Database schema design: A perspective from natural language techniques to validation and view integration

  • Elisabeth Métais
  • Jean-Noël Meunier
  • Gilles Levreau
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 823)


This paper discusses the contribution of natural language techniques to some functions aiming at elaborating the conceptual schema in database design.

The schema building mainly requires specification, validation and views integration means. Since these three functions extensively involve the information keepers, the reliability of the result is highly dependent on the quality of the communication between the information keepers sphere and the technical sphere (conceptual schema, designer, CASE tool). Natural language may be a communication vector between these actors.

Natural language techniques are used not only to understand and generate texts, but also to reinforce algorithms of other functions, such as view integration.

The natural language techniques we have chosen are mainly based on Fillmore's semantic cases and Sowa's conceptual graphs. Each technique may be used by several functions of schema manipulation. For example, the detection of semantic cases is needed as well to paraphrase the conceptual schema as to reinforce the views integration algorithm.


Natural Language Conceptual Schema View Integration Linguistic Knowledge Semantic 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. [Appelt 85]
    “Planning English Sentences”, in “Studies in Natural Language”, Appelt D.E., ed. by Joshi, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. [Batini & al 86]
    “A Comparative Analysis of Methodologies for Database Schema Integration”, Batini C., Lenzerini M., Navathe SB, ACM Comp. Surveys, Dec 1986.Google Scholar
  3. [Black 87]
    “Acquisition of conceptual data models from natural language descriptions”, Black W. J., Third Conf. of the European Chapter of the ACL, Coppenhague, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [Bouzeghoub 84]
    “The Functional Query Language MORSE”, Bouzeghoub M., Trends and Applications Conf. on Databases, Gaithersburg (MD, USA), IEEE-NBS, May 1984.Google Scholar
  5. [Bouzeghoub & Comyn 90]
    “View Integration by Semantic Unification and Transformation of Data Structures”, Bouzeghoub M., Comyn I., E/R conf., Lausanne, 1990.Google Scholar
  6. [Bouzeghoub & Métais 91]
    “Semantic Approach For Object Oriented Database Design”, Bouzeghoub M., Métais E., Proceed of VLDB conference, Barcelone, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. [Bouzegoub & al 91]
    “Une aide à l'acquisition de la sémantique d'une base de données en langage naturel”, Bouzeghoub M., Métais E., Carrère J.P., in “Génie logiciel et langage naturel”, vol. 3, EC2, Versailles, France, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. [Chen 76]
    “The Entity-Relationship Model — Toward a Unified View of Data”, Chen P.P., ACM TODS, vol 1, 1976.Google Scholar
  9. [Chen 80]
    “Entity-Relationship Diagrams and English Sentence Structures”, Chen P.P., in “Entity-Relationship Approach to System Analysis and Design”, North Holland Publication, 1980.Google Scholar
  10. [Comyn 90]
    “L'intégration de vues dans le système expert SECSI”, Comyn-Wattiau I., Thèse de l'université Pierre et Marie Curie-Paris 6, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. [Comyn & Bouzeghoub 92]
    “Constraint Confrontation: an Important Step in View Integration”, Comyn-Wattiau I., Bouzeghoub M., 4th International Conference CAiSE'92, ed. by P.Loucopoulos, Springer-Verlag, May 1992.Google Scholar
  12. [Coulon & Kayser 86]
    “Informatique et langage naturel: Présentation générale des méthodes d'interprétation des textes écrits”, Coulon D., Kayser D., 1986.Google Scholar
  13. [Dalianis 92a]
    “A method for validating a conceptual model by natural language discourse generation”, Dalianis H., in “Advanced Information Systems Engineering”, 4th International Conference CAiSE'92, ed. by P.Loucopoulos, Springer-Verlag, May 1992.Google Scholar
  14. [Dalianis 92b]
    “User adapted natural language discourse generation for validation of conceptual models”, Dalianis H., SYSLAB working paper n0 92-005, Royal Institue of Technology, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. [Fillmore 68]
    ”The case for case”, Fillmore C., universal in linguistic Theory, Bach & Harms, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New-York, 1968.Google Scholar
  16. [Grice 75]
    “Logic and Conversation”, in “Syntax and Semantics III: speech acts”, Grice H., ed. Coles & Morgan, Academic press, New-York, pp. 41–58, 1975.Google Scholar
  17. [Heyer et al.]
    “Motivation, goals & Milestones of ESPRIT II project MULTILEX”, Heyer G., Waldhör K. and Khatchadourian H., in “Génie logiciel et langage naturel”, vol. 1, EC2, Versailles, France, 1991.Google Scholar
  18. [Hobbs 85]
    “On the coherence and structure of discourse”, Hobbs J.R., report n0 CSLI-85-37, October 1985.Google Scholar
  19. [Hobbs 90]
    “Litterature and cognition”, Hobbs J.R., CSLI Lecture Notes Number 21, Center of the Study of Language and Information, 1990.Google Scholar
  20. [Johannesson 91]
    “Logic Based Approach to Schema Integration”, Johannesson P., 10th Entity/Relationship Approach, San Mateo (California U.S.), 1991.Google Scholar
  21. [Joshi & al 84]
    “Preventing False Inferences”, Joshi A., Webber B., Weischbedel R., in Proceedings of COLING84, Stanford University, California, 1984.Google Scholar
  22. [Kersten & al 86]
    “A conceptual modelling expert system”, Kersten M.L., Weigand H., Dignum F., Boom J., Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Entityrelationship Approach, ed. by Spaccapietra, Dijon, 1986.Google Scholar
  23. [Knight & Flynn 92]
    “Automated Conceptual Schema Acquisition”, Knight D.R., Flynn D.J., in “Information System Devopers Workbench”, Sopot, Sept. 1992.Google Scholar
  24. [Larson & al 89]
    “A Theory of Attribute Equivalence in Databases with Application to Schema Integration”, Larson J.A., Navathe S.B., El-Masri R., IEEE Transactions on Software Enfineering, Vol 15(4), 1989.Google Scholar
  25. [Lenat & al. 90]
    “CYC: Toward Programs with Common sense” D.B. Lenat, R.V. Guha, K. Pittman, D. Pratt and M. Shepherd, in Communications of the ACM. 1990. vol nℴ 8.Google Scholar
  26. [Levreau & al 91]
    “Définition d'une interface langage naturel pour la conception de bases de données”, Levreau G., Meunier J.N., Bouzeghoub M., Métais E., Rapport technique, Masi 91.45, 1991.Google Scholar
  27. [McKeown 85]
    “Discourse Strategies for Generating Natural Language Text”, McKeown K.R., Artificial Intelligence, vol 27, n0 1, September 1985.Google Scholar
  28. [McKeown & Swartout 88]
    “Language Generation and Explanation”, McKeown K.R., Swartout W.R., in “Advanced in Natural Language Generation”, communication in AI, ed. by Zock M. and Sabah G., vol 1, 1988.Google Scholar
  29. [Nossin 91]
    “Le projet GENELEX: EUREKA pour les dictionnaires génériques” in “Génie logiciel et langage naturel”, vol. 1, EC2, Versailles, France, 1991.Google Scholar
  30. [Paris 88]
    “Description Strategies for naive and expert users”, Paris C.L., proc. 23rd Ann. Meet. Assoc. Comput. ling., Chicago, 1985.Google Scholar
  31. [Rolland & Proix 92]
    “A Natural Language Approach for Requirements Engineering”, Rolland C., Proix C., in “Advanced Information Systems Engineering”, 4th International Conference CAiSE'92, ed. by P.Loucopoulos, Springer-Verlag, May 1992.Google Scholar
  32. [Sabah 88]
    “L'intelligence artificielle et le langage: Vol. 1, représentations des connaissances”, Sabah G., Ed. Hermès, 1988.Google Scholar
  33. [Sabah 89]
    “L'intelligence artificielle et le langage: Vol. 2, Processus de compréhension”, Sabah G., Ed. Hermès, 1989.Google Scholar
  34. [Sabbagh 90]
    “Sesame: un générateur d'interfaces pour bases de données relationnelles”, Sabbagh S., Dixièmes Journées Internationales “Les systèmes experts et leurs applications”, Avignon, France, 1990.Google Scholar
  35. [Sowa 84]
    “Conceptual structures: information processing in mind and machine”, Sowa J.F., in addison wesley publishing company, reading Mass, 1984.Google Scholar
  36. [Sowa 88]
    “Using a Lexicon of Canonical Graphs in a Semantic Interpreter”, Sowa J.F., in “Relational models of the lexicon: Representing knowledge in Semantic Networks”, edited by Evens M., 1988.Google Scholar
  37. [Sowa 90]
    “Knowledge Representation in Databases, Expert Systems and Natural Language”, Sowa J.F., in “Artificial Intelligence in Databases and Information”, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1990.Google Scholar
  38. [Spaccapietra & Parent 90]
    “View Integration: A step forward in solving structural conflicts”, Spaccapietra S., Parent C., Proc. of VIes Journées Bases de données Avancées, Montpellier, Sept 1990.Google Scholar
  39. [Szulman 90]
    “Enrichissement d'une base de connaissances à partir de textes en langage naturel”, Szulman S., thèse de doctorat de l'université Paris Nord, Dec 1990.Google Scholar
  40. [Talon & Trigano 91]
    “Lexique sémantique: enrichissement automatique à partir de définitions entrées en langage naturel”, Talon B., Trigano P., Onzièmes Journées Internationales “Les systèmes experts et leurs applications”, vol. 8, Avignon, 1991.Google Scholar
  41. [Uchida & Kakizaki]
    “Electronic Dictionary Project”, Hiroshi Uchida and Takahiro Kakizaki, in “Machine Translation Summit” Editor M. Nagao. published by Ohmsha Eds. 1989.Google Scholar
  42. [Velardi et al 88]
    “Conceptual graphs for the analysis and generation of sentences”, Velardi P., Pazienza M.T., de Giovanetti M., IBM Journal Research Development, Vol 32, nℴ2, 1988.Google Scholar
  43. [Verheijen & Bekkum 82]
    “NIAM: An Information Analysis Method”, in “Information Systems Design Methodologies”, Verheijen G.M.A., van. Bekkum J., ed. by Olle T.W., Verrijn-Stuart A.A., North-Holland, 1982.Google Scholar
  44. [Winograd 83]
    “Language as a cognitive process”, Winograd T., Vol 1 “Syntax”, in “Addison Wesley publishing company” reading Mass, 1983.Google Scholar
  45. [Woods 70]
    “Transition networks grammars for natural language analysis”, Woods W., Communications of the ACM, 13, 10, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisabeth Métais
    • 1
  • Jean-Noël Meunier
    • 1
  • Gilles Levreau
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire MASIUniversité de VersaillesVersaillesFrance

Personalised recommendations