Spaccapietra, S; Parent, C.; Dupont, Y.: Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. In: VLDB Journal: Very Large Data Bases 1 (1992), pp. 81126.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....that may initiate or terminate a future contract, whereas an Economic Contract is associated to the authorised roles or partner types between whom a contract is established. The introduction of new knowledge level classes into the economic concepts of UMM BRV can be seen as schema conforming [19], i.e. transforming the schemas to be integrated in order to increase their similarity. The individual constituents of the BPSS model become possible to relate to the economic concepts of UMM BRV as the two views now contain corresponding concepts defined on the same level of abstraction. The ....

Spaccapietra S., Parent C. and Dupont Y., "Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas", The VLDB Journal, vol. 1, no.2, pp. 81-126, 1992.

....that may initiate or terminate a future contract, whereas an Economic Contract is associated to the authorised roles or parmer types between whom a contract is established. The introduction of new knowledge level classes into the economic concepts of UMM BRV can be seen as schema conforming [16], i.e. transforming the schemas to be integrated in order to increase their similarity. The individual constituents of the BPSS model become possible to relate to the economic concepts of UMM BRV as the two views now contain corresponding concepts deftned on the same level of abstraction. The ....

Spaccapietra S., Parent C. and Dupont Y., "Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas", The VLDB Journal, vol. 1, no.2, pp. 81-126, 1992.

....of publications. Fig. 1 depicts the corresponding schemas of both databases. Before these schemas are integrated, conflicts have to be resolved. Here we consider extensional and intensional conflicts only. We assume that other types of conflicts are resolved before as described, e.g. in [LNE89, SPD92] Extensional conflicts refer to potential object redundancies among different classes whereas intensional conflicts are caused by different object types of semantically related classes. The schemas define extensional subset relationships between sub and superclasses and relationships due to ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. The VLDB Journal, 1(1):81--126, July 1992.

....information sources. The reflection of whether two extensions of concepts of different information sources represent the same real world objects can only be done by a domain expert. Based on these extensions, we classify four semantic inter correspondences between two concepts C 1 and C 2 (Spaccapietra, Parent, Dupont 1992): Semantic equivalence C 1 # C 2 : The concepts C 1 and C 2 represent the same set of real world objects, E(C 1 ) E(C 2 ) Semantic subsumption C 1 # C 2 : The set of real world objects represented by the concept C 1 is a subset of the set represented by C 2 , E(C 1 ) # E(C 2 ) ....

Spaccapietra, S.; Parent, C.; and Dupont, Y. 1992. Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. VLDB Journal: Very Large Data Bases 1(1):81--126.

....obliged to reason about the objects themselves (in addition to reasoning about the values that represent the objects) in order to establish the meaning of the mapping. For this reason we introduce the notion of Real World State (RWS) This notion has been used with different shades of distinction [13, 17]. In our case we use it in the following way: to define the constraints that a mapping between a terminology and a relational view must satisfy. Mapping among Knowledge Bases and Data Repositories: Precise Definition of its Syntax and Semantics 281 ID Name Address Phone StartingDate : ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. VLDB, 1(1):81--126 (1992).

.... between the data elements in the data sources and the terms in the semantic descriptions (ontologies) These semantic relationships must be asserted by persons, although semi automatic approaches can be taken in order to suggest some probable properties by considering the syntactic relationships [23]. However, in the scenery of software repositories the problem is minor. This can be seen by visiting di erent software websites: most of them have many categories in common, or use synonyms to denote the same category. For example, kinds of games in Download.com (Figure 2) are quite similar to ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. VLDB, 1:81-126, 1992.

....: 36 5. 2 Completeness : 39 6 Conclusion 42 7 Bibliography 43 1 Introduction Database integration has been identified as one of the major challenges in responding to enterprises information requirements [9]. In this report, we will prove a number of completeness results that are useful for semantic database integration, where databases are integrated using structure and behaviour [10, 11] As a basis for the completeness results, we need a formalisation of both database schemas and database ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. VLDB Journal, 1:81--126, 1992.

.... These differences react on the structure chosen to represent the phenomenon, but also on the terminology used to name it (homonymy and synonymy conflicts) The less recent approaches describe how to merge several schemas with regard to a set of correspondences between the schemas under study [1, 6, 4]. These approaches were based on relational, functional and entity relationship models. The interschema assertions had to be supplied by the designer, and the conflict solving depended on the designer s common sense. Some recent approaches, in most cases based on object oriented models, proposed ....

....Generally, these rules are model dependent [11] 3 The Integration Process Our integration process allows similarities to be discovered between the schemas under study. The designers do not need to enter the equivalence before doing the integration, as is required in a lot of existing works [6]. The process works on object oriented schemas. These schemas do not have to be expressed in a particular formalism among existing models, but rather on all the object oriented concepts used in most of the existing object oriented design methods [12, 13] that is to say, concepts of attribute, ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. Very Large Data Bases Journal, 1:81--126, 1992.

....has been carried out since the beginning of the 1980s. A comprehensive survey of the area can be found in [Batini86] Most of the 3 work has been done in the context of the relational model [Biskup86] the functional model [Motro87] or (some extended version of) the ER model, Larson89] [Spaccapietra92], Johannesson93a] Johannesson93b] Johannesson93c] Most work has focused on how to merge a number of schemas given a set of proposed schema correspondences. In recent years, however, several researchers have also shown an interest in heuristic methods for identifying equivalences and ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent and Y. Dupont, "Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas", The VLDB Journal, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 81-126, 1992.

....Finally, Section 6 concludes the paper and outlines future work. 2 Related Work The more general problem of schema integration is addressed by several approaches [BLN86,PBE95] For describing conflicts arising in the integration phase various classifications were developed, e.g. in [KS91,SCG93,SPD92] Data models and query languages supporting the integration of heterogeneous sources are particularly multidatabase languages like MSQL [GLRS93] SQL M [KGK 95] and SchemaSQL [LSS96] Examples of system implementations are federated database systems like IRO DB [GGF 96] Pegasus [ASD ....

....operations like union and joins, and restructuring of relations by combining data and meta data. In the following we discuss the application of these techniques for description conflicts, semantic conflicts, and structural conflicts. These are three of the four conflict classes introduced in [SPD92] We close this section by briefly considering the remaining class of heterogeneity conflicts. Description Conflicts. First, we consider description conflicts. This kind of conflicts occurs, when the same real word entity is modeled with different properties. In FRAQL we eliminate these ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. The VLDB Journal, 1(1):81--126, July 1992.

....can be resolved by transforming the local schemata into the canonical data model of the FDBS. In the second step schematic heterogeneity is solved. In general, this step is a very complex task due to many kinds of conflicts. Therefore, different integration methodologies were proposed in [2, 12, 21, 7, 15, 14]. There are different requirements attributed to the integration of local schemata into an integrated schema (adopted from [2] page 337) ffl Completeness and Correctness : The integrated schema must contain all concepts present in any component schema correctly. The integrated schema must be a ....

....all new buildings (S1.Buildings not specialized to old buildings) are included in the second database as habitable buildings. S1.Building: S1.Old Building: S2.Building: S2.Habitable Building: 1 2 3 4 5 Figure 2: Extensional Overlapping of Input Classes Most existing integration approaches [13, 12, 21, 3, 7, 22, 15, 8, 14] do only mark pairs of classes with a possibly non empty population intersection as candidates for integration. Additionally, attributes may be marked to be corresponding. The resulting integration assertions can be listed in the notation proposed by [22] S1fflBuilding S2fflBuilding ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. The VLDB Journal, 1(1):81--126, 1992.

....the integration of different schemata is how to correctly deal with the heterogeneity. Data model heterogeneity can be resolved by transforming each local schema into the canonical data model. After that schema heterogeneity has to be overcome. Many methodologies were proposed (e.g. BLN86, LNE89, SPD92, Dup94, RPRG94, PBE95] which describe various conflict resolution techniques. In order to support logical data independence, different external schemata must be derivable from the integrated schema. From now on, we refer to such views as external integrated schemata. The generation of a view ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. The VLDB Journal, 1(1):81--126, 1992.

....integration, although this is a possibility frequently used. We call this the bottom up strategy. Another approach is the top down strategy: The bottom up approach builds federations starting from the information resources towards the global schema, using a database integration method ( 17] [16], 10] The structure of the federated schema depends directly on the integrated export schemas and the integration method used. The top down approach builds federations starting from a global schema determined by the information needs of the global information system. This involves a ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, Y. Dupont, Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas, The VLDB Jounal, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 81-126, Jul. 1992.

.... to formalize nature of the subject and leads to an abundance of ad hoc solutions and methodologies (see also [9] A lot of approaches to classifying and managing structural conflicts were proposed ( 3, 1, 8, 12] and others) the most fundamental to date research is that one by Spaccapietra et al. ([14, 13]) where a taxonomy distinguishing semantic, descriptional, structural and heterogeneity conflicts was suggested. However, the taxonomy appears to be an informal description rather than a precise specification capable to support automated integration. In general, while the phenomenon of semantic ....

.... of labeling nodes by labeling arrow diagram allows to avoid certain kinds of structural conflicts between views like that one described at the very beginning of the previous section (note, however, these are the conflicts to which a large body of works is devoted, see Spaccapietra et al. [13]) But what are the real structural conflicts in the arrow approach We will expose the idea through considering a very simple example. Let us consider two ER schemas presented on Fig. 1. It is clear that if the names People in the first schema and Person in the second one refer to the same ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model-independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. Very Large Databases Journal, 1(1), 1992.

....federated database systems (FDBS) integration is a function regularly performed at different levels and by different services depending on the organization of the FDBS environment. The value of the problem is well known, various approaches, techniques and sometimes tools were proposed (see, eg, [7, 22, 35, 36, 30, 29, 26] and surveys [2, 27] In spite of the diversity of approaches, several common points can be well identified. Integration consists of schema integration composing a global schema from the set of local ones, and data integration computing virtual extension of the global schema. Schema ....

....conflicts between representations is the key for correct integration. In fact, a methodology of integration is mainly determined by the treatment and the taxonomy of conflicts it adopts. Several approaches were proposed ( 7, 19, 28, 30] and others) the most fundamental to date research is [29] where a taxonomy distinguishing semantic, descriptional, structural and heterogeneity conflicts was developed. It appears however that this is rather a substantial description of various situations leading to conflicts (and, indeed, it properly encompasses the diversity) than a precise formal ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Modelindependent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. Very Large Databases Journal, 1(1), 1992.

....Schema integration is a main component of conceptual design which is itself a part of the overall activity of database design. This explains the significant interest in schema integration methodologies: a vast diversity of various approaches, techniques and sometimes tools were proposed (see, eg, [10, 30, 42, 43, 40, 39, 36] and surveys [4, 37, 33] Moreover, to date the value of the issue has increased greatly due to the evident tendency of organizing modern (and of the nearest future) information systems on cooperative federal principals. Indeed, in the context of federated database systems (FDBS) integration is ....

.... a heuristic and hard to formalize nature of the subject and leads to an abundance of ad hoc solutions and methodologies (see also [31] A lot of approaches to classifying and managing structural conflicts were proposed ( 10, 4, 25, 38, 40] and others) the most fundamental to date research is [39] where a taxonomy distinguishing semantic, descriptional, structural and heterogeneity conflicts was suggested. It appears however that this is rather an informal descrip 2 This phenomenon is often called semantic relativism. Moreover, a good semantic model just must be rich enough to support ....

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model-independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. Very Large Databases Journal, 1(1), 1992.

No context found.

Spaccapietra, S; Parent, C.; Dupont, Y.: Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. In: VLDB Journal: Very Large Data Bases 1 (1992), pp. 81126.

No context found.

Spaccapietra, S., Parent, C., Dupont, Y.: Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. VLDB Journal 1 (1992) 81--126

No context found.

Spaccapietra, S., Parent, C., Dupont, Y.: Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. VLDB Journal 1 (1992) 81--126

No context found.

Spaccapietra, S; Parent, C.; Dupont, Y.: Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. In: VLDB Journal: Very Large Data Bases 1 (1992), pp. 81126.

No context found.

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. VLDB, 1:81--126, 1992.

No context found.

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. VLDB, 1(1):81--126 (1992).

No context found.

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. The VLDB Journal, 1(1):81--126, 1992. 6

No context found.

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, Y. Dupont. Model Independent Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas. The VLDB Journal, 1#1#:81#126, 1992.

No context found.

S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, and Y. Dupont. Model-independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas. Very Large Databases Journal, 1(1), 1992.

First 50 documents  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC