Multi-criteria Web Services Selection: Balancing the Quality of Design and Quality of Service

Web service composition allows developers to create applications via reusing available services that are interoperable to each other. The process of selecting relevant Web services for a composite service satisfying the developer requirements is commonly acknowledged to be hard and challenging, especially with the exponentially increasing number of available Web services on the Internet. The majority of existing approaches on Web Services Selection are merely based on the Quality of Service (QoS) as a basic criterion to guide the selection process. However, existing approaches tend to ignore the service design quality, which plays a crucial role in discovering, understanding, and reusing service functionalities. Indeed, poorly designed Web service interfaces result in service anti-patterns, which are symptoms of bad design and implementation practices. The existence of anti-pattern instances in Web service interfaces typically complicates their reuse in real-world service-based systems and may lead to several maintenance and evolution problems. To address this issue, we introduce a new approach based on the Multi-Objective and Optimization on the basis of Ratio Analysis method (MOORA) as a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method to select Web services based on a combination of their (1) QoS attributes and (2) QoS design. The proposed approach aims to help developers to maintain the soundness and quality of their service composite development processes. We conduct a quantitative and qualitative empirical study to evaluate our approach on a Quality of Web Service dataset. We compare our MOORA-based approach against four commonly used MCDM methods as well as a recent state-of-the-art Web service selection approach. The obtained results show that our approach outperforms state-of-the-art approaches by significantly improving the service selection quality of top-k selected services while providing the best trade-off between both service design quality and desired QoS values. Furthermore, we conducted a qualitative evaluation with developers. The obtained results provide evidence that our approach generates a good trade-off for what developers need regarding both QoS and quality of design. Our selection approach was evaluated as “relevant” from developers point of view, in improving the service selection task with an average score of 3.93, compared to an average of 2.62 for the traditional QoS-based approach.