2692-2967ISSN (Online)
2770-0216ISSN (Print)
Volume 12 , Issue 2 , PP: 01-14, 2025 | Cite this article as | XML | Html | PDF | Full Length Article
Larisa Ivascu 1 *
Doi: https://doi.org/10.54216/AJBOR.120201
Determining web services according to Quality of Service (QoS) restrictions is the topic of discussion in this section. Decision tree classifiers are used to accomplish this classification. Because of the ever-changing and expanding nature of online services, it is necessary to accurately categorize them in order to make choosing them more efficient for consumers. It makes use of decision tree techniques, more especially the C5.0 classifier, this is an advancement over older approaches such as the C4.5 classifiers. It incorporates characteristics like as noisy handling, incomplete information administration, and improved decision-making correctness. Web services are classified into four distinct groups: Outstanding, Good, Average, and Poor. These classifications are determined by QoS metrics that include time to response, accessibility, performance, dependability, and success rate. The choice of features is accomplished utilizing an evolutionary algorithm with a wrapper technique with the goal to maximize the effectiveness of this category. This method minimizes the number of repetitive features and improves the method of classification for the purpose of optimization. The resilience and predicted reliability of the algorithm are ensured by additional approaches like as cross-validation and error reduction. These approaches also address difficulties such as overfitting and redundant characteristics. The construction of integrated web services for complicated corporate operations is a particularly valuable use of this technology, which also considerably improves the procedure for making choices for identifying services and consumption. Service 7 stands out with an impressive 98% performance, while Service 6 and Service 3 are also among the top-performing services. Compared to the others, Service 1, Service 2, Service 5, and Service 4 all exhibit comparatively poor results.
VoIP , QoS , C5.0 classifier , Decision tree , SWAM
[1] J. Tanha, M. van Someren, and H. Afsarmanesh, ‘‘Semi-supervised self training for decision tree classifiers,’’ Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 355–370, Feb. 2017.
[2] Esraa Mohamed, The Relationship between Artificial Intelligence and Internet of Things: A quick review, Journal of Cybersecurity and Information Management, Vol. 1 , No. 1 , (2020) : 30-34 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/JCIM.010101)
[3] Dr. Ajay B. Gadicha , Dr. Vijay B. Gadicha, Implicit Authentication Approach by Generating Strong Password through Visual Key Cryptography, Journal of Cybersecurity and Information Management, Vol. 1 , No. 1 , (2020) : 5-16 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/JCIM.010102)
[4] B. S. Balaji, S. Balakrishnan, K. Venkatachalam, and V. Jeyakrishnan, ‘‘Retracted Article: Automated query classification based web service similarity technique using machine learning,’’ J. Ambient Intell. Humanized Comput., vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 6169–6180, Jun. 2021.
[5] M. S. Das, A. Govardhan, and D. V. Lakshmi, ‘‘Classification of web services using data mining algorithms and improved learning model,’’ TELKOMNIKA (Telecommun. Comput. Electron. Control), vol. 17, no. 6,p. 3191, Dec. 2019
[6] M.-T. Wu, ‘‘Confusion matrix and minimum cross-entropy metrics based motion recognition system in the classroom,’’ Sci. Rep., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Feb. 2022.
[7] C. Vivek,M. Indu,N. Nandhini, Speech Recognition Using Artificial Neural Network, Journal of Journal of Cognitive Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 5 , No. 2 , (2023) : 08-14 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/JCHCI.050201)
[8] Vidyul Narayanan,Nithya P.,Sathya M., Effective lung cancer detection using deep learning network, Journal of Journal of Cognitive Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 5 , No. 2 , (2023) : 15-23 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/JCHCI.050202)
[9] S. Ruuska, W. Hämäläinen, S. Kajava, M. Mughal, P. Matilainen, and J. Mononen, ‘‘Evaluation of the confusion matrix method in the validation of an automated system for measuring feeding behaviour of cattle,’’ Behavioural Processes, vol. 148, pp. 56–62, Mar. 2018.
[10] N. Agarwal, G. Sikka, and L. K. Awasthi, ‘‘Enhancing web service clustering using length feature weight method for service description document vector space representation,’’ Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 161, Dec. 2020, Art. no. 113682.
[11] M. B. Blake, W. Cheung, M. C. Jaeger, and A. Wombacher, ‘‘WSC-06: The web service challenge,’’ in Proc. 8th IEEE Int. Conf. E-Commerce Technol., 3rd IEEE Int. Conf. Enterprise Comput., E-Commerce, EServices (CEC/EEE), Jun. 2006, p. 62.
[12] Denis A. Pustokhin , Irina V. Pustokhina, FLC-NET: Federated Lightweight Network for Early Discovery of Malware in Resource-constrained IoT, International Journal of Wireless and Ad Hoc Communication, Vol. 6 , No. 2 , (2023) : 43-55 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/IJWAC.060204)
[13] Mohamed Saber , El-Sayed M. El-Kenawy , Abdelhameed Ibrahim , Marwa M. Eid , Abdelaziz A. Abdelhamid, Metaheuristic Optimized Ensemble Model for Classification of SMS Spam in Computer Networks, International Journal of Wireless and Ad Hoc Communication, Vol. 6 , No. 2 , (2023) : 56-64 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/IJWAC.060205)
[14] A. V. Dastjerdi and R. Buyya, ‘‘Compatibility-aware cloud service composition under fuzzy preferences of users,’’ IEEE Trans. Cloud Comput., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–13, Jan. 2014.
[15] M. Razian, M. Fathian, H. Wu, A. Akbari, and R. Buyya, ‘‘SAIoT: Scalable anomaly-aware services composition in CloudIoT environments,’’ IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 3665–3677, Mar. 2020.
[16] M. Gao, M. Chen, A. Liu, W. H. Ip, and K. L. Yung, ‘‘Optimization of microservice composition based on artificial immune algorithm considering fuzziness and user preference,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 26385–26404, 2020.
[17] R. Buyya, S. N. Srirama, G. Casale, R. Calheiros, Y. Simmhan, B. Varghese, E. Gelenbe, B. Javadi, L. M. Vaquero, and M. A. Netto, ‘‘A manifesto for future generation cloud computing: Research directions for the next decade,’’ ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 1–38, 2018.
[18] Hayder Sabah Salih,Fatema Akbar Mohamed, Fusion-based Diversified Model for Internet of Vehicles: Leveraging Artificial Intelligence in Cloud Computing, Journal of Fusion: Practice and Applications, Vol. 12 , No. 2 , (2023) : 54-69 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/FPA.120205)
[19] Zeena N. Al-kateeb,Dhuha Basheer Abdullah, A Smart Architecture Leveraging Fog Computing Fusion and Ensemble Learning for Prediction of Gestational Diabetes, Fusion: Practice and Applications, Vol. 12 , No. 2 , (2023) : 70-87 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/FPA.120206)
[20] G. Chen, T. Jiang, M. Wang, X. Tang, and W. Ji, ‘‘Modeling and reasoning of IoT architecture in semantic ontology dimension,’’ Comput. Commun., vol. 153, pp. 580–594, Mar. 2020.
[21] W. Chen, B. Liu, H. Huang, S. Guo, and Z. Zheng, ‘‘When UAV swarm meets edge-cloud computing: The QoS perspective,’’ IEEE Netw., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 36–43, Mar./Apr. 2019.
[22] S. K. Gavvala, C. Jatoth, G. R. Gangadharan, and R. Buyya, ‘‘QoS-aware cloud service composition using eagle strategy,’’ Future Gener. Comput. Syst., vol. 90, pp. 273–290, Jan. 2019.
[23] M. Vučetić, M. Hudec, and B. Božilović, ‘‘Fuzzy functional dependencies and linguistic interpretations employed in knowledge discovery tasks from relational databases,’’ Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell., vol. 88, Feb. 2020, Art. no. 103395.
[24] M. Sözat and A. Yazici, ‘‘A complete axiomatization for fuzzy functional and multivalued dependencies in fuzzy database relations,’’ Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 117, no. 2, pp. 161–181, Jan. 2001.
[25] B. Sheng, O. M. Moosman, B. Del Pozo-Cruz, J. Del Pozo-Cruz, R. M. Alfonso-Rosa, and Y. Zhang, ‘‘A comparison of different machine learning algorithms, types and placements of activity monitors for physical activity classification,’’ Measurement, vol. 154, Mar. 2020, Art. no. 107480.
