This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
Comparing Relationships in Conceptual Modeling: Mapping to Semantic Classifications
November 2005 (vol. 17 no. 11)
pp. 1478-1489
Much of the research that deals with understanding the real world and representing it in a conceptual model uses some form of the entity-relationship model as a means of representation. This research proposes an ontology for classifying relationship verb phrases based upon the domain and context of the application within which the relationship appears. The classification categories to which the verb phrases are mapped were developed based upon prior research in databases, ontologies, and linguistics. The usefulness of the ontology for comparing relationships when used in conjunction with an entity ontology is discussed. Together, these ontologies can be effective in comparing two conceptual database designs for integration and validation. Empirical testing of the ontology on a number of relationships from different application domains and contexts illustrates the usefulness of the research.

[1] G. Arango, Domain Analysis Methods. Software Reusability, Ellis Horwood, 1994.
[2] M. Bergholtz, and P. Johnannesson, “Classifying the Semantics of Relationships in Conceptual Modelling by Categorization of Roles,” Proc. Sixth Int'l Workshop Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems (NLDB '01), pp. 28-29, June 2001.
[3] T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila, “The Semantic Web,” Scientific Am. vol. 284, no. 5, pp. 34-43, May 2001.
[4] C. Bettini and A. Montanari, “Temporal Representation and Reasoning,” Data and Knowledge Eng., vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 139-264, Feb. 2003.
[5] J. Biskup and D.W. Embley, “Extracting Information from Heterogeneous Information Sources Using Ontologically Specified Target Terms,” Information Systems, vol. 28, no. 3, 2003.
[6] F. Bodart, A. Pate, M. Sim, and R. Weber, “Should Optional Properties Be Used in Conceptual Modelling? A Theory and Three Empirical Tests,” Information Systems Research, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 384-405, 2002.
[7] R.J. Brachman, ”What IS-A Is and Isn't: An Analysis of Taxonomic Links in Semantic Networks,” Computer, Oct. 1983.
[8] M. Brodie, “On the Development of Data Models,” On Conceptual Modeling, M.L. Brodie, J. Mylopoulos, and J.W. Schmidt, eds., pp. 19-47, New York: Springer-Verlag, 1984.
[9] M. Brodie, “Association: A Database Abstraction,” Proc. Entity-Relationship Conf., 1981.
[10] J.F.M. Burg and R.P. van de Riet, “COLOR-X: Using Knowledge from WordNet for Conceptual Modeling,” WordNet: An Electronic Reference System and Some of Its Applications, C. Fellbaum, ed., pp. 353-377, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1998.
[11] Comm. ACM, special issue on ontology, M. Gruninger and J. Lee, eds., vol. 45, no. 2, 39-65, Feb. 2002.
[12] R. Chaffin, D.J. Hermann, and M. Winston, “An Empirical Taxonomy of Part-Whole Relation Identification,” Language and Cognitive Processes, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 17-48, 1998.
[13] P. Chen, “Entity-Relationship Modeling: Historical Events, Future Trends, and Lessons Learned,” Software Pioneers: Contributions to Software Eng., M. Broy and E. Denert, eds., pp. 100-114, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, June 2002.
[14] P. Chen, “The Entity-Relationship Approach,” Information Technology in Action: Trends and Perspectives, pp. 13-36, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1993.
[15] P. Chen, “English, Chinese, and ER Diagrams,” Data and Knowledge Eng., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 6-16, June 1997.
[16] H. Cottam, “Ontologies to Assist Process Oriented Knowledge Acquisition,”, 2000.
[17] H. Cottam, N. Milton, and N. Shadbolt, “The Use of Ontologies in a Decision Support System for Business Process Re-Engineering,” ai/themes/kaUseofOnto.html, 2000.
[18] D.A. Cruse, “On the Transitivity of Part-Whole Relation,” J. Linguistics, vol. 15, pp. 29-38, 1986.
[19] K. Dahlgren, “A Linguistic Ontology,” Int'l J. Human-Computer Studies, vol. 43, pp. 809-818, 1995.
[20] K. Dahlgren, Naive Semantics for Natural Language Understanding. Hingham, Mass: Kluwer Academic, 1988.
[21] J. Davis and R.D. Bonnell, “A Framework for Constructing Visual Knowledge Specifications in Acquiring Organizational Knowledge,” Knowledge Acquisition An Int'l J., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 79-113, Mar. 1991.
[22] J.P. Davis and R.D. Bonnell, “Modeling Semantics with Concept Abstractions in the EARL Data Model,” Proc. Eighth Int'l Conf. Entity-Relationship Approach, pp. 107-117, 1998.
[23] D. Dey, V.C. Storey, and T.M. Barron, “Improving Database Design through the Analysis of Relationships,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 453-486, Dec. 1999.
[24] J. Dullea and I.-Y. Song, “A Taxonomy of Recursive Relationships and Their Structural Validity in ER Modeling,” Conceptual Modeling— ER'99, Proc. 18th Int'l Conf. Conceptual Modeling, J. Akoka, M. Bouzeghoub, I. Comyn-Wattiau, and E. Metais, eds., pp. 384-389, 1999.
[25] D. Embley, D.M. Campbell, Y.S. Jiang, Y.K. Ng, R.D. Smith, S.W. Liddle, and D.W. Quass, “A Conceptual-Modeling Approach to Web Data Extraction,” Data and Knowledge Eng., 1999.
[26] B.S. Everitt, The Analysis of Contingency Tables. Chapman and Hill, 1977.
[27] V. Fellbaum, “Introduction,” Wordnet: An Electronic Lexical Database, pp. 1-19, Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1998.
[28] R.C. Goldstein and V.C. Storey, “Data Abstractions: ‘Why and How,’” Data and Knowledge Eng., vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 1-18, 1999.
[29] L.C. Gray and R.C. Bonnell, “A Comprehensive Conceptual Analysis Using ER and Conceptual Graphs,” J. Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4, pp. 95-106, 1992.
[30] T.R. Gruber, “A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 5, pp. 199-220, 1993.
[31] M. Gruninger and J. Lee, “Ontology Applications and Design,” Comm. ACM, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 39-41, Feb. 2002.
[32] “Information Integration,” IEEE Intelligent Systems, M.A. Hearst, ed., pp. 12-24, Sept./Oct. 1998.
[33] J. Hendler, “Agents and the Semantic Web,” IEEE Intelligent Systems, pp. 30-36, Mar./Apr. 2001.
[34] IEEE Intelligent Systems, special issue on the semantic Web, pp. 32-79, Mar./Apr. 2001.
[35] Z. Kedad and E. Metais, “Dealing with Semantic Heterogeneity during Data Integration,” Conceptual Modeling— ER '99, Proc. 18th Int'l Conf. Conceptual Modeling, J. Akoka, M. Bouzeghoub, I. Comyn-Wattiau, and E. Metais, eds., pp. 325-339, Nov. 1999.
[36] P.W. Kuczorz and S.J. Cosby, “Implementation of Meronymic (Part-Whole) Inheritance for Semantic Networks,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 219-227, Butterworth and Co. Ltd., 1989.
[37] T.Y. Landis, D.J. Harrmann, and R. Charrin, “Development Differences in the Comprehension of Semantic Relations,” Z. Psychologie, vol. 195, no. 2, pp. 129-139, 1987.
[38] E. Lim and R. Chiang, “Accommodating Instance Heterogeneities in Database Integration,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 38, pp. 213-231, 2004.
[39] G.A. Miller, R. Beckwith, C. Fellbaum, D. Gross, and K.J. Miller, “Introduction to WordNet: An On-Line Lexical Database,” Int'l J. Lexicography, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 235-244, 1990.
[40] R. Motschnig-Pitrik, “A Generic Framework for the Modeling of Contexts and Its Applications,” Data and Knowledge Eng., vol. 32, pp. 145-180, 2000.
[41] R. Motschnig-Pitrik and J. Mylopoulos, “Class and Instances,” Int'l J. Intelligent and Cooperative Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 61-92, 1992.
[42] R. Motschnig-Pitrik and V.C. Storey, “Modelling of Set Membership: The Notion and the Issues,” Data and Knowledge Eng., vol. 16, pp. 147-185, 1995.
[43] K. Mahalingam and M.N. Huhns, “A Tool for Organizing Web Information,” Computer, pp. 80-83, June 1997.
[44] J. Mylopoulos, “Information Modeling in the Time of the Revolution,” Information Systems, vol. 23, pp. 127-155, 1998.
[45] S.A. Noah and M.D. Williams, “Knowledge-Based Approaches to Database Design Diagnosis; Improving Performance with a Domain Specific Thesaurus Structure,” Proc. 2002 IASTED Int'l Conf. Artificial and Computational Intelligence, pp. 366-371, 2002.
[46] N.F. Noy and C.D. Hafner, “The State of the Art in Ontology Design: A Survey and Comparative Review,” AI Magazine, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 53-74, 1997.
[47] D.E. O'Leary, “Impediments in the Use of Explicit Ontologies for KBS Development,” Int'l J. Human-Computer Studies, vol. 46, pp. 327-337, 1997.
[48] K. O'Hara, N.R. Shadbolt, and G. Van Heust, “Generalised Directive Models: Integrating Model Development and Knowledge Acquisition,” Int'l J. Human-Computer Studies, vol. 49, pp. 497-522, 1998.
[49] C. Parent and A. Spaccapietra, “Database Integration: An Overview of Approaches and Issues,” Comm. ACM, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 166-178, May 1998.
[50] J. Parsons, “Effects of Local Versus Global Schema Diagrams on Verification and Communication in Conceptual Data Modeling,” J. Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 155-183, Winter 2002-2003.
[51] J. Parsons and Y Wand, “Emancipating Instances from the Tyranny of Classes in Information Modeling,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 228-268, June 2000.
[52] J.R. Searle, “A Taxonomy of Illocutionary Speech Acts,” Expressions and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts, pp. 1-29, New York: Cambridge Press, 1979.
[53] G. Shanks, E. Tansley, J. Nurelini, D. Toblin, and R. Weber, “Representing Part-Whole Relationships in Conceptual Modeling: An Empirical Evaluation,” Proc. Int'l Conf. Information Systems, Dec. 2002.
[54] K. Siau, Y. Wand, and I. Benbasat, “The Relative Importance of Structural Constraints and Surface Semantics in Information Modeling,” Information Systems, vol. 22, no. 23, pp. 155-170, 1997.
[55] J.F. Sowa, Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley, 1984.
[56] V.C. Storey, “Understanding Semantic Relationships,” Very Large Data Bases (VLDB) J., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 455-488, Oct. 1993.
[57] V.C. Storey, R. Chiang, D. Dey, R.C. Goldstein, and S. Sundaresan, “Common Sense Reasoning and Learning for Database Design Systems,” ACM Trans. Data Base Systems, vol. 22, no. 4, Dec. 1997.
[58] V.C. Storey and D. Dey, “A Methodology for Learning Across Application Domains for Database Design Systems,” IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Eng., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 13-28, Jan./Feb. 2002.
[59] V.C. Storey, D. Dey, H. Ullrich, and S. Sundaresan, “An Ontology-Based Expert System for Database Design,” Data and Knowledge Eng., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 31-46, 1998.
[60] W. Swartout, “Ontologies,” IEEE Intelligent Systems, pp. 18-19, Jan./Feb. 1999.
[61] T.L. Teorey, D. Yang, and J.P. Fry, ”A Logical Design Methodology for Relational Databases Using the Extended Entity-Relationship Approach,” ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 197-222, 1986.
[62] J.D. Ullman and J. Widom, A First Course in Database Systems. Prentice Hall, 2002.
[63] H. Ullrich, S. Purao, and V.C. Storey, “An Ontology for Classifying the Semantics of Relationships in Database Design,” Proc. Fifth Int'l Conf. Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems, (NLDB '00), June 2000.
[64] Y. Wand, V.C. Storey, and R. Weber, “Analyzing the Meaning of a Relationship,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 494-528, Dec. 1999.
[65] R. Weber, “Conceptual Modelling and Ontology: Possibilities and Pitfalls,” Proc. 21st Int'l Conf. Conceptual Modeling (ER), S. Spaccapietra, S.T. March, and Y. Kambayashi, eds., pp. 1-2, 2002.
[66] R. Weber, “Ontological Issues in Accounting Information Systems,” Researching Accounting as an Information Systems Discipline, S. Sutton and V. Arnold, eds., Sarasota, Fla.: Am. Accounting Assoc., 2002.
[67] R. Weber, Ontological Foundations of Information Systems. Melbourne: Coopers & Lybrand, 1997.
[68] R. Weber, “Are Attributes Entities? A Study of Database Designers' Memory Structures,” Information Systems Research, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 137-162, June 1996.
[69] C. Welty and N. Guarino, “Supporting Ontological Analysis of Taxonomic Relationships,” Data and Knowledge Eng., A.H.F. Laender and V.C. Storey, eds., special issue on ER 2000, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 51-74, 2001.
[70] M. Winslett, “Peter Chen Speaks Out,” SIGMOD Record, vol. 33, no. 1, 2004.
[71] M.E. Winston, R. Chaffin, and D. Hermann, “A Taxonomy of Part-Whole Relations,” Cognitive Science, vol. 11, pp. 417-444, 1987.

Index Terms:
Index Terms- Design representation, design concepts, design methodologies, logical design data models, logical design schema and subschema.
Veda C. Storey, "Comparing Relationships in Conceptual Modeling: Mapping to Semantic Classifications," IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1478-1489, Nov. 2005, doi:10.1109/TKDE.2005.175
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.