Entity Identity Reconciliation based Big Data Federation-A MDE approach

“Information is power” is a sentence attributed to Francis Bacon that acquired a high important in the current era of the information. However, too much information can be a negative aspect. The term of “Infoxication” refers to the difficulty a person can have understanding an issue and making decisions that can be caused by the presence of too much information. With the increasing of relevance of open data and big database, the application of mechanisms and solutions to manage information is critical. This paper introduces the problem of unique identification and data reconciliation and offers a discussion about how to solve this problem in big and open data environment. The problem of data reconciliation in multiple databases and the unique identification of entities is not a new problem, but, how effective are classical mechanisms in the new internet environment? In this paper a solution based on model-driven engineering and virtual graph is presented in order to improve the processing of information in big open repositories. The paper illustrates the idea with a real example for the right exploitation of heritage information in the south of Spain

Middleware-based Database Replication: The Gaps between Theory and Practice

The need for high availability and performance in data management systems has been fueling a long running interest in database replication from both academia and industry. However, academic groups often attack replication problems in isolation, overlooking the need for completeness in their solutions, while commercial teams take a holistic approach that often misses opportunities for fundamental innovation. This has created over time a gap between academic research and industrial practice. This paper aims to characterize the gap along three axes: performance, availability, and administration. We build on our own experience developing and deploying replication systems in commercial and academic settings, as well as on a large body of prior related work. We sift through representative examples from the last decade of open-source, academic, and commercial database replication systems and combine this material with case studies from real systems deployed at Fortune 500 customers. We propose two agendas, one for academic research and one for industrial R&D, which we believe can bridge the gap within 5-10 years. This way, we hope to both motivate and help researchers in making the theory and practice of middleware-based database replication more relevant to each other.Comment: 14 pages. Appears in Proc. ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Vancouver, Canada, June 200

Significance of Semantic Reconciliation in Digital Forensics

Digital forensics (DF) is a growing field that is gaining popularity among many computer professionals, law enforcement agencies and other stakeholders who must always cooperate in this profession. Unfortunately, this has created an environment replete with semantic disparities within the domain that needs to be resolved and/or eliminated. For the purpose of this study, semantic disparity refers to disagreements about the meaning, interpretation, descriptions and the intended use of the same or related data and terminologies. If semantic disparity is not detected and resolved, it may lead to misunderstandings. Even worse, since the people involved may not be from the same neighbourhood, they may not be aware of the existence of the semantic disparities, and probably might not easily realize it. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to discuss semantic disparity in DF and further elaborates on how to manage it. In addition, this paper also presents the significance of semantic reconciliation in DF. Semantic reconciliation refers to reconciling the meaning (including the interpretations and descriptions) of terminologies and data used in digital forensics. Managing semantic disparities and the significance of semantic reconciliation in digital forensics constitutes the main contributions of this paper. Keywords: Digital forensics, semantic disparity, managing semantic disparity, semantic reconciliation, significance of semantic reconciliatio

Report of the Stanford Linked Data Workshop

The Stanford University Libraries and Academic Information Resources (SULAIR) with the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) conducted at week-long workshop on the prospects for a large scale, multi-national, multi-institutional prototype of a Linked Data environment for discovery of and navigation among the rapidly, chaotically expanding array of academic information resources. As preparation for the workshop, CLIR sponsored a survey by Jerry Persons, Chief Information Architect emeritus of SULAIR that was published originally for workshop participants as background to the workshop and is now publicly available. The original intention of the workshop was to devise a plan for such a prototype. However, such was the diversity of knowledge, experience, and views of the potential of Linked Data approaches that the workshop participants turned to two more fundamental goals: building common understanding and enthusiasm on the one hand and identifying opportunities and challenges to be confronted in the preparation of the intended prototype and its operation on the other. In pursuit of those objectives, the workshop participants produced:1. a value statement addressing the question of why a Linked Data approach is worth prototyping;2. a manifesto for Linked Libraries (and Museums and Archives and …);3. an outline of the phases in a life cycle of Linked Data approaches;4. a prioritized list of known issues in generating, harvesting & using Linked Data;5. a workflow with notes for converting library bibliographic records and other academic metadata to URIs;6. examples of potential “killer apps” using Linked Data: and7. a list of next steps and potential projects.This report includes a summary of the workshop agenda, a chart showing the use of Linked Data in cultural heritage venues, and short biographies and statements from each of the participants