A Formal Model for Databases with Applications to Schema Merging

  • Anthony S. Kosky
Conference paper
Part of the Workshops in Computing book series (WORKSHOPS COMP.)


In this paper we present a simple and general model for database schemas and their instances. The model is sufficiently expressive to represent complex, higher order data structures and incorporates representations for specialisation relations and object identity. It is general enough to encode data structures arising from many other semantic data models in a natural way, though we do not attempt to model some of the more sophisticated constraints that occur in other models.

We claim that using a formal mathematical model can help us to understand and deal with various problems arising from database systems, and, to demonstrate this, we present some work on the problem of schema merging that has been carried out using our model.


Database System Object Identity Database Schema Merging Process Cardinality Constraint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



  1. [1]
    R. Hull and R. King. Semantic database modelling: survey, applications and research issues. ACM Computing Surveys, 19 (3): 201–260, September 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    C. Batini, M. Lenzerini, and S. Navathe. A comparative analysis of methodolgies for database schema integration. ACM Computing Surveys, 18 (4): 323–364, December 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. Smith, P. Bernstein, U. Dayal, N. Goodman, T. Landers, K. Lin, and E. Wong. Multibase- Integrating Heterogeneous Distributed Database Systems. In Proceedings of AFIPS, pages 487–499, 1981.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Sheth and J. Larson. Federated database systems for managing distributed heterogeneous and autonomous databases. ACM Computing Surveys, 22 (3): 183–236, September 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. Kosky. Modeling and Merging Database Schemas. Technical Report, University of Pennsylvania, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    John Miles Smith and Diane C.P. Smith. Database abstractions: aggregation and generalisation. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 2 (2): 105–133, June 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Peter Pin-Shan Chen. The entity-relationship model — toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans. on Database Systems, 1 (1): 9–36, March 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    U. Dayal and H. Hwang. View definition and generalisation for database integration in multibase. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering,SE-10(6):628644, November 1984.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    A. Motro. Superviews: virtual integration of multiple databases. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. SE-13(7): 785–798, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    D. Shipman. The Functional Data Model and the Data Language DAPLEX. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 6 (1): 140–173, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. Ohori. Semantics of Types for Database Objects. Theoretical Computer Science, 76: 53–91, 1990.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    F. Bancilon. Object-oriented database systems. In Principles of Database Systems, pages 152–162, 1988.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. Sheth, J. Larson, J. Cornellio, and S. Navethe. A tool for integrating conceptual schemas and user views. In Proceedings of Ph International Conference on Data Engineering, pages 176–183, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anthony S. Kosky
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information SciencesUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations