Advertisement

A commonsense reasoning facility based on the entity-relationship model

  • Veda C. Storey
  • Robert C. Goldstein
  • Roger H. L. Chiang
  • Debabrata Dey
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 823)

Abstract

Various expert systems have been developed that attempt to automate the database design process. Although these systems may have a high degree of expertise in the design task, their lack of knowledge about the application domain that the database serves reduces their value as design aids. They often have to ask questions that appear unnecessary or trivial, thus losing credibility as experts and increasing the effort required of the user. A Commonsense Business Reasoner, based on the entity-relationship model, has been developed to augment a particular database design expert system for business applications. The Commonsense Business Reasoner is described in terms of the entities, relationships, and attributes that are needed to incorporate commonsense knowledge into the existing system.

Keywords

Entity Type Inference Engine Database Design Standard Industrial Classification Application Case 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bouzeghoub, M., “Using Expert Systems in Schema Design”, in Loucopoulos, P. and Zicari, R. (Eds.), Conceptual Modeling, Databases, and Case, Wiley, 1992, pp.465–487.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dahlgren, K., Naive Semantics for Natural Language Understanding, Boston MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ein-Dor, P., “Representing Commonsense Knowledge: A Survey”, Working Paper No. 864/85, Israel Institute of Business Research, Tel Avi University, June 1985.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goldstein, R.C. and Storey, V.C., “Commonsense Reasoning in Database Design”, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on the Entity-Relationship Approach, San Francisco, California, 23–25 October 1991, pp.77–91.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Loucopoulos, P. and Theodoulidis, B., “CASE — Methods and Support Tools”, in Loucopoulos, P. and Zicari, R. (Eds.), Conceptual Modeling, Databases, and Case, Wiley, 1992, pp.373–388.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lord, C. and Dahlgren, K., “Representation of Business and Financial Knowledge in the NewSelector System”, Working Paper, IBM L.A. Scientific Center, Jan. 1990.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reiner, D., “Database Design Tools”, in Batini, C., Ceri, S., and Navathe, S.B., Conceptual Database Design: An Entity-Relationship Approach, Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc. 1992.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Prentice Hall Information Services, 1988.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Storey, V.C., View Creation: An Expert System for Database Design, Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, ICIT Press, Washington, D.C., 1988.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Storey, V.C. and Goldstein, R.C., “Knowledge-Based Approaches to Database Design”, Management Information Systems Quarterly, Vol.17, No.1, March 1993, pp.25–46.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Storey, V.C. and Goldstein, R.C., “A Methodology for the Creation of User Views During Database Design”, ACM Transactions On Database Systems, Vol.13, No.3, September, 1988, pp.305–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Veda C. Storey
    • 1
  • Robert C. Goldstein
    • 2
  • Roger H. L. Chiang
    • 3
  • Debabrata Dey
    • 4
  1. 1.William E. Simon Graduate School of Business AdministrationUniversity of RochesterRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Faculty of Commerce and Business AdministrationUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  3. 3.School of ManagementSyracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA
  4. 4.Quantitative Business AnalysisLouisiana State UniversityBaton RoughUSA

Personalised recommendations