Encyclopedia of Big Data Technologies

Living Edition
| Editors: Sherif Sakr, Albert Zomaya

Uncertain Schema Matching

  • Avigdor Gal
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63962-8_24-1


Data integration has been the focus of research for many years now. At the heart of the data integration process is a schema matching problem whose outcome is a collection of correspondences between different representations of the same real-world construct. In recent years, data integration has been facing new challenges as a result of the presence of big data. These challenges require the development of a set of methods to support a matching process using uncertainty management tools to quantify the inherent uncertainty in the process. This chapter is devoted to the introduction of uncertain schema matching. It also discusses existing and future research, as well as possible applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Assoudi H, Lounis H (2015) Coping with uncertainty in schema matching: Bayesian networks and agent-based modeling approach. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 53–67Google Scholar
  2. Batini C, Lenzerini M, Navathe S (1986) A comparative analysis of methodologies for database schema integration. ACM Comput Surv 18(4):323–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bellahsene Z (2011) Schema matching and mapping. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergamaschi S, Castano S, Vincini M, Beneventano D (2001) Semantic integration of heterogeneous information sources. Data Knowl Eng 36(3):215–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berlin J, Motro A (2001) Autoplex: automated discovery of content for virtual databases. Springer, London, pp 108–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernstein P, Melnik S, Churchill J (2006) Incremental schema matching. Proc Int Conf Very Large Databases 2:1167–1170Google Scholar
  7. Bernstein P, Madhavan J, Rahm E (2011) Generic schema matching, ten years later. PVLDB 4(11):695–701Google Scholar
  8. Do H, Rahm E (2002) COMA – a system for flexible combination of schema matching approaches. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on very data bases, pp 610–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Doan A, Domingos P, Halevy A (2001) Reconciling schemas of disparate data sources: a machine-learning approach. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOID international conference on management of data, pp 509–520Google Scholar
  10. Doan A, Madhavan J, Domingos P, Halevy A (2002) Learning to map between ontologies on the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the 11th international world wide web conference, pp 662–673Google Scholar
  11. Domshlak C, Gal A, Roitman H (2007) Rank aggregation for automatic schema matching. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng (TKDE) 19(4):538–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dong X, Halevy A, Yu C (2009) Data integration with uncertainty. VLDB J 18:469–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gal A (2006) Managing uncertainty in schema matching with top-k schema mappings. J Data Semant 6:90–114Google Scholar
  14. Gal A (2011) Uncertain schema matching. Synthesis lectures on data management. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, San RafaelCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gal A, Martinez M, Simari G, Subrahmanian V (2009) Aggregate query answering under uncertain schema mappings, pp 940–951Google Scholar
  16. Hung N, Tam N, Miklós Z, Aberer K (2013) On leveraging crowdsourcing techniques for schema matching networks. In: Meng W, Feng L, Bressan S, Winiwarter W, Song W (eds) Database systems for advanced applications. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 7826. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 139–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Madhavan J, Bernstein P, Rahm E (2001) Generic schema matching with Cupid, pp 49–58Google Scholar
  18. Madhavan J, Bernstein P, Domingos P, Halevy A (2002) Representing and reasoning about mappings between domain models, pp 80–86Google Scholar
  19. Melnik S, Rahm E, Bernstein P (2003) Rondo: a programming platform for generic model management. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOID international conference on management of data, pp 193–204Google Scholar
  20. Miller R, Hernàndez, M, Haas L, Yan LL, Ho C, Fagin R, Popa L (2001) The Clio project: managing heterogeneity. SIGMOD Rec 30(1):78–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Modica G, Gal A, Jamil H (2001) The use of machine-generated ontologies in dynamic information seeking. In: Proceedings of the international conference on cooperative information, pp 433–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ontology alignment evaluation initiative. http://oaei.ontologymatching.org/
  23. Rahm E, Bernstein P (2001) A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. VLDB J 10(4):334–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sagi T, Gal A (2013) Schema matching prediction with applications to data source discovery and dynamic ensembling. VLDB J 22(5):689–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sagi T, Gal A (2014) In schema matching, even experts are human: towards expert sourcing in schema matching. In: Workshops proceedings of the 30th international conference on data engineering workshops, ICDE 2014, Chicago, 31 Mar–4 Apr 2014, pp 45–49Google Scholar
  26. Sagi T, Gal A (2018) Non-binary evaluation measures for big data integration. VLDB J 27(1):105–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Saha B, Stanoi I, Clarkson K (2010) Schema covering: a step towards enabling reuse in information integration. In: Proceedings of the 26th international conference on data engineering, pp 285–296Google Scholar
  28. Saleem K, Bellahsene Z, Hunt E (2007) Performance oriented schema matching. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference database and expert systems application, pp 844–853Google Scholar
  29. Shvaiko P, Euzenat J (2005) A survey of schema-based matching approaches. J Data Semant 4:146–171zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Tu K, Yu Y (2005) CMC: combining multiple schema-matching strategies based on credibility prediction. In: Zhou L, Ooi B, Meng X (eds) Database systems for advanced applications. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3453. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 995–995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhang JC, Chen L, Jagadish H, Cao CC (2013) Reducing uncertainty of schema matching via crowdsourcing. Proc VLDB Endow 6:757–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Industrial Engineering & ManagementTechnion – Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael

Section editors and affiliations

  • Maik Thiele
    • 1
  1. 1.Database Systems GroupTechnische Universität DresdenDresdenDeutschland