Trusting Data Quality in Cooperative Information Systems

  • Luca De Santis
  • Monica Scannapieco
  • Tiziana Catarci
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2888)


Managing the quality of exchanged data is a relevant problem in any cooperative information system. If the quality of exchanged data is not known, the cooperation itself is negatively affected; indeed, an organization can prefer not requiring data at all, rather than receiving bad quality data. Therefore, there is the need of providing mechanisms to certify organizations with respect to the quality of data that they spread in the cooperative system.

This paper describes a model for trusting cooperating organizations. In such a model, a trust value is assigned to each organization with respect to a specific data category. A set of experiments shows the effectiveness of the model. Moreover, the design of an architectural service that rates organizations on the basis of such model is also described.


Cooperative systems trust peer-to-peer data quality 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    De Michelis, G., Dubois, E., Jarke, M., Matthes, F., Mylopoulos, J., Papazoglou, M., Pohl, K., Schmidt, J., Woo, C., Yu, E.: Cooperative Information Systems: A Manifesto. In: Papazoglou, M., Schlageter, G. (eds.) Cooperative Information Systems: Trends & Directions, Academic Press, London (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Redman, T.: Data Quality for the Information Age. Artech House (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Scannapieco, M., Virgillito, A., Marchetti, C., Mecella, M., Baldoni, R.: The daquincis architecture: a platform for exchanging and improving data quality in cooperative information systems. Accepted for publication on Information Systems (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Batini, C., Mecella, M.: Enabling Italian e-Government Through a Cooperative Architecture. IEEE Computer 34 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shankaranarayan, G., Wang, R., Ziad, M.: Modeling the Manufacture of an Information Product with IP-MAP. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information Quality (IQ 2000), Boston, MA, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wang, R.: A Product Perspective on Total Data Quality Management. Communications of the ACM 41 (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    English, L.: Improving Data Warehouse and Business Information Quality. Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Naumann, F.: Quality-Driven Query Answering for Integrated Information Systems. LNCS, vol. 2261, p. 69. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mecella, M., Scannapieco, M., Virgillito, A., Baldoni, R., Catarci, T., Batini, C.: Managing Data Quality in Cooperative Information Systems. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, Irvine, CA (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Catarci, T. (ed.): ICDT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2572. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jeusfeld, M., Quix, C., Jarke, M.: Design and Analysis of Quality Information for Data Warehouses. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 349–362. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lenzerini, M.: Data Integration: A Theoretical Perspective. In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS 2002), Madison, Wisconsin, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aberer, K., Despotovic, Z.: Managing trust in a peer-2-peer information system. In: Proceedings of the tenth international conference on Information and knowledge management, pp. 310–317 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Mecella, M.: Cooperative Processes and e-Services. Ph.D. Thesis in Computer Engineering, IV 2002, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fauvet, M., Dumas, M., Benatallah, B., Paik, H.: Peer-to-Peer Traced Execution of Composite Services. In: Proceedings of the 2nd VLDB International Workshop on Technologies for e-Services (VLDB-TES 2001), Rome, Italy (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gnutella: The gnutella protocol specification v0.4 (2001),
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Damiani, E., di Vimercati, D.C., Paraboschi, S., Samarati, P., Violante, F.: A reputation-based approach for choosing reliable resources in peer-to-peer networks. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pp. 207–216 (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Devore, J.L.: Probability and Statistics for Engineering and the Sciences, 5th edn. Duxbury Press, Boston (1999)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Colt: The colt distribution library,
  23. 23.
    Mui, L., Mohtashemi, M., Halberstadt, A.: Notions of reputation in multi-agents systems: a review. In: Proceedings of the first international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp. 280–287 (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Marsh, S.: Formalising Trust as a Computational Concept. PhD thesis, University of Strirling (1994)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gil, Y., Ratnaker, V.: Trusting information sources one citizen at a time. In: Proceedings of the first international Semantic Web conference, ISWC (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mui, L., Mohtashemi, M., Ang, C., Szolovits, P., Halberstadt, A.: Ratings in distributed systems: A bayesian approach. In: 11th Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems, WITS 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Finin, T., Joshi, A.: Agents, trust, and information access on the semantic web. ACM SIGMOD Record 31, 30–35 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cornelli, F., Damiani, E., di Vimercati, S.D.C., Paraboschi, S., Samarati, P.: Choosing reputable servents in a p2p network. In: Proceedings of the eleventh international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 376–386 (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luca De Santis
    • 1
  • Monica Scannapieco
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tiziana Catarci
    • 1
  1. 1.Università di Roma “La Sapienza” 
  2. 2.Istituto di Analisi dei Sistemi ed InformaticaConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (IASI-CNR) 

Personalised recommendations