Skip to main content

Discovering and Representing InterSchema Semantic Knowledge in a Cooperative Multi-Information Server Environment

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA 2000)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1873))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Discovering interschema semantic knowledge between corresponding elements in a cooperating Multi-Information Server (MIS) environment requires deep knowledge, not only about the structure of the data represented in each server, but also about the commonly occurring differences in the intended semantics of this data. The same information could be represented in various incompatible structures, and more importantly the same structure could be used to represent data with many diverse and incompatible semantics. Interschema semantic knowledge can only be detected if both the structural and semantic properties of the schemas of these servers are made explicit and formally represented in a way that a computer system can process. Unfortunately, very often there is lack of such knowledge and the local schemas, being semantically weak as a consequence of the limited expressiveness of traditional data models, do not help the acquisition of this knowledge. The solution to overcome this limitation is primarily to upgrade the semantic level of the IS local schemas through a semantic enrichment process by augmenting these local schemas to semantically enriched schema models, then to use the enriched schema models in detecting and representing correspondences between classes belonging to different schemas. In this paper we investigate the possibility of using domain ontologies both for building semantically rich schema models, and for expressing interschema knowledge and reasoning about it. We believe that the use of domain ontologies in this setting has two important advantages. On the one hand, it enables a semantic approach for interschema knowledge specification, by concentrating on expressing conceptual and semantic correspondences between both the conceptual (intensional) definition and the set of instances (extension) of classes represented in different schemas. On the other hand, it is exactly this semantic nature of our approach that allows us to devise reasoning mechanisms for discovering and reusing interschema knowledge when the need arises to compare and combine it.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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. R. Ahmed, P. De Smedt, W. Du, W. Kent, M. A. Ketabchi, W. Litwin, and A. Rafi. The Pegasus heterogeneous multidatabase system. IEEE Computer, 24(12):19–27, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Y. Arens, C. Y. Chee, C. Hsu, and C. A. Knoblock. Retrieving and integrating data from multiple information sources. International Journal of Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems, 2(2):127–158, 1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. C. Batini, M. Lenzerini, and S. B. Navathe. A comparative analysis of methodologies for database schema integration. ACM Computing Surveys, 18(4):323–364, November 1986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. E. Bertino. Integration of heterogeneous data repositories by using object-oriented views. Proceedings of International Workshop on Interoperability in Multidatabase Systems, Kyoto, Japan, pages 22–29, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. Buneman, L. Raschid, and J. Ullman. Mediator languages-a proposal for a standard. Report of an I3/POB Working Group held at the University of Maryland, ftp://ftp.umiacs.umd.edu/pub/ONRrept/medmodel96.ps, April 1996.

  6. T. Catarci and M. Lenzerini. Representing and using interschema knowledge in cooperative information systems. International Journal of Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems, 2(4):375–398, 1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. R.G. Cattel and Morgan Kufmann. ODMG-93 The Object Database Standard Release 1.2. Inc., San Francisco, California, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. C. Collet, M. N. Huhus, and W. M. Shen. Resource integration using a large knowledge base in Carnot. IEEE Computer, 24(12):55–62, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. C. H. Goh, S. Bressan, S. Mandick, and M. Siegel. Context interchange: New features and formalisms for the intelligent integration of information. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 17(3):270–293, July 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. D. D. Karunaratna, W. A. Gray, and N. J. Fiddian. Establishing a knowledge base to assist integration of heterogeneous databases. In Suzanne M. Embury et al, editor, Proceedings of 16th British National Conference on Databases (BNCOD16), LNCS 1405, Springer, pages 103–118, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  11. M. Kifer and G. Lauson. F-logic: A higher-order language for reasoning about objects, inheritance and scheme. Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  12. R. Krishnamurthy, W. Litwin, and W. Kent. Language features for interoperability of databases with schematic discrepancies. Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  13. E. Kuhn and T. Ludwig. VIP-MDBMS: A logic multidatabase system. Proceedings of 2nd International Symposium on Distributed Databases, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. Larson, S. Navathe, and R. Elmasri. A theory of attribute equivalence in databases with application to schema integration. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 15(4):449–463, 1989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Alon Y. Levy, D. Srivastava, and T. Kirk. Data model and query evaluation in global information systems. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 5(2), 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. E. Mena, V. Kashyap, A. Sheth, and A. Illarramendi. Observer: An approach for query processing in global information systems based on interoperation across pre-existing ontologies. Proceedings of First IFCIS International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’96), Brussels (Belgium), IEEE Computer Society Press, pages 14–25, June 1996.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. A. Motro. Superviews: Virtual integration of multiple databases. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 13(7):785–798, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. A. M. Ouksel and I. Ahmed. Ontologies are not the panacea in data integration: A flexible coordinator to mediate context construction. Distributed and Parallel Databases, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 7(1):7–35, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. A. Rector, W. Solomon, W. Nowlan, and T. Rush. A terminology server for medical language and medical information systems. Methods of Information in Medicine, 34:147–157, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. M. Siegel and S. Madnick. A metadata approach to resolving semantic conflicts. Proceedings of 17th VLDB Conference, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  21. A-R Tawil and Wernher Behrendt. Requirements for components of an intelligent information retrieval model for the www. Intelligent World Wide Web Agents. IEE Colloquium organised by Professional Group c4 (Artificial Intelligence), 97(118):1-1–1-7, March 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  22. A-R Tawil, W. A. Gray, and N. J. Fiddian. Ontological commitments for multiple view cooperation in a distributed heterogeneous environment. Proceedings of 16th British National Conference on Databases (BNCOD16), 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  23. A-R Tawil, W. A. Gray, and N. J. Fiddian. Rich semantic-based schema integration in a federated MDBS environment. Submitted for publication to IDEAS, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  24. William A. Woods and James G. Schmolze. The KL-ONE family. Computer Math. Applic., 23(2–5):133–177, August 1992.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Tawil, AR.H., Gray, W.A., Fiddian, N.J. (2000). Discovering and Representing InterSchema Semantic Knowledge in a Cooperative Multi-Information Server Environment. In: Ibrahim, M., Küng, J., Revell, N. (eds) Database and Expert Systems Applications. DEXA 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1873. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44469-6_51

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44469-6_51

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67978-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44469-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics