Bright, M.W., Hurson, A.R., Pakzad, S.H.: Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS) 19 (1994) 212--253  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....supporting interoperability rather than through a complete global schema. However, although the impact of a change to a local schema may be smaller, any change to the local schema may require some change to the federated schema. Maintaining these mappings is still difficult. Multidatabase systems [HDG84, LAZ 89, SC94, BHP94] attempt to resolve the problems described above by discarding completely with the need of a global or partial schema. This approach puts the integration responsibility on the user by providing him with functionality beyond standard SQL in order to specify some integration information as part of ....

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(2):212--253, June 1994.

....critical queries and resolve the type incompatibility at the time the queries get executed. Type inference is equally useful in contexts where we need to achieve inter operation between heterogeneous sources. There has been a lot of research on reconciling schemata with semantic heterogeneity [BHP94, Hul97] One approach to this problem identifies the semantic inconsistencies of the ontologies in different domains and creates a global ontology that combines all of them. Another approach identifies the intersection of domains where the inconsistencies occur and tries to resolve them by ....

M.W. Bright, A.R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(2), 1994.

....requires a fee and or specialpermission from the Endowment Proceedings of the 28 th VLDB Conference, Hong Kong, China, 2002 Erhard Rahm rahm informatik.uni leipzig.de use of such applications. Numerous researchers have addressed the schema matching problem either for specific applications [1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 15, 16] or in a more generic way for different applications and schema languages [12, 13, 14] The proposed techniques for automating schema matching exploit various types of schema information, e.g. element names, data types and structural properties [2, 12, 15, 16, 9] as well as characteristics of data ....

....wrong match candidates may be determined in cases where the transitivity property does not hold. In the context of information retrieval, transitive simi larity estimations have been applied to derive the similarity of words based on terminological relationships, such as synonymy and hypernymy [4, 17]. A common approach to determine the transitive similarity is to multiply the individual similarity values [2] This approach, however, may lead to rapidly degrading similarity values. For instance, for contactFirstName 0.5 Name 0.7 firstName the similarity between contactFirstName and ....

Bright, M.W. et al: Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabase. ACM Trans. Database Systems 19: 2, 1994

....and resolve the type incompatibility in due course and not at the time the queries get executed. Our work is equally useful in contexts where we need to achieve interoperation between heterogeneous sources. There has been a lot of research on reconciling schemata with semantic heterogeneity [4, 7]. One approach to this problem identi es the semantic inconsistencies of the ontologies in di erent domains and creates a global ontology that combines all of them. Another approach identi es the intersection of domains where the inconsistencies occur and tries to resolve them by introducing ....

M.W. Bright, A.R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(2), 1994.

....is extremely cumbersome, has limited potential for success and, more importantly, is error prone as it does not deal with terminology nuances. More recently several research activities in the area have concentrated on the issue of creating semantically enhanced federated database dictionaries [BHP94] Are93] MS95] CDA97] Construction of conceptual ontologies on the basis of domain specific terminologies and formalisms that can be mapped to description logics are also discussed in [KS97] Some of the issues relating to the identification of semantically related information can be found ....

.... [Are93] MS95] CDA97] Construction of conceptual ontologies on the basis of domain specific terminologies and formalisms that can be mapped to description logics are also discussed in [KS97] Some of the issues relating to the identification of semantically related information can be found in [BHP94] where the authors describe an approach that relies on an abstract global data structure to match user terms to the semantically closest available system terms. Concepts grounded on a common dictionary are defined in a domain and schema elements from component databases are manually mapped to ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Bright, A. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(2), 1994.

....language to define navigational integration is easy for end users to learn and understand. Moreover, to define navigational integration more easier, we also provide a tool for generating a new client application embedded with the query command defined by mobile end users. The conflict resolution [2, 4, 10, 13, 16] is one of important problems in integration systems. The previous researches based on a wrapper mediator architecture solve this problem by defining data conversion rules in the middleware mediator in a server. How5 ever, such a static manner cannot be applied to our approach that allow end users ....

M.W. Bright, A.R. Hurson and S. Pakzad. "Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases." In ACM Transaction on Database Systems, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 212--253, June 1994.

....as part of the search process. The user performs the query by using a user friendly graphical interface. The approach aims to avoid the use of integrated schemas and centralised repositories containing information about the available data in the system and where it is located, as proposed in [2, 3, 7, 8, 13]. It also permits dynamic evolution of the system. The process is assisted by hierarchical information structures composed of special terms. These terms are used to identify a group of databases related to a query, sharing some similarities with the Global Concepts [11] The idea is to limit the ....

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transaction on Database Systems, 19(12):212--253, June 1994.

....Various architectures and methodologies have been proposed in the literature addressing the problem of manipulating and accessing heterogeneous databases. Some of these architectures use a global schema integrating the databases [1, 6, 16, 17] Other architectures avoid the use of a global schema [3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15] making the databases interoperable. Based on the existing architectures we propose an approach to the problem of interoperating with a large number of autonomous heterogeneous databases. The architecture aims to permit users of different databases to access local data and data from other ....

....the data that is known to be relevant, but to determine which data is relevant and where it is located. Some of the approaches proposed in the literature use a centralised structure like dictionaries and or repositories, containing information about the objects that are exported by the components [5, 7, 8, 10]. However, when dealing with a large number of databases the use of dictionaries and repositories is not suitable. They violate databases autonomy and do not guarantee privacy and confidentiality of the components. The databases have to notify all data that they export into it. A centralised ....

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transaction on Database Systems, 19(12):212--253, June 1994.

.... may easily be extended to include terminology descriptors which describe naming equivalences between inter component schema elements, contextual usage, term senses, term genericity, a list of key words, etc) These can be used to match user terms to the semantically closest available system terms [3] and assist in query formulation. 4.3 Formalization of Relational ADCs To increase clarity and understanding we formalize in this subsection aspects of the ADCs that are used to describe the relational model. For this purpose we use the Z notation [13] We start by formalizing aspects of the ....

M. Bright, A. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases. ACM ToDS, 19(2), June 1994.

....and implemented. However, problem of resolving semantic heterogeneity still evades requiring further research. For resolving semantic heterogeneity, techniques have been proposed to identify semantically related attributes and entities in different schemas using partial and fully automated methods [2][9] We focus on classifying these semantic related constructs with the intention of utilizing such information to the full extent in integration and query processing of heterogeneous database schemas. Our approach to resolving semantic heterogeneity tries to exploit some of the advantages of ....

Bright M.W., Hurson A.R. and Pakzad S., "Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases". In ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 212-253, 1994.

....and expanded view definitions with provisions for updatability. Selected translation or mapping approaches include [3, 9] and others which are based upon the 5 level architecture described in Sheth and Larson [21] Approaches to semantics based integration and access to heterogeneous DBs include [4, 7, 14, 19], wherein semantic features are used to interrelate disparate data and resolve potentially different meanings [8, 11] Seen from a higher level, what is needed are mediation services [22] among different representations and systems. Schema Integration: Database design tools have been applied to ....

Bright, M.W., A.R.Hurson, & S.Pakzad, Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases, ACM Trans. on Database Systems, 19(2), June 1994.

....common metamodel which formalises the syntax and the semantics of the constructs as a collection of second order logic formulae. 29 great majority of the approaches related to the resource discovery are based on the idea of using a federal dictionary or repository containing the exported data [15, 16, 45, 46, 110]. They assume that complete descriptions are specified a priori and do not normally change. However, this is not what happens in a federation of numerous databases (components) 2. Resolution of semantic heterogeneity: After identifying the remote information suitable for a certain request it is ....

....from the initial architectures presented in subsubsection 2.3.1. We divide these approaches into centralised and decentralised, based on the existence of a central structure to help with the information discovery and relationship identification processes. Centralised This group of approaches [15, 16, 37, 38, 45, 46, 110, 111] uses a centralised structure, such as a dictionary or repository,containing information about the objects that are exported by the components of a federation (shared data) and the location of those objects 12 . A centralised structure is not suitable for a system where a component can often ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneityinmultidatabases. ACM Transaction on Database Systems, 19(12):212-- 253, June 1994.

....BRO93, COL95, MIL95] The number of participating local nodes in an IS is usually very large, therefore locating and identifying information of interest is a non trivial and time consuming process. Most proposals for future IS architectures employ a global object space or name space hierarchy [BRI94, BRO93] with associated browsers to locate and identify the required information, and formats and protocols for shipping the information once it is located. Table 2.1 compares DDBSs, MDBSs and ISs. The first row describes the data model 1 These DBMSs can be heterogeneous as well. However, they all have ....

....schemas. In the case of multiple federation MDB systems, the last property (i.e. completeness) is relaxed. Despite all the algorithms, methodologies and heuristics which have been developed to help automate parts of the schema integration process, it is still a very human labour intensive activity [BAT86, BRI94, OZS91] 3.4.3.1 Schema Integration Strategies Schema integration strategies are divided into binary and n ary categories [BAT86, OZS91] see figure 3.9) Binary integration takes two schemas at a time and integrates them. It may proceed by following ladder or balanced strategies. Binary integration is ....

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson and S. H. Pakzad. Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(2), pages 212--253, 1994.

No context found.

Bright, M. W., Hurson, A. R., and Pakzad, S. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Databases Systems, 19(2) (1994).

No context found.

Bright, M.W., Hurson, A.R., Pakzad, S.H.: Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS) 19 (1994) 212--253

No context found.

M. Bright, A. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(2):212--253, 1994.

No context found.

M. Bright, A. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(2):212--253, 1994.

No context found.

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases. ACM Trans. on Database Sys. (TODS), 19(2):212--253, June 1994.

No context found.

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and Simin H. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. Transactions of Database Systems, pages 212-253, June 1994.

No context found.

M. Bright, A. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), 19(2):212--253, 1994.

No context found.

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and Simin H. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. Transactions of Database Systems, pages 212-253, June 1994.

No context found.

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Trans. on Database Systems, 19(2):212--253, June 1994.

No context found.

M. W. Bright, A. R. Hurson, and S. Pakzad. Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases. ACM Trans. on Database Sys. (TODS), 19(2):212--253, June 1994.

No context found.

Bright, M., A. Hurson, and S. Pakzad, Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 1994. 19(2): p. 212-253.

No context found.

M.W. Bright, A.R. Hurson, S. Pakzad, Automated Resolution of Semantic Heterogeneity in Multidatabases, ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19, 2, pp. 212--253, 1994.

First 50 documents

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