A Framework for Integrating XML Transformations

Dong, Ce; Bailey, James E.

doi:10.1007/11901181_15

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Common matched are the pairs of nodes that defined as matches by the automatic matcher based on different thesauri. For example, when using NAL2008 the pair (10,18) is defined as a match with similarity value equals to 0.009, also it was defined as a match when using NAL2012 with similarity value equals 0.28. As shown in Table 3, the similarity of matches when using NAL 2012 Thesaurus, which has more terms, lead-in terms, and cross-relations than NAL2008, was increased or stay constant in 70% of common matches.…”

Section: Common Matches Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Schema matching, which is the process of identifying the semantic correspondence, or finding the equivalent elements between two or more schemas, is still an open research area. This is because schema matching is one of the basic phases [10] in many applications such as data integration, data warehousing, and semantic query processing. Many approaches and tools were proposed to find the equivalent elements between two schemas such as Cupid [11], and LSD [12], Corpus [13].…”

Section: 10 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Schema Matching Quality: Thesaurus as the Matcher

Sabbah

Selamat

2014

Jurnal Teknologi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thesaurus is used in many Information Retrieval (IR) applications such as data integration, data warehousing, semantic query processing and classifiers. It was also utilized to solve the problem of schema matching. Considering the fact of existence of many thesauri for a certain area of knowledge, the quality of schema matching results when using different thesauri in the same field is not predictable. In this paper, we propose a methodology to study the performance of the thesaurus in solving schema matching. The paper also presents results of experiments using different thesauri. Precision, recall, F-measure, and similarity average were calculated to show that the quality of matching changed according to the used thesaurus.

show abstract

Section: Common Matches Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: 10 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Schema Matching Quality: Thesaurus as the Matcher

Sabbah

Selamat

2014

Jurnal Teknologi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…89 The importance of studying the effect of thesaurus size is com- Schema matching, which is the process of identifying the 102 semantic correspondence, or finding the equivalent elements 103 between two or more schemas, is still an open research area since 104 more than two decades. This is not only because schema matching 105 is one of the basic operations [12] in many applications such as 106 data integration, data warehousing, and semantic query process- 107 ing, but also because it is an increasingly important problem itself 108 [13], and as well as the uncertainty in the results of schema ships between elements labels [6]. However, it is common that 139 algorithms in this category use combined methods to get high 140 computed similarity, methods of label normalization to improve 141 schema matching was also by [6,7] A new method to compute the similarity between vectors 166 extracted from the thesaurus is proposed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%