scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Jayant Madhavan

Other affiliations: University of Washington
Bio: Jayant Madhavan is an academic researcher from Google. The author has contributed to research in topics: Web search query & Data management. The author has an hindex of 35, co-authored 60 publications receiving 9771 citations. Previous affiliations of Jayant Madhavan include University of Washington.


Papers
More filters
Proceedings Article
11 Sep 2001
TL;DR: This paper proposes a new algorithm, Cupid, that discovers mappings between schema elements based on their names, data types, constraints, and schema structure, using a broader set of techniques than past approaches.
Abstract: Schema matching is a critical step in many applications, such as XML message mapping, data warehouse loading, and schema integration. In this paper, we investigate algorithms for generic schema matching, outside of any particular data model or application. We first present a taxonomy for past solutions, showing that a rich range of techniques is available. We then propose a new algorithm, Cupid, that discovers mappings between schema elements based on their names, data types, constraints, and schema structure, using a broader set of techniques than past approaches. Some of our innovations are the integrated use of linguistic and structural matching, context-dependent matching of shared types, and a bias toward leaf structure where much of the schema content resides. After describing our algorithm, we present experimental results that compare Cupid to two other schema matching systems.

1,533 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
07 May 2002
TL;DR: Glue is described, a system that employs machine learning techniques to find semantic mappings between ontologies and is distinguished in that it works with a variety of well-defined similarity notions and that it efficiently incorporates multiple types of knowledge.
Abstract: Ontologies play a prominent role on the Semantic Web. They make possible the widespread publication of machine understandable data, opening myriad opportunities for automated information processing. However, because of the Semantic Web's distributed nature, data on it will inevitably come from many different ontologies. Information processing across ontologies is not possible without knowing the semantic mappings between their elements. Manually finding such mappings is tedious, error-prone, and clearly not possible at the Web scale. Hence, the development of tools to assist in the ontology mapping process is crucial to the success of the Semantic Web.We describe glue, a system that employs machine learning techniques to find such mappings. Given two ontologies, for each concept in one ontology glue finds the most similar concept in the other ontology. We give well-founded probabilistic definitions to several practical similarity measures, and show that glue can work with all of them. This is in contrast to most existing approaches, which deal with a single similarity measure. Another key feature of glue is that it uses multiple learning strategies, each of which exploits a different type of information either in the data instances or in the taxonomic structure of the ontologies. To further improve matching accuracy, we extend glue to incorporate commonsense knowledge and domain constraints into the matching process. For this purpose, we show that relaxation labeling, a well-known constraint optimization technique used in computer vision and other fields, can be adapted to work efficiently in our context. Our approach is thus distinguished in that it works with a variety of well-defined similarity notions and that it efficiently incorporates multiple types of knowledge. We describe a set of experiments on several real-world domains, and show that glue proposes highly accurate semantic mappings.

1,027 citations

Book ChapterDOI
Xin Dong1, Alon Halevy1, Jayant Madhavan1, Ema Nemes1, Jun Zhang1 
31 Aug 2004
TL;DR: Woogle supports similarity search for web services, such as finding similar web-service operations and finding operations that compose with a given one, and novel techniques to support these types of searches are described.
Abstract: Web services are loosely coupled software components, published, located, and invoked across the web. The growing number of web services available within an organization and on the Web raises a new and challenging search problem: locating desired web services. Traditional keyword search is insufficient in this context: the specific types of queries users require are not captured, the very small text fragments in web services are unsuitable for keyword search, and the underlying structure and semantics of the web services are not exploited. We describe the algorithms underlying the Woogle search engine for web services. Woogle supports similarity search for web services, such as finding similar web-service operations and finding operations that compose with a given one. We describe novel techniques to support these types of searches, and an experimental study on a collection of over 1500 web-service operations that shows the high recall and precision of our algorithms.

828 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
14 Jun 2005
TL;DR: This work considers complex information spaces: the authors' references belong to multiple related classes and each reference may have very few attribute values, and gradually enrich references by merging attribute values.
Abstract: Reference reconciliation is the problem of identifying when different references (i.e., sets of attribute values) in a dataset correspond to the same real-world entity. Most previous literature assumed references to a single class that had a fair number of attributes (e.g., research publications). We consider complex information spaces: our references belong to multiple related classes and each reference may have very few attribute values. A prime example of such a space is Personal Information Management, where the goal is to provide a coherent view of all the information on one's desktop.Our reconciliation algorithm has three principal features. First, we exploit the associations between references to design new methods for reference comparison. Second, we propagate information between reconciliation decisions to accumulate positive and negative evidences. Third, we gradually enrich references by merging attribute values. Our experiments show that (1) we considerably improve precision and recall over standard methods on a diverse set of personal information datasets, and (2) there are advantages to using our algorithm even on a standard citation dataset benchmark.

595 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Nov 2003
TL;DR: GLUE is described, a system that employs machine learning techniques to find semantic mappings between ontologies and is distinguished in that it works with a variety of well-defined similarity notions and that it efficiently incorporates multiple types of knowledge.
Abstract: On the Semantic Web, data will inevitably come from many different ontologies, and information processing across ontologies is not possible without knowing the semantic mappings between them. Manually finding such mappings is tedious, error-prone, and clearly not possible on the Web scale. Hence the development of tools to assist in the ontology mapping process is crucial to the success of the Semantic Web. We describe GLUE, a system that employs machine learning techniques to find such mappings. Given two ontologies, for each concept in one ontology GLUE finds the most similar concept in the other ontology. We give well-founded probabilistic definitions to several practical similarity measures and show that GLUE can work with all of them. Another key feature of GLUE is that it uses multiple learning strategies, each of which exploits well a different type of information either in the data instances or in the taxonomic structure of the ontologies. To further improve matching accuracy, we extend GLUE to incorporate commonsense knowledge and domain constraints into the matching process. Our approach is thus distinguished in that it works with a variety of well-defined similarity notions and that it efficiently incorporates multiple types of knowledge. We describe a set of experiments on several real-world domains and show that GLUE proposes highly accurate semantic mappings. Finally, we extend GLUE to find complex mappings between ontologies and describe experiments that show the promise of the approach.

533 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis.
Abstract: Machine Learning is the study of methods for programming computers to learn. Computers are applied to a wide range of tasks, and for most of these it is relatively easy for programmers to design and implement the necessary software. However, there are many tasks for which this is difficult or impossible. These can be divided into four general categories. First, there are problems for which there exist no human experts. For example, in modern automated manufacturing facilities, there is a need to predict machine failures before they occur by analyzing sensor readings. Because the machines are new, there are no human experts who can be interviewed by a programmer to provide the knowledge necessary to build a computer system. A machine learning system can study recorded data and subsequent machine failures and learn prediction rules. Second, there are problems where human experts exist, but where they are unable to explain their expertise. This is the case in many perceptual tasks, such as speech recognition, hand-writing recognition, and natural language understanding. Virtually all humans exhibit expert-level abilities on these tasks, but none of them can describe the detailed steps that they follow as they perform them. Fortunately, humans can provide machines with examples of the inputs and correct outputs for these tasks, so machine learning algorithms can learn to map the inputs to the outputs. Third, there are problems where phenomena are changing rapidly. In finance, for example, people would like to predict the future behavior of the stock market, of consumer purchases, or of exchange rates. These behaviors change frequently, so that even if a programmer could construct a good predictive computer program, it would need to be rewritten frequently. A learning program can relieve the programmer of this burden by constantly modifying and tuning a set of learned prediction rules. Fourth, there are applications that need to be customized for each computer user separately. Consider, for example, a program to filter unwanted electronic mail messages. Different users will need different filters. It is unreasonable to expect each user to program his or her own rules, and it is infeasible to provide every user with a software engineer to keep the rules up-to-date. A machine learning system can learn which mail messages the user rejects and maintain the filtering rules automatically. Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis. Statistics focuses on understanding the phenomena that have generated the data, often with the goal of testing different hypotheses about those phenomena. Data mining seeks to find patterns in the data that are understandable by people. Psychological studies of human learning aspire to understand the mechanisms underlying the various learning behaviors exhibited by people (concept learning, skill acquisition, strategy change, etc.).

13,246 citations

01 Jan 2002

9,314 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Noel Gorelick1, M. Hancher1, Mike J. Dixon1, Simon Ilyushchenko1, David Thau1, Rebecca Moore1 
TL;DR: Google Earth Engine is a cloud-based platform for planetary-scale geospatial analysis that brings Google's massive computational capabilities to bear on a variety of high-impact societal issues including deforestation, drought, disaster, disease, food security, water management, climate monitoring and environmental protection.

6,262 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Dec 2001
TL;DR: A taxonomy is presented that distinguishes between schema-level and instance-level, element- level and structure- level, and language-based and constraint-based matchers and is intended to be useful when comparing different approaches to schema matching, when developing a new match algorithm, and when implementing a schema matching component.
Abstract: Schema matching is a basic problem in many database application domains, such as data integration, E-business, data warehousing, and semantic query processing. In current implementations, schema matching is typically performed manually, which has significant limitations. On the other hand, previous research papers have proposed many techniques to achieve a partial automation of the match operation for specific application domains. We present a taxonomy that covers many of these existing approaches, and we describe the approaches in some detail. In particular, we distinguish between schema-level and instance-level, element-level and structure-level, and language-based and constraint-based matchers. Based on our classification we review some previous match implementations thereby indicating which part of the solution space they cover. We intend our taxonomy and review of past work to be useful when comparing different approaches to schema matching, when developing a new match algorithm, and when implementing a schema matching component.

3,693 citations

Book
05 Jun 2007
TL;DR: The second edition of Ontology Matching has been thoroughly revised and updated to reflect the most recent advances in this quickly developing area, which resulted in more than 150 pages of new content.
Abstract: Ontologies tend to be found everywhere. They are viewed as the silver bullet for many applications, such as database integration, peer-to-peer systems, e-commerce, semantic web services, or social networks. However, in open or evolving systems, such as the semantic web, different parties would, in general, adopt different ontologies. Thus, merely using ontologies, like using XML, does not reduce heterogeneity: it just raises heterogeneity problems to a higher level. Euzenat and Shvaikos book is devoted to ontology matching as a solution to the semantic heterogeneity problem faced by computer systems. Ontology matching aims at finding correspondences between semantically related entities of different ontologies. These correspondences may stand for equivalence as well as other relations, such as consequence, subsumption, or disjointness, between ontology entities. Many different matching solutions have been proposed so far from various viewpoints, e.g., databases, information systems, and artificial intelligence. The second edition of Ontology Matching has been thoroughly revised and updated to reflect the most recent advances in this quickly developing area, which resulted in more than 150 pages of new content. In particular, the book includes a new chapter dedicated to the methodology for performing ontology matching. It also covers emerging topics, such as data interlinking, ontology partitioning and pruning, context-based matching, matcher tuning, alignment debugging, and user involvement in matching, to mention a few. More than 100 state-of-the-art matching systems and frameworks were reviewed. With Ontology Matching, researchers and practitioners will find a reference book that presents currently available work in a uniform framework. In particular, the work and the techniques presented in this book can be equally applied to database schema matching, catalog integration, XML schema matching and other related problems. The objectives of the book include presenting (i) the state of the art and (ii) the latest research results in ontology matching by providing a systematic and detailed account of matching techniques and matching systems from theoretical, practical and application perspectives.

2,579 citations