Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Efficient entity resolution based on subgraph cohesion

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Knowledge and Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Entity resolution has wide applications and receives considerable attentions in literature. For entity resolution, similarity functions are often used to judge whether two data objects refer to the same real-world entity. However, the similar relations determined by many commonly used similarity functions lack transitivity. This fact results in the conflict that \(A\) and \(B\) refer to the same entity and \(B\) and \(C\) refer to the same entity, but \(A\) and \(C\) do not refer to the same entity. To address this problem and make the group-wise entity resolution results consistent with pairwise entity resolution, this paper models the entity resolution problem as the partition of the vertices in a weighted graph into cohesive subgraphs, which is proven to be co-NP-complete. To solve this problem, an approximate algorithm with approximation ratio bound is proposed. For performing entity resolution on a large data set efficiently, a heuristic algorithm is developed to address this problem. In order to implement the heuristic algorithm efficiently, a similarity measure compatible with many measures in common usage is presented. With such similarity measure, indices and efficient implementations for the heuristic algorithm are proposed. Extensive experiments have been performed to verify the efficiency and effectiveness of the methods in this paper.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Duplicate detection, record linkage, and identity uncertainty: datasets. http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/ml/riddle/data.html. Accessed 6 Oct 2013

  2. Matching (graph theory) (2012). http://en.wikipedia.org/matching_(graph_theory). Accessed 15 Oct 2012

  3. DBLP (2014). http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/. Accessed 15 Jan 2014

  4. Arasu A, Ré C, Suciu D (2009) Large-scale deduplication with constraints using dedupalog. In: ICDE, pp 952–963

  5. Aslam JA, Pelekhov E, Rus D (2004) The star clustering algorithm for static and dynamic information organization. J Graph Algorithms Appl 8:95–129

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bayardo RJ, Ma Y, Srikant R (2007) Scaling up all pairs similarity search. In: WWW, pp 131–140

  7. Benjelloun O, Garcia-Molina H, Menestrina D, Su Q, Whang SE, Widom J (2009) Swoosh: a generic approach to entity resolution. VLDB J 18(1):255–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bhattacharya I, Getoor L (2004) Iterative record linkage for cleaning and integration. In: DMKD, pp 11–18

  9. Chaudhuri S, Chen B-C, Ganti V, Kaushik R (2007) Example-driven design of efficient record matching queries. In: VLDB, pp 327–338

  10. Chaudhuri S, Ganti V, Kaushik R (2006) A primitive operator for similarity joins in data cleaning. In: ICDE, p 5

  11. Chaudhuri S, Sarma AD, Ganti V, Kaushik R (2007) Leveraging aggregate constraints for deduplication. In: SIGMOD conference, pp 437–448

  12. Chen Z, Kalashnikov DV, Mehrotra S (2009) Exploiting context analysis for combining multiple entity resolution systems. In: SIGMOD conference, pp 207–218

  13. Dong X, Halevy AY, Madhavan J (2005) Reference reconciliation in complex information spaces. In: SIGMOD conference, pp 85–96

  14. Duda R, Hart P, Stork D (2001) Pattern classification. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Elmagarmid AK, Ipeirotis PG, Verykios VS (2007) Duplicate record detection: a survey. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 19(1):1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hassanzadeh O, Chiang F, Miller RJ, Lee HC (2009) Framework for evaluating clustering algorithms in duplicate detection. PVLDB 2(1):1282–1293

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hassanzadeh O, Miller RJ (2009) Creating probabilistic databases from duplicated data. VLDB J 18(5):1141–1166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jiang Y, Li G, Feng J, Li W (2014) String similarity joins: an experimental evaluation. PVLDB 7(8):625–636

  19. Kalashnikov DV, Mehrotra S (2006) Domain-independent data cleaning via analysis of entity-relationship graph. ACM Trans Database Syst 31(2):716–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim HS, Lee D (2010) Harra: fast iterative hashed record linkage for large-scale data collections. In: EDBT, pp 525–536

  21. Koudas N, Saha A, Srivastava D, Venkatasubramanian S (2009) Metric functional dependencies. In: ICDE, pp 1275–1278

  22. Manning CD, Schütze H (1999) Foundations of statistical natural language processing. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Menestrina D, Whang S, Garcia-Molina H (2010) Evaluating entity resolution results. PVLDB 3(1):208–219

  24. Micali S, Vazirani VV (1980) An \(\text{ o }(\sqrt{|V|}|e|\)) algorithm for finding maximum matching in general graphs. In: FOCS, pp 17–27

  25. Michelson M, Knoblock CA (2006) Learning blocking schemes for record linkage. In: AAAI

  26. Michelson M, Knoblock CA (2009) Mining the heterogeneous transformations between data sources to aid record linkage. In: IC-AI, pp 422–428

  27. Sarawagi S, Bhamidipaty A (2002) Interactive deduplication using active learning. In: KDD, pp 269–278

  28. Schaeffer SE (2007) Graph clustering. Comput Sci Rev 1(1):27–64

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Shen W, DeRose P, Vu L, Doan A, Ramakrishnan R (2007) Source-aware entity matching: a compositional approach. In: ICDE, pp 196–205

  30. Shen W, Li X, Doan A (2005) Constraint-based entity matching. In: AAAI, pp 862–867

  31. Whang SE, Menestrina D, Koutrika G, Theobald M, Garcia-Molina H (2009) Entity resolution with iterative blocking. In: SIGMOD conference, pp 219–232

  32. Xiao C, Wang W, Lin X, Yu JX (2008) Efficient similarity joins for near duplicate detection. In: WWW, pp 131–140

  33. Yang X, Wang B, Li C (2008) Cost-based variable-length-gram selection for string collections to support approximate queries efficiently. In: SIGMOD conference, pp 353–364

  34. Yannakakis M (1978) Node- and edge-deletion np-complete problems. In: STOC, pp 253–264

  35. Yin X, Han J, Yu PS (2007) Object distinction: distinguishing objects with identical names. In: ICDE, pp 1242–1246

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper was partially supported by NGFR 973 Grant 2012CB316200, NSFC Grant 61472099,61133002 and National Sci-Tech Support Plan 2015BAH10F00.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China

    Hongzhi Wang, Jianzhong Li & Hong Gao

Authors
  1. Hongzhi Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jianzhong Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hong Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hongzhi Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, H., Li, J. & Gao, H. Efficient entity resolution based on subgraph cohesion. Knowl Inf Syst 46, 285–314 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-015-0818-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-015-0818-7

Keywords