Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An Ontology-Based Approach for Semantic Conflict Resolution in Database Integration

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Computer Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An important task in database integration is to resolve data conflicts, on both schema-level and semantic-level. Especially difficult the latter is. Some existing ontology-based approaches have been criticized for their lack of domain generality and semantic richness. With the aim to overcome these limitations, this paper introduces a systematic approach for detecting and resolving various semantic conflicts in heterogeneous databases, which includes two important parts: a semantic conflict representation model based on our classification framework of semantic conflicts, and a methodology for detecting and resolving semantic conflicts based on this model. The system has been developed, experimental evaluations on which indicate that this approach can resolve much of the semantic conflicts effectively, and keep independent of domains and integration patterns.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kashyap V, Sheth A P. Semantic and schematic similarities between database objects: A context-based approach. The VLDB Journal, 1996, 5(4): 276–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alon Y Halevy, Naveen Ashishy, Dina Bittonz. Enterprise information integration: Successes, challenges and controversies. In Proc. SIGMOD, 2005, pp. 778–787.

  3. Gruber T. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 1993, 5: 199–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Michael Uschold, Michael Gruninger. Ontologies and semantics for seamless connectivity. SIGMOD Record, 2004, 33(4): 58–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dave Beckett, Brain Mcbride. RDF/XML syntax specification (revised). http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-gra-mmar/, 2004.

  6. Michael K Smith, Chris Welty, Deborah L McGuinness. OWL web ontology language guide. http://www. w3.org/TR/owl-guide/, 2004.

  7. The Gene Ontology. http://www.geneontology.org/, 2005.

  8. Unified Medical Language System. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/, 2006.

  9. Fowler J, Nodine M, Perry B, Bargmeyer B. Agent-based semantic interoperability in infosleuth. SIGMOD Record, 1999, 28(1): 60–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mena E, Illarramendi A, Kashyap V, Sheth A P. OBSERVER: An approach for query processing in global information systems based on interoperability across pre-existing ontologies. Distributed and Parallel Databases, 2000, 8(2): 223–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sudha Ram, Jinsoo Park. Semantic conflict resolution ontology (SCROL): An ontology for detecting and resolving data and schema level semantic conflicts. IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2004, 16(2): 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Conflict Resolution Environment for Autonomous Mediation. http://info-sharing.com/index.html.

  13. Ramon Lawrence. Automatic conflict resolution to integrate relational schema [Dissertation]. Univ. Manitoba, 2001.

  14. Cheng Hian Goh. Representing and reasoning about semantic conflicts in heterogeneous information systems [Dissertation]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1997.

  15. Won Kim, Jungyun Seo, *UniSQL, Inc. Classifying schematic and data heterogeneity in multidatabase systems. IEEE Computer, 1991, 24(12): 12–18.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sheth A P, Kashyap V. So far (schematically), yet so near(semantically). In Proc. the IFIP WG2.6 Database Semantics Conference on Interoperable Database Systems, Victoria, Australia, Nov. 16–20, 1992, pp. 283–312.

  17. Tim Berners-Lee. Relational databases and the semantic web (in design issues). http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/RDB-RDF.html.

  18. Wiederhold. Mediators in the architecture of future information systems. IEEE Computers, 1992, 25(3): 38–49.

    Google Scholar 

  19. OnceDI. http://www.once.com.cn/product/di.jsp

  20. Protege ontology editor and knowledge acquisition system. http://protege.stanford.edu.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Software, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100080, China

    Qiang Liu, Tao Huang, Shao-Hua Liu & Hua Zhong

  2. Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100080, China

    Qiang Liu

Authors
  1. Qiang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tao Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shao-Hua Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hua Zhong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qiang Liu.

Additional information

This work is supported by the National natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 60573126, the National High-Tech Research and Development 863 Program of China under Grant No. 2004AA112010, the National Grand Fundamental Research 973 Program of China under Grant No. 2002CB312005.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, Q., Huang, T., Liu, SH. et al. An Ontology-Based Approach for Semantic Conflict Resolution in Database Integration. J Comput Sci Technol 22, 218–227 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11390-007-9028-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11390-007-9028-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation