Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metrics for Evaluating the Quality of Entity Relationship Models

  • Conference paper
Conceptual Modeling – ER ’98 (ER 1998)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1507))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper defines a comprehensive set of metrics for evaluating the quality of Entity Relationship models. This is an extension of previous research which developed a conceptual framework and identified stakeholders and quality factors for evaluating data models. However quality factors are not enough to ensure quality in practice, because different people will have different interpretations of the same concept. The objective of this paper is to refine these quality factors into quantitative measures to reduce subjectivity and bias in the evaluation process. A total of twenty five candidate metrics are proposed in this paper, each of which measures one of the quality factors previously defined. The metrics may be used to evaluate the quality of data models, choose between alternatives and identify areas for improvement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Australian Software Metrics Association (ASMA): ASMA Project Database, Release 7, November, P.O. Box 1287, Box Hill, Victoria, Australia, 3128 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Batini, C., Ceri, S., Navathe, S.B.: Conceptual Database Design: An Entity Relationship Approach. Benjamin Cummings, Redwood City, California (1992)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Batini, C., Lenzerini, M., And Navathe, S.: A Comparative Analysis of Methodologies for Database Schema Integration. ACM Computing Surveys 18(4), 323–364 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Checkland, P.B., Scholes, J.: Soft Systems Methodology in Action. Wiley, Chichester (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Date, C.J.: Introduction to Database Systems, 4th edn. Addison Wesley, Reading (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dubin, R.: Theory Building. The Free Press, New York (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gartner Research Group: Sometimes You Gotta Break the Rules, Gartner Group Strategic Management Series Key Issues, November 23 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Goodhue, D.L., Kirsch, L.J., Wybo, M.D.: The Impact of Data Integration on the Costs and Benefits of Information Systems. MIS Quarterly 16(3), 293–311 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hitchman, S.: Practitioner Perceptions On The Use Of Some Semantic Concepts In The Entity Relationship Model. European Journal of Information Systems 4, 31–40 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. International Standards Organisation (ISO), Information Processing Systems - Concepts and Terminology for the Conceptual Schema and the Information Base, ISO Technical Report 9007 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kesh, S.: Evaluating the Quality of Entity Relationship Models. Information and Software Technology 37(12) (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Klir, G.J.: Architecture of Systems Problem Solving. Plenum Press, New York (1985)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Krogstie, J., Lindland, O.I., Sindre, G.: Towards a Deeper Understanding of Quality in Requirements Engineering. In: Iivari, J., Rossi, M., Lyytinen, K. (eds.) CAiSE 1995. LNCS, vol. 932. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Levitin, A., Redman, T.: Quality Dimensions of a Conceptual View. Information Processing and Management 31 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lindland, O.I., Sindre, G., And Solveberg, A.: Understanding Quality in Conceptual Modelling. IEEE Software (March 1994)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Loffman, R.S., Rush, R.M.: Improving Data Quality. Database Programming and Design 4(4), 17–19 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Martin, J.: Strategic Data Planning Methodologies. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mayer, R.E.: Models for Understanding, Review of Educational Research (Spring 1989)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Meyer, B.: Object Oriented Software Construction. Prentice Hall, New York (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Moody, D.L., Shanks, G.G.: What Makes A Good Data Model? Evaluating the Quality of Entity Relationship Models. In: Loucopolis, P. (ed.) Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Manchester, December 14-17, pp. 94–111 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Moody, D.L., Simsion, G.C.: Justifying Investment in Information Resource Management. Australian Journal of Information Systems 3(1), 25–37 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Moody, D.L.: Graphical Entity Relationship Models: Towards A More User Understandable Representation of Data. In: Thalheim, B. (ed.) Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Cottbus, Germany, October 7-9, pp. 227–244 (1996a)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Moody, D.L.: Critical Success Factors for Information Resource Management. In: Proc. 7th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Hobart, Australia (December 1996b)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Moody, D.L.: A Multi-Level Architecture for Representing Enterprise Data Models. In: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Los Angeles, November 1-3 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Moody, D.L., Shanks, G.G.: What Makes A Good Data Model? A Framework for Evaluating and Improving the Quality of Entity Relationship Models. Australian Computer Journal (1998) (forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Moody, D.L., Shanks, G.G., And Darke, P.: Improving the Quality of Entity Relationship Models-Experience in Research and Practice. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  27. O’Brien, C., O’Brien, S.: Mining Your Legacy Systems: A Data-Based Approach. In: Asia Pacific DB2 User Group Conference, Melbourne, Australia, November 21-23 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pippenger, N.: Complexity Theory. Scientific American 238(6), 1–15 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Roman, G.: A Taxonomy of Current Issues in Requirements Engineering. IEEE Computer (April 1985)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Shanks, G.G.: Conceptual Data Modelling: An Empirical Study of Expert and Novice Data Modellers. Australian Journal of Information Systems 4(2), 63–73 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Simsion, G.C.: Data Planning in a Volatile Business Environment. In: Australian Computer Society Conference on Strategic Planning for Information Technology, Ballarat, pp. 88–92 (March 1988)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Simsion, G.C.: Creative Data Modelling. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Entity Relationship Conference, pp. 112–123. San Francisco (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Simsion, G.C.: Data Modelling Essentials. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Symons, C.R.: Function Point Analysis: Difficulties and Improvements. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 14(1) (January 1988)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Symons, C.R.: Software Sizing and Estimating: MkII Function Point Analysis. J. Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Thompson, C.: Living with an Enterprise Model. Database Programming and Design 6(12), 32–38 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  37. van Vliet, J.C.: Software Engineering: Principles and Practice. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Von Halle, B.: Data: Asset or Liability? Database Programming and Design 4(7), 13–15 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Zultner, R.E.: The Deming Way: Total Quality Management for Software. In: Proceedings of Total Quality Management for Software Conference, Washington, DC, pp. 134–145 (April 1992)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Simsion Bowles and Associates, 1 Collins St., Melbourne, Australia

    Daniel L. Moody

Authors
  1. Daniel L. Moody
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computing, National University of Singapore,  

    Tok-Wang Ling

  2. Department of MIS, Eller School of Management, University of Arizona, 430J McClelland Hall, 85721, Tucson, AZ

    Sudha Ram

  3. Department of Computer Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore

    Mong Li Lee

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Moody, D.L. (1998). Metrics for Evaluating the Quality of Entity Relationship Models. In: Ling, TW., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds) Conceptual Modeling – ER ’98. ER 1998. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1507. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-49524-6_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-49524-6_18

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-65189-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49524-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation