Journal of Systems Integration

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 163–194 | Cite as

On research issues regarding uncertain query processing in an office document retrieval system

  • Qianhong Liu
  • Jason T. L. Wang
  • Peter A. Ng
Article

Abstract

TEXPROS (TEXT PROcessing System) is an intelligent document processing, system; it supports storing, extracting, classifying, categorizing, retrieving, and browsing information from a variety of office documents [76]. This article presents a retrieval subsystem for TEXPROS, which is capable of processing incomplete, imprecise, and vague queries, and providing semantically meaningful responses to the user. The design of the retrieval subsystem is highly integrated with various mechanisms for achieving these goals. First, a system catalog including a thesaurus is used to store the knowledge about the database. Second, there is a query transformation mechanism composed of context construction and algebraic query formulation modules. Given an incomplete or imprecise query, the context construction module searches the system for the required terms and constructs a query that has a complete and precise representation: The resulting query is then formulated into an algebraic expression. Third, in practice, the user may not have a clear idea of what he is searching for. A browing mechanism is employed for such situations to assist the user in the retrieval process. With the browser, vague queries can be entered into the system until sufficient information, is obtained to the extent that the user is able to construct a query for his request. Finally, when processing of queries fails by responding with a null answer to the user, a generalizer mechanism is used to give the user cooperative explanation for the null answer. The presented techniques will contribute to our research toward development of highly intelligent data processing facilities beyond the present scope of database technology.

Key Words

Data management systems information retrieval integrated systems intelligent toolbox office automation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P.K. Bose and M. Rajinikanth, “KARMA: A knowledge-based assistant to a database system”, InProceedings 2nd. Conference of AI Applications, pp. 462–472, Oct., 1985.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Bouzeghoub and E. Metais, “SECSI: An expert system approach for database design”,Information Processing, pp. 251–257, 1986.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Boyce, D. Chamberlin, W. King, and M. Hammer, “Specifying queries as relational expressions”,CACM, vol. 18, no. 11, 1975.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B.P. Buckles and F.E. Petry, “A fuzzy representation of data for relational databases”Fuzzy Sets and vol. 5, pp. 213–226, 1982.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D.M. Campbell, D.W. Embley, and B. Czejdo, “Graphical query formulation for an ER model”,Data and Knowledge Engineering, vol 2, pp. 89–121, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R.G.G. Cattell, “An entity-based database interface”, InProceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Santa Monica, CA, pp. 144–150, May, 1980.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Chamberlin, “A unified approach to data definition, manipulation and control”,IBM Journal of Research and Development, vol. 20, no. 6, Nov., 1976.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Chamberlin and R. Boyce, “SEQUEL: A structured English query language”, InProceedings of ACM SIGMOD Workshop on Data Description, Access and Control, Ann Arbor, MI., May, 1974.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D.D. Chanpeaux, “About the Daterson-Wegman linear unification algorithm”,Journal of computer System Science, vol. 32, pp. 79–90, 1986.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. Chen and V. Dhar, “A knowledge-based approach to the design of document-based retrieval systems”, InConf. on Office Information Systems, Cambridge, MA, pp. 281–290, Apr., 1990.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    W.B. Croft, “User-specified domain knowledge for document retrieval”, InProceedings of ACM Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Pisa, Italy, pp. 201–206, 1986.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    W.B. Croft and R. Krovetz, “Interactive retrieval of office documents”, InProceedings of the Conference on Office Information Systems, ACM, New York, NY, 1988.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Date, “A critique of the SQL database language”,ACM SIGMOD Record, vol. 14, no. 3, Nov., 1984.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C.J. Date,The Data Dictionary. Addison-Wesley Publishing comparny, 1989.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. D'Atri and L. Tarantino, “From browsing to querying”,IEEE on Data Engineering, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 46–53, Jun., 1989.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J.P. Davis and R.D. Bonnell, “EDICT—An enhanced relational data dictionary.: Architecture and example. InProceedings 4th International conference on Data engineering, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 184–191, Feb., 1988.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    U. Dayal and P. Bernstein “On the update ability of relational views”, InProceedings of the 4th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, West Berlin, Germany, Sept. 1978.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. Defude,Knowledge-Base System versus Thesaurus: An Architecture Problem about Expert System Design. Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, 1984.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    R. Fikes and T. Kehler, “The role of frame-based representation in reasoning”,Communications of ACM, vol 28, pp. 904–920, 1985.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    N. Fuhr, “Integration of probabilistic fact and text retrieval”, InProceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Int. ACM SIGIR Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 211–222, June, 1992.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    N. Fuhr, “A probabilistic framework for vague queries and imprecise information in database.”, InProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Los Altos, CA, pp. 696–707, 1990.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    S.K. Gadia, S.S. Nair, and Y-C. Poon, “Incomplete information in relational temporal databases”, InProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases Vancouver, Canada, pp. 395–407, Aug. 1992.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    S. Gauch and J.B. Smith, “Search improvement via automatic query reformulation”,ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 249–280, Jul., 1991.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    S. Gibbs and D. Tsichritzis, “Document presentation and query formulation in muse”, InProceedings of ACM Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Pisa, Italy, pp. 23–29, 1986.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    C. Herot, “Spatial management of data,”ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 493–513, Dec., 1980.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    T. Ichikawa and M. Hirakawa, “ARES: A relational database with the capability of performing flexible interpretation of queries,”IEEE Transactions on Sofware Engineering, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 624–634, May, 1986.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    T. Imielinski, “Incomplete information in logical databases,”IEEE on Data Engineering, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 29–40, Jun. 1989.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    G. Jakobson, G. Lafond, E. Nyberg, and G. Piatetsky, “An Intelligent Database Assistant,”IEEE Expert, vol. I, pp. 65–78, 1986.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    J. Kalita, “Generating summary responses to natural language database queries,” University of Saskatchewan, Technical Report TR84-9, 1984.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    M. Kao, N. Cercone, and W. Luk, “What do you mean null? Turning null responses into quality responses,” InProceedings 3rd International Conference on Data Engineering, Los Angeles, California, pp. 365–362, Feb., 1987.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    J. Kaplan, “Cooperative responses from a portable natural language query system,”Artificial Intelligence, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 165–187, 1982.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    A. Keller,Updates to Relational Database Through Views Involving Joins. Academic Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    W. Kent, “Consequences of assuming a universal relation,”ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 539–556, 1981.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    H.F. Korth, G.M. Kuper, J. Feigenbaum, A. Van Gelder, and J.D. Ullman, “System/U: A database system based on the universal relation assumption,”ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 331–347, 1984.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    S.K. Lee, “An extended relational database model for uncertain and imprecise information,” InProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 395–407, Aug. 1992.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    J.W. Lloyd,Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, 1964.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Q. Liu, “An office document retrieval system with the capability of processing incomplete and vague queries,” Ph.D. Thesis Proposal, Department of Computer and Information Science, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Jan., 1993.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    D. Maier, J.D. Ullman, and M.Y. Vardi, “On the foundations of the universal relation model,”ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 283–308, June, 1984.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    A. Martelli and U. Montanari, “An efficient unification algorithm,”ACM Transactions on Programming Languages, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 258–282, Apr., 1982.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    K. McKeown, “The TEXT system for natural language generation: An overview,” InProceedings of 20th ACL, Toronto, Ontario, pp. 113–120, 1982.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    F.S. Mhlanga, J.T.L. Wang, T.H. Shiau, and P.A. Ng, “A query algebra for office documents,” InProceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Systems Integration, Morristown, NJ, pp. 458–467, June, 1992.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    M. Morgenstern, “The role of constraints in database, expert systems, and knowledge representation,” InProceedings of the Ist Int. Workshop on Expert Database Systems, pp. 351–368, 1986.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    A. Motro, “BAROQUE: A browser for relational databases,”ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 164–181, Apr. 1986.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    A. Motro, “Construction queries from tokens,” InProceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Washington, D.C., pp. 120–131, 1986.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    A. Motro, “Extending the relational database model to support goal queries,” InProceedings of the 1st International Conference on Expert Database Systems, Charleston, SC, pp. 129–150, Apr. 1986.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    A. Motro, “FLEX: A tolerant and cooperative user interface to databases,”IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 231–246, Jun. 1990.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    A. Motro, “SEAVE: A mechanism for verifying user presuppositions in query systems,”ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 312–330, Oct. 1986.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    A. Motro, “A trio of database user interfaces for handling vague retrieval requests,”IEEE on Data Engineering, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 54–63, Jun., 1989.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    A. Motro, “VAGUE: A user interface to relational database that permits vague queries,”ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 187–214, Jul., 1988.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    C. Parent and S. Spaccapietra, “An algebra for a general entity-relationship model,”IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 634–643, 1985.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    S. Pollitt, “CANSEARCH: An expert system approach to document retrieval,”Information Processing Management, vol. 23, no. 2. pp. 119–138, 1987.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    H. Prade and C. Testemale, “Generalizing database relational algebra for the treatment of incomplete or uncertain information and vague queries,”Information Science, vol. 34, pp. 115–143, 1984.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    R. Rada and B.K. Martin, “Augmenting thesauri for information systems,”ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 378–392, Oct., 1987.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    P. Reisner, “Human factors studies of database query languages: A survey and assessment,”ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 13, no. 1, March, 1981.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    P. Reisner, “Use of psychological experimentation as an aid to development of a query language,”IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 3, no. 3, May, 1977.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    J.A. Robinson, “A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle,”JACM, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 23–41, Jan., 1965.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    C. Rolland and C. Proix, “An expert system approach to information systems design,”Information Processing, pp. 251–257, 1986.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    L.V. Saxton and V.V. Raghavan, “Design of an integrated information retrieval/database management system,”IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 231–246, Jun., 1990.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    R. Schank and W. Lehnert, “The concept of conversation,” InProceedings of the 6th Inter. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 769–771, 1979.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    P. Schauble, “Thesaurus based concept spaces,” InProceedings of the 10th Annual Int. ACM SIGIR Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 254–262, 1987.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    P. Shoval, “Expert/consultation system for the retrieval database with semantic network of concepts,” InProceedings of the 4th Annual Int. ACM SIGIR Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 145–149, 1981.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    E.H. Sibley, “An expert database system architecture based on an active and extensible dictionary system,” InProceedings of the 1st Int. Workshop on Expert Database Systems, pp. 401–422, 1986.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    M. Siegel and S.E. Madnick, “A metadata approach to resolving semantic conflicts,” InProceedings of 17th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 133–145, Sept., 1991.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    J.M. Smith and D.C.P. Smith, “Database abstractions: Aggregation and generalization,”ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 105–133, 1977.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    P.J. Smith, S.J. Shute, and D. Galdes, “Knowledge-based search tactics for an intelligent intermediary system,”ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 246–270, July, 1989.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    M. Stonebraker and J. Kalash, “TIMBER: A sophisticated relation browser,” InProceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Mexico City, Mexico, pp. 1–10, Sept., 1982.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    M. Stonebraker, H. Stettner, N. Lynn, J. Kalash, and A. Guttman, “Document processing in a relational database system,”ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 143–158, Apr., 1983.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    M. Stonebraker, E. Wong, P. Kreps, and G. Held, “The design and implementation of INGRES,”TODS, vol. 1, no. 3, Sept., 1976.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    V. Tahani, “A conceptual framework for fuzzy query processing—A step toward very intelligent database systems,”Information Processing & Management, vol. 13, pp. 289–303, 1977.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    R.M. Tong, “RUBRIC: An environment for full text information retrieval,” InProceedings of the 8th Annual Int. ACM SIGIR Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 243–251, 1985.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    F.N. Tou, M.D. Williams, R. Fikes, A. Henderson, and T. Malone, “RABBIT: An intelligent database assistant,” InProceedings National Conference of AI, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 314–318, Aug., 1982.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    A. Tzvieli, “Representation and access of uncertain relational data,”IEEE on Data Engineering, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 21–28, Jun., 1989.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    J.D. Ullman, “On Kent's consequences of assuming a universal relation,”ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 637–643, 1983.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    J.D. Ullman,Principles of Database Systems. Computer Science Press, 2nd edition, 1982.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    R.A. Wall, “Intelligent indexing and retrieval: A man-machine partnership,”Information Processing Management, vol. 16, pp. 73–90, 1980.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    J.T.L. Wang and P.A. Ng, “TEXPROS: An intelligent document processing system,”International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 171–196, June, 1992.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    H.K.T. Wong and I. Kuo, “GUIDE: Graphical user interface for database exploration,” InProceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Mexico City, Mexico, pp. 1–10, Sept. 1982.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    X. Wu and T. Ichikawa, “KDA: A knowledge-based database assistant with a query guiding facility,”IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 443–453, Oct., 1992.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    L.A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,”Information and Control, vol. 3, pp. 177–200, 1965.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    L.A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility,”Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3–28, 1978.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    M. Zemankova, “FIIS: A fuzzy intelligent information system,”Data Engineering, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 11–20, Jun., 1989.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    M. Zemankova and A. Kandel, “Implementing imprecision in information systems,”Information Science, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 107–141, Dec., 1985.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    M.M. Zloof, “Query-by-example: A database language,”IBM System Journal, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 324–343, 1977.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Qianhong Liu
    • 1
  • Jason T. L. Wang
    • 1
  • Peter A. Ng
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Integrated Systems Research, Department of Computer and Information ScienceNew Jersey Institute of TechnologyNewark

Personalised recommendations