models of cloud services
(SaaS, PaaS and IaaS). Furthermore, the existing studies do not consider all functional
and non-functional requirement for discovering Cloud services.
 Cloud Service Discovery and Extraction 297

Table 1. Limitations of existing cloud service discovery solutions

Study Proposed cloud service discovery solution Limitations
[39] A CSDS, which uses agents and ontology It has been evaluated using providers’
to discover the Cloud services over the virtual websites
Internet Time consuming
Ontology doesn’t cover all cloud concepts
System was partially implemented
[32] Cloudle is implemented based on agents It has been judged using providers’ virtual
and ontology for searching cloud services websites
based on functional, non-functional and Cloud providers need to register their
technical requirements services in a central database
[37] A search engine based on ontology, which It does not cover all Cloud services
uses various reasoning methods to identify attributes
the similarities among cloud services. The Cloud ontology was small
matching service is retrieved based on the Cloud providers need to register their
user request and sorted according to the services in a central database
price of time period established by the user
[30] Cloud services and their specific features It provides URL and the name for each
are described by extending the WSDL and service only
publishing them on the web service It has issues in coping with the expanding
registry (UDDI) needs, and in presenting the latest updates
[12] Improved Cloudle which uses two The evaluation was done based on virtual
ontologies CO-1 and CO-2. CO-1 websites
contained only concepts and CO-2 Cloud providers need to register their
contained a set of concepts services in a central database
[13] Cloud service broker system based on a The cloud ontology concepts did not take
cooperative agent-based cloud service into account upgrading of the ontology to
discovery protocol using ontology for deal with the expanding Cloud services
matching the similarities among Cloud
services
[16] A CSDS based on agents and ontology. Time Consuming
Different reasoning methods used to The developed cloud ontology covered few
concepts
determine the similarities among services
It has been evaluated using providers’
virtual websites
[14] An intelligent service discovery The developed cloud ontology covered
framework which integrates mobile agent few concepts
with ontology for searching appropriate The framework was partially implemented
services in cloud environment using It needs more evaluation to verify the recall
inference rules measure
[33] A cloud broker using semantic service Shared ontology among cloud providers is
based on OWL for dynamically finding needed for translating the offered and
the services which consist of complex requested services
multi criteria QoS parameters are not included
[42] A mobile agent is used to compare Keywords-based search
between user request and cloud service It does not cover all Cloud services
description based on keyword search attributes
(continued)
298 A. Ali et al.

Table 1. (continued)
Study Proposed cloud service discovery solution Limitations
[5] An ontology based on OWL that can Applied only to IaaS services
represent the functional and non-
functional concepts, and the relationship
of infrastructure services on the IaaS layer
[45] An improved Cloudle that includes Cloud The evaluation was done based on virtual
Crawlers, which searched for cloud websites
services over the web QoS parameters are not included
[34] A framework that served as a services The equalisation between the query and
repository. It provides an integrated, business function is asked by the user
unified business service and cloud The SPARQL is only comprehensive to
ontology expert users
The providers’ data is obtained based on
market search
[40] A semantic platform that annotates cloud It does not cover all Cloud services
services represented in natural language attributes
descriptions using ontology The validation was performed on very
small services
[7] A crawler engine to crawl cloud web Short of primary services’ information for
portals using ontology and store the instance, service name and service URL
retrieved information in a local repository
[35] A SaaS discovery system that locate SaaS The automatic discovery feature is not
service information based on several supported for SaaS
parameters using a unified SaaS business It covers only SaaS services
ontology
[36] Using a single ontology, semantic It does not cover all Cloud services
representations are added to each cloud attributes
service profile. All separate ontology was Cloud service providers need to publish
combined to construct a global ontology their list of services in the form of RDF
[4, CB-Cloudle based on crawlers to discover It needed to be evaluated
43] cloud services from different cloud
providers. k-means clustering algorithm
has been applied to cluster the retrieved
Cloud services
[44] Distributed methods for crawling only It only provides URL and the name for
SaaS cloud services based on the Hadoop each service
framework It covers only SaaS services
[10] A search engine and recommender system It was applied on few cloud services
called CSRecommender, which offers Accuracy is low
recommendations for using collaborative It does not cover all types of Cloud services
and content-based methods
[15] A CSDF based on agents and web services No evaluation was done
that uses many agents for achieving Ontology need to be extended to enhance
different tasks related to Cloud services the crawling process
discovering and ranking
(continued)
 Cloud Service Discovery and Extraction 299

Table 1. (continued)
Study Proposed cloud service discovery solution Limitations
[9] A prototype based on ontology and agents Not fully implemented
for describing and discovering Cloud Not evaluated
services
[41] A system, which automatically extracts the It covers SAL only
terms and measures of text file SLA Not evaluated
documents. The extracted terms are saved No comparison of SLA among different
as RDF graph to represent the knowledge providers
base

5 Conclusion

The cloud services discovery, the existing cloud services discovery approaches and
related works have been investigated. Based on the critical review of the literature of
cloud services discovery approaches, there is still a need for models, frameworks and
systems that can consider different attributes. The different formats of cloud services
attributes representation (tables, JSON, text, etc.) should be considered. In addition, the
retrieved cloud services attributes can be represented in an ontology form. Ontology
can be used to represent the retrieved attributes so the query of a service can be an
ontology-based rather than keyword-based, which will increase the efficiency and
effectiveness of the system. Ontology also can be used during the crawling or finding
the similarities between retrieved cloud services and queries. In addition, cloud service
discovery model can be proposed based on ontology, agents, classification and several
extraction methods for extracting Cloud services represented in different formats. Multi
agents can be used to achieve different tasks in parallel for overcoming the problem of
time consuming and low performance. Furthermore, all cloud service models can be
covered. The process of discovering cloud service of different models (SaaS, PaaS,
IaaS) and classifying them into their corresponding model can be carried out using
classification process. Classifying Cloud services into their models increases efficiency
of the process of cloud service attributes extraction which in turn improves the effi-
ciency of the whole process of Cloud services discovery.

References
1. Soundararajan, V., Govil, K.: Challenges in building scalable virtualized datacenter
management. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 44(4), 95–102 (2010)
2. Emeakaroha, V.C.: Managing Cloud Service Provisioning and SLA Enforcement via
Holistic Monitoring Techniques. Technische Universität Wien, Karlsplatz (2012)
3. Lee, G.: Resource Allocation and Scheduling in Heterogeneous Cloud Environments, in
Computer Science. University of California, Berkeley (2012)
4. Gong, S., Sim, K.M.: CB-Cloudle and cloud crawlers. In: 2014 5th IEEE International
Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS). IEEE (2014)
300 A. Ali et al.

5. Zhang, M., et al.: An ontology-based system for Cloud infrastructure services’ discovery. In:
2012 8th International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications
and Worksharing (CollaborateCom). IEEE (2012)
6. Garg, S.K., Versteeg, S., Buyya, R.: A framework for ranking of cloud computing services.
Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 29(4), 1012–1023 (2013)
7. Noor, T.H., et al.: CSCE: a crawler engine for cloud services discovery on the world wide
web. In: 2013 IEEE 20th International Conference on Web Services (ICWS). IEEE (2013)
8. Noor, T.H., et al.: Analysis of web-scale cloud services. IEEE Internet Comput. 18(4), 55–61
(2014)
9. Parhi, M., Pattanayak, B.K., Patra, M.R. (2015) A Multi-agent-based framework for cloud
service description and discovery using ontology. In: Jain, L.C., Patnaik, S., Ichalkaranje, N.
(eds.) Proceedings of ICCD 2014 on Intelligent Computing, Communication and Devices,
vol. 1, pp. 337–348. Springer, New Delhi (2015)
10. Wheal, J., Yang, Y.: CSRecommender: a cloud service searching and recommendation
system. J. Comput. Commun. 3(06), 65 (2015)
11. Kang, J., Sim, K.M.: A cloud portal with a cloud service search engine. In: International
Conference on Information and Intelligent Computing IPCSIT. IACSIT Press, Singapore
(2011)
12. Kang, J., Sim, K.M.: Ontology and search engine for Cloud computing system. In: 2011
International Conference on System Science and Engineering (ICSSE). IEEE (2011)
13. Kang, J., Sim, K.M.: Towards agents and ontology for cloud service discovery. In: 2011
International Conference on Cyber-Enabled Distributed Computing and Knowledge
Discovery (CyberC). IEEE (2011)
14. Chang, Y.-S., et al.: Integrating intelligent agent and ontology for services discovery on
cloud environment. In: 2012 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics (SMC). IEEE (2012)
15. Nabeeh, N.A., El-Ghareeb, H.A, Riad, A.: Integrating software agents and web services in
service oriented architecture based cloud services discovery framework. J. Converg. Inf.
Technol. (JCIT) 10(1), 67–79 (2015)
16. Han, T., Sim, K.M.: An agent-based cloud service discovery system that consults a cloud
ontology. In: Intelligent Control and Computer Engineering, pp. 203–216. Springer (2011)
17. Ghazouani, S., Slimani, Y.: A survey on cloud service description. J. Netw. Comput. Appl.
91, 61–74 (2017)
18. Alkalbani, A.M., Hussain, F.K.: A comparative study and future research directions in cloud
service discovery. In: 2016 IEEE 11th Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications
(ICIEA), pp. 1049–1056. IEEE, June 2016
19. Sun, L., et al.: Cloud service selection: state-of-the-art and future research directions.
J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 45, 134–150 (2014)
20. Ahmed, E., et al.: Multi-objective optimization model for seamless application execution in
mobile cloud computing. In: 2013 5th International Conference on Information and
Communication Technologies (ICICT). IEEE (2013)
21. Ahmed, E., Shiraz, M., Gani, A.: Spectrum-aware distributed channel assignment for
cognitive radio wireless mesh networks. Malays. J. Comput. Sci. 26(3), 232–250 (2013)
22. Manvi, S.S., Shyam, G.K.: Resource management for Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) in
cloud computing: a survey. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 41, 424–440 (2014)
23. Shamshirband, S., et al.: Co-FAIS: cooperative fuzzy artificial immune system for detecting
intrusion in wireless sensor networks. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 42, 102–117 (2014)
24. Rahimi, M.R., et al.: MAPCloud: mobile applications on an elastic and scalable 2-tier cloud
architecture. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE/ACM Fifth International Conference on
Utility and Cloud Computing. IEEE Computer Society (2012)
 Cloud Service Discovery and Extraction 301

25. Chang, J.M., Chao, H.C., Chen, J.L., Lai, C.F.: An efficient service discovery system for
dual-stack cloud file service. IEEE Syst. J. 6(4), 584–592 (2012)
26. Zhao, L., et al.: Flexible service selection with user-specific QoS support in service-oriented
architecture. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 35(3), 962–973 (2012)
27. Segev, A., Sheng, Q.Z.: Bootstrapping ontologies for web services. IEEE Trans. Serv.
Comput. 5(1), 33–44 (2012)
28. Chinnici, R., et al.: Web services description language (WSDL) version 2.0 part 1: Core
language. W3C Recommendation 26 (2007)
29. Cardoso, J., et al.: Towards a unified service description language for the internet of services:
Requirements and first developments. In: 2010 IEEE International Conference on Services
Computing (SCC). IEEE (2010)
30. Chen, F., Bai, X., Liu, B.: Efficient Service Discovery for Cloud Computing Environments.
In: Advanced Research on Computer Science and Information Engineering, pp. 443–448.
Springer (2011)
31. Ankolekar, A., Burstein, M., Hobbs, J.R., Lassila, O., Martin, D.L., McIlraith, S.A.,
Narayanan, S., et al.: DAML-S: Semantic markup for web services, 411–430 (2001)
32. Kang, J., Sim, K.M.: Cloudle: a multi-criteria cloud service search engine. In: 2010 IEEE
Asia-Pacific Services Computing Conference (APSCC) (2010)
33. Kanagasabai, R.: OWL-S based semantic cloud service broker. In: 2012 IEEE 19th
International Conference on Web Services (ICWS). IEEE (2012)
34. Tahamtan, A., et al.: A cloud repository and discovery framework based on a unified
business and cloud service ontology. In: 2012 IEEE Eighth World Congress on Services
(SERVICES). IEEE (2012)
35. Afify, Y., et al.: A semantic-based software-as-a-service (SAAS) discovery and selection
system. In: 2013 8th International Conference on Computer Engineering and Systems
(ICCES). IEEE (2013)
36. Vasudevan, M., Haleema, P., Iyengar, N.C.S.: Semantic discovery of cloud service catalog
published over resource description framework. Int. J. Grid Distrib. Comput. 7(6), 211–220
(2014)
37. Kang, J., Sim, K.M.: Cloudle: an agent-based cloud search engine that consults a cloud
ontology. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Cloud Computing and
Virtualization. Citeseer (2010)
38. Sim, K.: Agent-based cloud computing. In: IEEE Transactions on Services Computing.
IEEE (2012)
39. Han, T., Sim, K.M.: An ontology-enhanced cloud service discovery system. In: Proceedings of
the International Multi Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists, Hong Kong (2010)
40. Rodríguez-García, M.Á., Valencia-García, R., García-Sánchez, F.: Ontology-based annota-
tion and retrieval of services in the cloud. Knowledge-Based Systems. 56, 15 (2013)
41. Mittal, S., et al.: Automatic extraction of metrics from SLAs for cloud service management.
In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Engineering (IC2E 2016) (2016)
42. Hamza, S., et al.: A Cloud computing approach based on mobile agents for Web services
discovery. In: 2012 Second International Conference on Innovative Computing Technology
(INTECH). IEEE (2012)
43. Gong, S., Sim, K.M.: CB-Cloudle: a centroid-based cloud service search engine. In:
Proceedings of the International Multi Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists
(2014)
44. Alkalbani, A., et al.: Design and implementation of the hadoop-based crawler for SaaS
service discovery. In: 2015 IEEE 29th International Conference on Advanced Information
Networking and Applications. IEEE (2015)
45. Sim, K.M.: Agent-based cloud computing. IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 5(4), 564–577 (2012)