Advertisement

A Rule-Based Approach for the Recognition of Similarities and Differences in the Integration of Structural Karlstad Enterprise Modeling Schemata

  • Peter Bellström
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 68)

Abstract

In this paper, we address the recognition of similarities and differences in schema integration while applying the notation in the Karlstad Enterprise Modeling approach. In doing so, we describe and present a set of “if -then” rules. In these rules, we make use of both concept name comparison and comparison of concept neighborhoods (their surroundings). Following the classification of schema matching approaches given by [26], the rules are classified as a composite schema-based matching approach. The rules should first of all be viewed as a step towards a semi-automatic method for the recognition of similarities and differences in the integration of structural Karlstad Enterprise Modeling schemata. By applying the proposed rules, several problems, such as homonyms and synonyms, might be recognized that otherwise could pass unnoticed.

Keywords

Schema Integration Recognition of Similarities and Differences Karlstad Enterprise Modeling Approach 

References

  1. 1.
    Batini, C., Lenzerini, M., Navathe, S.B.: A Comparative Analysis of Methodologies for Database Schema Integration. ACM Computing Surveys 18(4), 323–364 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Batini, C., Ceri, S., Navathe, S.B.: Conceptual Database Design An Entity-Relatinship Approach. The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Redwood City (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellström, P.: Using Enterprise Modeling for Identification and Resolution of Homonym Conflicts in View Integration. In: Vasilecas, O., Caplinskas, A., Wojtkowski, W., Wojtkowski, W.G., Zupančič, J., Wrycza, S. (eds.) Information Systems Development Advances in Theory, Practice, and Education, pp. 265–276. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bellström, P.: View Integration in Conceptual Database Design Problems, Approaches and Solutions. Licentiate Thesis. Karlstad University Studies 2006:5 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bellström, P.: On the Problem of Semantic Loss in View Integration. In: Barry, C., Conboy, K., Lang, M., Wojtkowski, G., Wojtkowski, W. (eds.) Information Systems Development Challenges in Practice, Theory, and Education, pp. 963–974. Springer Science, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bellström, P.: Schema Integration – How to Integrate Static and Dynamic Database Schemata. Dissertation. Karlstad University Studies 2010:13 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bellström, P., Jakobsson, L.: Towards a Generic and Integrated Enterprise Modeling Approach to Designing Databases and Software Components. In: Nilsson, A.G., Gustas, R., Wojtkowski, W., Wojtkowski, S.W., Wrycza, S., Zupancic, J. (eds.) Advances in Information Systems Development: Bridging the Gap between Academia and Industry, pp. 635–646. Springer Science, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bellström, P., Vöhringer, J., Salbrechter, A.: Recognition and Resolution of Linguistic Conflicts: The Core to a Successful View and Schema Integration. In: Magyar, G., Knapp, G., Wojtkowski, W., Wojtkowski, W.G., Zupančič, J. (eds.) Advances in Information Systems Development: New Methods and Practice for the Networked Society, pp. 77–87. Springer Science, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bellström, P., Vöhringer, J., Kop, C.: Guidelines for Modeling Language Independent Integration of Dynamic Schemata. In: Pahl, C. (ed.) Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 112–117. ACTA Press (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bellström, P., Vöhringer, J.: Towards the Automation of Modeling Language Independent Schema Integration. In: Kusiak, A., Lee, S.-G. (eds.) Proceedings International Conference on Information, Process, and Knowledge Management, pp. 110–115. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen, P.: The Entity-Relationship Model – Toward a Unified View of Data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 1(1), 9–36 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ekenberg, L., Johannesson, P.: Conflictfreeness as a Basis for Schema Integration. In: Bhalla, S. (ed.) CISMOD 1995. LNCS, vol. 1006, pp. 1–13. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ekenberg, L., Johannesson, P.: A Formal Basis for Dynamic Schema Integration. In: Thalheim, B. (ed.) Conceptual Modeling, ER 1996, pp. 211–226. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frank, H., Eder, J.: Integration of Behavioral Models. In: Proceedings of the ER 1997 Workshop on Behavioral Models and Design Transformations: Issues and Opportunities in Conceptual Modeling [Electronic] (1997), http://osm7.cs.byu.edu/ER97/workshop4/fe.html (04-08-2010)
  15. 15.
    Frank, H., Eder, J.: Integration of Statecharts. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IFCIS International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, pp. 364–372. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gustas, R.: Gustiené. P.: Towards the Enterprise Engineering Approach for Information System Modelling Across Organisational and Technical Boundaries. In: Camp, O., Filipe, J., Hammoudi, S. & Piattini, M. (eds.) Enterprise Information Systems V. pp. 204–215. Kluwer (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gustas, R., Gustiené, P.: Pragmatic-Driven Approach for Service-Oriented Analysis and Design. In: Johannesson, P., Söderström, E. (eds.) Information Systems Engineering: From Data Analysis to Process Networks, pp. 97–128. IGI Global (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gustas, R., Gustiené, P.: Service-Oriented Foundation and Analysis Patterns for Conceptual Modelling of Information Systems. In: Barry, C., Conboy, K., Lang, M., Wojtkowski, G., Wojtkowski, W. (eds.) Information Systems Development Challenges in Practice, Theory, and Education, pp. 249–265. Springer Science, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    He, Q., Ling, T.W.: Resolving Schematic Discrepancy in the Integration of Entity-Relationship Schemas. In: Atzeni, P., Chu, W., Lu, H., Zhou, S., Ling, T.W. (eds.) ER 2004. LNCS, vol. 3288, pp. 245–258. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johannesson, P.: Schema Integration, Schema Translation, and Interoperability in Federated Information Systems. Dissertation. Stockholm: Department of Computer & Systems Sciences, Stockholm University (1993)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee, M.L., Ling, T.W.: A Methodology for Structural Conflict Resolution in the Integration of Entity-Relationship Schemas. Knowledge and Information System 5(2), 225–247 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mannino, M.V.: Database Design, Application Development, & Administration. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Irwin (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S., Russo, A.: Making Inconsistency Respectable in Software Development. The Journal of Systems and Software 58, 171–180 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Object Management Group: OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML), Superstructure. [Electronics] (2009), http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.2/Superstructure/PDF/ (25-01-2010)
  25. 25.
    Parsons, J.: Effects of Local Versus Global Schema Diagrams on Verification and Communication in Conceptual Data Modeling. Journal of Management Information Systems 19(3), 155–183 (2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.A.: A Survey of Approaches to Automatic Schema Matching. VLDB Journal 10, 334–350 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Song, W.: Schema Integration – Principles, Methods, and Applications. Dissertation. Stockholm: Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University (1995)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Spaccapietra, S., Parent, C.: View Integration: a Step Forward in Solving Structural Conflicts. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 6(2), 258–274 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vernadat, F.B.: Enterprise Modeling and Integration: principles and applications. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton (1996)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vöhringer, J., Mayr, H.C.: Integration of Schemas on the Pre-Design Level Using the KCPM-Approach. In: Nilsson, A.G., Gustas, R., Wojtkowski, W., Wojtkowski, W.G., Wrycza, S., Zupančič, J. (eds.) Advances in Information Systems Development: Bridging the Gap between Academia and Industry, pp. 623–634. Springer Science, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Bellström
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information SystemsKarlstad UniversityKarlstadSweden

Personalised recommendations