XML Matchers: approaches and challenges
Agreste, Santa, De Meo, Pasquale, Ferrara, Emilio, Ursino, Domenico
–arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence
Schema Matching, i.e. the process of discovering semantic correspondences between concepts adopted in different data source schemas, has been a key topic in Database and Artificial Intelligence research areas for many years. In the past, it was largely investigated especially for classical database models (e.g., E/R schemas, relational databases, etc.). However, in the latest years, the widespread adoption of XML in the most disparate application fields pushed a growing number of researchers to design XML-specific Schema Matching approaches, called XML Matchers, aiming at finding semantic matchings between concepts defined in DTDs and XSDs. XML Matchers do not just take well-known techniques originally designed for other data models and apply them on DTDs/XSDs, but they exploit specific XML features (e.g., the hierarchical structure of a DTD/XSD) to improve the performance of the Schema Matching process. The design of XML Matchers is currently a well-established research area. The main goal of this paper is to provide a detailed description and classification of XML Matchers. We first describe to what extent the specificities of DTDs/XSDs impact on the Schema Matching task. Then we introduce a template, called XML Matcher Template, that describes the main components of an XML Matcher, their role and behavior. We illustrate how each of these components has been implemented in some popular XML Matchers. We consider our XML Matcher Template as the baseline for objectively comparing approaches that, at first glance, might appear as unrelated. The introduction of this template can be useful in the design of future XML Matchers. Finally, we analyze commercial tools implementing XML Matchers and introduce two challenging issues strictly related to this topic, namely XML source clustering and uncertainty management in XML Matchers.
arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence
Jul-10-2014
- Country:
- South America > Brazil
- North America
- United States
- Maryland > Baltimore (0.04)
- District of Columbia > Washington (0.04)
- Indiana > Marion County
- Indianapolis (0.04)
- Nevada > Clark County
- Las Vegas (0.04)
- Hawaii > Honolulu County
- Honolulu (0.04)
- New York
- Richmond County > New York City (0.04)
- Queens County > New York City (0.04)
- New York County > New York City (0.04)
- Kings County > New York City (0.04)
- Bronx County > New York City (0.04)
- Rhode Island > Providence County
- Providence (0.04)
- Louisiana > Orleans Parish
- New Orleans (0.04)
- Virginia > Fairfax County
- McLean (0.04)
- Wisconsin > Dane County
- Madison (0.04)
- California
- Santa Clara County > San Jose (0.04)
- San Diego County > San Diego (0.04)
- Santa Barbara County > Santa Barbara (0.04)
- Los Angeles County > Long Beach (0.04)
- Mexico > Quintana Roo
- Cancún (0.04)
- Canada
- United States
- Europe
- Middle East > Cyprus (0.04)
- Portugal > Coimbra
- Coimbra (0.04)
- Poland > Lesser Poland Province
- Kraków (0.04)
- Italy
- Calabria (0.04)
- Tuscany > Pisa Province
- Pisa (0.04)
- Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol > Trentino Province
- Trento (0.04)
- Germany
- Saxony > Leipzig (0.04)
- Rhineland-Palatinate > Kaiserslautern (0.04)
- Lower Saxony > Hanover (0.04)
- Bavaria > Regensburg (0.04)
- France
- Île-de-France > Paris
- Paris (0.04)
- Hauts-de-France > Oise
- Compiègne (0.04)
- Île-de-France > Paris
- Denmark > Capital Region
- Copenhagen (0.04)
- Austria
- Vienna (0.14)
- Upper Austria > Linz (0.04)
- Asia
- Genre:
- Summary/Review (1.00)
- Research Report (1.00)
- Overview (1.00)
- Industry:
- Information Technology > Services (0.46)
- Technology:
- Information Technology
- Information Management (1.00)
- Communications > Web (1.00)
- Data Science
- Data Mining (1.00)
- Data Integration (0.93)
- Artificial Intelligence
- Natural Language > Text Processing (1.00)
- Representation & Reasoning
- Expert Systems (0.93)
- Ontologies (0.69)
- Information Fusion (0.68)
- Machine Learning
- Statistical Learning (1.00)
- Performance Analysis > Accuracy (0.46)
- Information Technology