A Pragmatic Method for the Integration of Higher-Order Entity-Relationship Schemata

  • Thomas Lehmann
  • Klaus-Dieter Schewe
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1920)


One of the challenges in practical information system development is to find suitable methods for schema integration. Schema integration aims at replacing a set of existing schemata by a single new one. In this case there is a need to guarantee that with respect to information capacity the new schema dominates or is equivalent to the old ones. We develop formal transformation rules for schema integration. These rules rely on the Higher-order Entity-Relationship model and its theory of schema equivalence and dominance. The rules are embedded in a pragmatic method telling how they should be applied for integration. The method has been applied to various schemata of realistic size.


Schema Integration Transformation Rule Entity Type Integrity Constraint Relationship Type 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. Biskup, B. Convent. A Formal View Integration Method. Proc. ACM SIGMOD 1986, 398–407.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Hull. Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata. SIAM Journal of Computing vol. 15 (3), 1986, 856–886.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J.L. Koh, A.L.P. Chen. Integration of Heterogeneous Object Schemas. Proc. ER’93, 1993, 297–314.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Larson, S.B. Navathe, R. Elmasri. A Theory of Attribute Equivalence in Databases with Application to Schema Integration. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering vol. 15 (4), 1989, 449–463.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. Lehmann. Ein pragmatisches Vorgehenskonzept zur Integration und Kooperation von Informationssystemen. Ph.D. Thesis, TU Clausthal, 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    X. Qian. Correct Schema Transformations. Proc. EDBT’96, Springer LNCS 1057, 1996, 114–126.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Sciore, M. Siegel, A. Rosenthal. Using Semantic Values to Facilitate Interoperability Among Heterogeneous Information Systems. ACM TODS vol. 19 (2), 1994, 254–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent. View Integration-A Step Forward in Solving Structural Conflicts. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering vol. 6 (2), 1994, 258–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. Thalheim. Entity-Relationship Modeling-Foundations of Database Technology. Springer 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Lehmann
    • 1
  • Klaus-Dieter Schewe
    • 2
  1. 1.Volkswagen AG, K-DOE 2IS ProduktmanagementWolfsburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of Information SystemsMassey UniversityPalmerston NorthNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations