SUPPORTING DATABASE DESIGNERS IN ENTITY-RELATIONSHIP MODELING: AN ONTOLOGY-BASED APPROACH

Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS 2003

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 59-71

  Sugumaran, Vijayan ^a   Storey, Veda C ^b  

^a OAKLAND UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

database design; database design assistant; domain knowledge; entity relationship modeling; Ontology

Indexed keywords

DATA MINING; DATABASE SYSTEMS; DESIGN; DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE;

DATABASE DESIGN; DATABASE DESIGN ASSISTANT; DESIGN-PROCESS; DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE; DOMAIN-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE; ENTITY/RELATIONSHIP MODEL; GOOD DESIGNS; ONTOLOGY'S; ONTOLOGY-BASED;

ONTOLOGY;

EID: 35448959078     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. Alter, S. Information Systems: A Management Perspective, Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA, 1999.
2. Bergholtz, M., and Johannesson, “Classifying the Semantics of Relationships in Conceptual Modeling by Categorization of Roles,” in Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems, A. M. Moreno and R. P. van de Reit (eds.), Madrid, June 28-29, 2001, pp. 199-203.
3. Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, T. J., and Lassila, O. “The Semantic Web,” Scientific American (284:5), May 2001, pp. 34-43.
4. Bodart, F., Pate, A., Sim, M., and Weber, R. “Should Optional Properties be Used in Conceptual Modeling? A Theory and Three Empirical Tests,” Information Systems Research (12:4), 2002, pp. 384-405.
5. Dahlgren, K. “A Linguistic Ontology,” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (43), 1995, pp. 809-818.
6. Dennis, A., and Wixom, B. H. Systems Analysis and Design, John Wiley, New York, 2000.
7. Embley, D., Campbell, D. M., Jiang, Y. S., Ng, Y. K., Smith, R. D., Liddle, S. W., and Quass, D. W. “A Conceptual-Modeling Approach to Web Data Eextraction,” Data & Knowledge Engineering (31:3), 1999, pp. 225-305.
8. Farquhar, A., Fikes, R., and Rice, J. “The Ontolingua Server: A Tool for Collaborative Ontology Construction,” Technical Report KSL-54-96-26, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, 2002.
9. Fensel, D., van Harmelen, F., Horrocks, I., McGuinness, D. L., and Patel-Schneider, P. F. “OIL: An Ontology Infrastructure for the Semantic Web,” IEEE Intelligent Systems (16:1), 2001, pp. 38-45.
10. Friedman-Hill, E. “Jess: The Expert System Shell,” Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA, 2002 (available online at http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess).
11. Gruber, T. R. “A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications,” Knowledge Acquisition (5), 1993, pp. 199-220.
12. Heflin, J., and Hendler, J. “Dynamic Ontologies on the Web,” in Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000), AAAI/MIT Press, Menlo Park, CA, 2000, pp. 443-449 (available online at http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/software/ontolingua/).
13. Kedad, Z., and Metais, E. “Dealing with Semantic Heterogeneity During Data Integration,” in Conceptual Modeling: ER’99, Eighteenth International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1728, J. Akoka, M. Bouzeghoub, I. Comyn-Wattiau, and E. Metais (eds.), Paris, France, November 15-18, 1999, pp. 325-339.
14. Lloyd-Williams, M. “Exploiting Domain Knowledge During the Automated Design of ObjectOriented Databases,” in Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1331, D. W. Embley and R. C. Goldstein (eds.), Los Angeles, November 3-6, 1997.
15. Mason, O., and Grove-Stephensen, I. “Automated Free Text Marking with Paperless School,” in Proceedings of Sixth International Computer Assisted Assessment Conference, M. Danson (ed.), Loughborough, July 9-10, 2002, pp. 213-219.
16. McGuiness, D. L., Fikes, R., Rice, J., and Wilder, S. “An Environment for Merging and Testing Large Ontologies,” in Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, A. G. Cohn, F. Giunchiglia, and B. Selman (eds.), Breckenridge, CO, 2000, pp. 483-493.
17. Noah, S. A., and Williams, M. D. “Knowledge-Based Approaches to Database Design Diagnosis: Improving Performance with a Domain Specific Thesaurus Structure,” in ACI 2002: Proceedings of the 2002 IASTED International Conference on Artificial and Computational Intelligence, N. Ishii (ed.), ACTA Press, Calgary, Canada, 2002, pp. 366-371. .
18. Parsons, J., and Wand, Y. “Emancipating Instances from the Tyranny of Classes in Information Modeling,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems (25:2), 2000, pp. 228-268.
19. Shanks, G., Tansley, E., Nurelini, J., Toblin, D., and Weber, R. “Representing Part-Whole Relationships in Conceptual Modeling: An Empirical Evaluation,” in Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Conference on Information Systems, L. Applegate, R. Galliers, and J. I. DeGross (eds.), Barcelona, Spain, December 15-18, 2002, pp. 89-100.
20. Siau, K., Wand, Y., and Benbasat, I. “The Relative Importance of Structural Constraints and Surface Semantics in Information Modeling,” Information Systems (22:23), 1997, pp. 155-170.
21. Sugumaran, V., and Storey, V. “Ontologies for Conceptual Modeling: Their Creation, Use, and Management,” Data and Knowledge Engineering (42:3), 2002, pp. 251-271.
22. Swartout, W. “Ontologies,” IEEE Intelligent Systems (14:1), January-February, 1999, pp. 18-19.
23. Teorey, T. J., Yang, D., and Fry, J. P. “A Logical Design Methodology for Relational Databases Using the Extended Entity-Relationship Model,” ACM Computing Surveys (18:2), 1986, pp. 197-222.
24. Weber, R. “Are Attributes Entities? A Study of Database Designers’ Memory Structures,” Information Systems Research (7:2), June 1996, pp. 137-162.
25. Weber, R. “Ontological Issues in Accounting Information Systems,” in Researching Accounting as an Information Systems Discipline, S. Sutton and V. Arnold (eds.), American Accounting Association, Sarasota, FL, 2002.
26. Welty, C., and Guarino, N. “Supporting Ontological Analysis of Taxonomic Relationships,” in Special Issue on ER 2000, Data and Knowledge Engineering (39:1), 2001, pp. 51-74.