CA2501847A1 - Methods and apparatus for identifying related nodes in a directed graph having named arcs - Google Patents
Methods and apparatus for identifying related nodes in a directed graph having named arcs Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2501847A1 CA2501847A1 CA002501847A CA2501847A CA2501847A1 CA 2501847 A1 CA2501847 A1 CA 2501847A1 CA 002501847 A CA002501847 A CA 002501847A CA 2501847 A CA2501847 A CA 2501847A CA 2501847 A1 CA2501847 A1 CA 2501847A1
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- identified
- data
- criteria
- ancestor
- sub
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 73
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 claims description 5
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 description 8
- 230000014509 gene expression Effects 0.000 description 5
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 description 3
- 241000321453 Paranthias colonus Species 0.000 description 2
- 230000000875 corresponding effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000010354 integration Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000000463 material Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 208000037656 Respiratory Sounds Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 230000006978 adaptation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000007792 addition Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 108010051489 calin Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 238000006243 chemical reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000007596 consolidation process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000007796 conventional method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000007418 data mining Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000013500 data storage Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000002085 persistent effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 206010037833 rales Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 238000012546 transfer Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000010200 validation analysis Methods 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F16/00—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor
- G06F16/20—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor of structured data, e.g. relational data
- G06F16/27—Replication, distribution or synchronisation of data between databases or within a distributed database system; Distributed database system architectures therefor
- G06F16/278—Data partitioning, e.g. horizontal or vertical partitioning
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99931—Database or file accessing
- Y10S707/99933—Query processing, i.e. searching
- Y10S707/99934—Query formulation, input preparation, or translation
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99931—Database or file accessing
- Y10S707/99933—Query processing, i.e. searching
- Y10S707/99935—Query augmenting and refining, e.g. inexact access
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99941—Database schema or data structure
- Y10S707/99942—Manipulating data structure, e.g. compression, compaction, compilation
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99941—Database schema or data structure
- Y10S707/99944—Object-oriented database structure
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99941—Database schema or data structure
- Y10S707/99944—Object-oriented database structure
- Y10S707/99945—Object-oriented database structure processing
Abstract
The invention provides methods for identifying related data in a directed graph (e.g., an RDF data set). A "first" step-though the steps are not necessarily executed in sequential order-includes identifying (or marking) a s related data expressly satisfying the criteria. A "second" step includes identifying as related ancestors of any data identified as related, e.g., in the first step, unless that ancestor conflicts with the criteria. A "third" step of the method is identifying descendents of any data identified, e.g., in the prior steps, unless that descendent conflicts with the criteria or has a certain relationship with the ancestor from which it descends. The methods generates, e.g., as output, an indication of each of the nodes identified as related in the three steps.
Description
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR IDENTIFYING RELATED NODES IN A
DIRECTED GRAPH HAVING NAMED ARCS
Background of the Invention The invention pertains to digital. data processing and, more particularly, to methods and apparatus for identifying subsets of related data in a data set. The invention has application, for example, in enterprise business visibility and insight using real-time reporting tools.
It is not uncommon for a single company to have several database systems-separate systems not interfaced-to track internal and external planning and transaction data. Such sys-tems might have been developed at different times throughout the history of the company and are therefore of differing generations of computer technology. For example, a marketing data-base system tracking customers may be ten years old, while an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system tracking inventory might be two or three years old. Integration between these systems is difficult at best, consuming specialized programming skill and constant mainte-nance expenses.
A major impediment to enterprise business visibility is the consolidation of these dispa-rate legacy databases with one another and with newer databases. For instance, inventory on-hand data gleaned from a legacy ERP system may be difficult to combine with customer order data gleaned from web servers that support e-commerce (and other web-based) transactions.
This is not to mention difficulties, for example, in consolidating resource scheduling data from the ERP system with the forecasting data from the marketing database system.
Even where data from disparate databases can be consolidated, e.g., through data mining, directed queries, brute-force conversion and combination, or otherwise, it may be dif ficult (if not impossible) to use. For example, the manager of a corporate marketing campaign may be wholly unable to identify relevant customers from a listing o.f tens, hundreds or even thousands of pages of consolidated corporate ERP, e-commerce, marketing and other data.
An object of this invention is to provide improved methods and apparatus for digital data processing and, more particularly, for identifying subsets of related data in a data set.
A related object is to provide such methods and apparatus as facilitate enterprise busi-ness visibility and insight.
A further object is to provide such methods and apparatus as can rapidly identify sub-sets of related data in a data set, e.g., in response to user directives or otherwise.
A further object of the invention is to provide such methods and apparatus as can be readily and inexpensively implemented.
Summary of the Invention The foregoing are among the objects attained by the invention which provides, in one aspect, a method for identifying related data in a directed graph, such as an RI7F data set. A
"first" step-though the steps are not necessarily executed in sequential order-includes iden-tifying (or marking) as related data expressly satisfying a criteria (e.g., specified by a user). A
"second" step includes identifying as related ancestors of any data identified as related, e.g., in the first step, unless that ancestor conflicts with the criteria. A "third"
step of the method is identifying descendents of any data identified, e.g., in fhe prior steps, unless that descendent conflicts with the criteria or has a certain relationship with the ancestor from which it descends.
The methods generates, e.g., as output, an indication of each of the nodes identified as related in these steps.
By way of example, in the first step, a method according to this aspect of the invention can identify nodes in the directed graph that explicitly match a criteria in the form fieldl =
value l, where fieldT is a characteristic (or attribute) of one or more of the nodes and value.? is a value of the specific characteristic (or attribute). Of course, criteria are specific to the types of data in the data set and can be more complex, including f'or example, Boolean expressions and operators, wildcards, and so forth. 'Thus, for example, a criteria of a data set composed of RDF triples might be of the form predicate=CTO and object=Colin, which identifies, as related, triples having a predicate ''CTO'' and an object ''Colin.'' By way of further example, in second step, the method "walks" up the directed graph from each node identified as related in first step (or any of the steps) to find ancestor nodes.
Cach of these is identified as related unless it conflicts with the criteria.
To continue the exam-ple, if the first step marks as related a first RDF triple that matches the criteria predicate=C'TO
and object=Cvlin, the second step marks as related a second, parent triple whose object is the subject of the first triple, unless that second (or parent) triple otherwise conflicts with the crite-ria, e..g., has another object specifying that Dave is the CTO.
By way of further example, in the third step, the method walks down the directed graph from each node identified in the previously described steps (or any of the steps) to find descen-dent nodes. Each of these is identified as related unless (i) it conflicts with the criteria or (ii) its relationship with the ancestor from which walking occurs is of the same type as the relation-ship that ancestor has with a child, if any, .from which the ancestor was identified by operation of the second step. To continue the example, if the first step marks as related a first RDF triple that matches the criteria predicate=C'TO and object=Colin and the second step marks as related a second, parent triple whose object is the subject of the first triple via a predicate rela-tionship "Subsidiary," the third step marks as related a third, descendent triple whose subject is the object of the second, parent triple, unless that descendent triple conflicts with the criteria (e.g., has a predicate-object pair specifying that Dave is the CTO) or unless its relationship with the parent triple is also defined by a predicate relationship of type "Subsidiary."
As evident in the discussion above, according to some aspects of the invention, the data are defined by RDF triples and the nodes by subjects (or resource-type objects) of those triples.
In other aspects, the data and nodes are of other data types-including, for example, meta directed graph data (of the type defined in one of the aforementioned incorporated-by-refer-ence applications) where a node represents a plurality of subjects each sharing a named rela-tionship with a plurality of objects represented by a node.
Still further aspects of the invention provide methods as described above in which the so-called first, second and third steps are executed in parallel, e.g., as by an expert system rule-engine. In other aspects, the steps are executed in series and/or iteratively.
In still further aspects of the. invention, the invention provides methods for identifying related data in a directed graph by exercising only the first and second aforementioned steps.
Other aspects provide such methods in which only the first and third such steps are exercised.
Still other aspects of the invention provide methods as described above in which the directed graph is made up of, at least in part, a data flow, e.g. of the type containing transac-tional or enterprise data.. Related aspects provide such methods in which the steps are executed on a first portion of a directed graph and, then, separately on a second portion of the directed graph, e.g., as where the second portion reflects updates to a data set represented by the first portion.
These and other aspects are evident in the drawings and in the description that follows.
Brief Description of the Drawings A more complete understanding of the invention may be attained by reference to the drawings, in which:
Figure 1 is a block diagram of a system according to the invention for identifying related data in a data set;
figure 2 depicts a data set suitable for processing by a methods and apparatus according to the invention;
Figures 3-5 depict operation of the system of Figure 1 on the data set of Figure 2 with different criteria.
Detailed Description of the Illustrated Embodiment Figure 1. depicts a system 8 according to the invention for identifying and/or generating (collectively, "identifying") a subset of a directed graph, namely, that subset matching or related to a criteria. The embodiment (and, more generally, the invention) is suited for use inter alia in generating subsets ofRDF data sets consolidated from one or more data sources, e.g., in the manner described in the following copending, commonly assigned application, the teach-ings of which are incorporated herein by reference United States Patent Application Number Serial No. 09/917,264, filed July 27, 2001, entitled "Methods and Apparatus for )Jnterprise Application Integration,"
United States Patent Application Number Serial No. 10/051,619, filed October 29, 2001, entitled "Methods And Apparatus I'or Real-time Business Visibility Using Per-sistent Schema-less Data Storage,"
United States Patent Application Number Serial No. 60/332,219, filed. November 21, 2001, entitled "Methods And Apparatus For Calculation And Reduction Of Time-series Metrics From Event Streams Or Legacy Databases In A System For Real-time Business Visibility," and United States Patent Application Number Serial No. 60/332,053, filed November 21, 2001., entitled "Methods And Apparatus For Querying A Relational Database Of RDF
Triples In A System For Real-tinge Business Visibility."
'fhe embodiment (and, again, more generally, the invention) is also suited inter alia for generating subsets of ''meta" directed graphs of the type described in copending, commonly assigned application United States Patent Application Number Serial No.
10/138,725, filed May 3, 2002, entitled "Methods And Apparatus for Visualizing Relationships Among Triples of Resource Description Framework (RDF) Data Sets," the teachings of which are incorpo-rated herein by reference.
The illustrated system 8 includes a module 12 that executes a set of rules 18 with respect to a set of facts 1.6 representing criteria in order to generate a subset 20 of a set of facts 10 representing an input data set, where that subset 20 represents those input data facts that match the criteria or are related thereto. For simplicity, in the discussion that follows the set of facts 16 representing criteria are referred to as ''criteria" or "criteria 16,'' while the set of facts 10 representing data are referred to as ''data" or "data 10." The illustrated system 8 is imple-mented on a general- or special-purpose digital data processing system, e.g., a workstation, server, mainframe or other digital data processing system of the type conventionally available in the marketplace, configured and operated in accord with the teachings herein. Though not shown in the drawing, the digital data processing system can be coupled for communication with other such devices, e.g., via a network or otherwise, and can include input/output devices, such as a keyboard, pointing device, display, printer and the like.
Illustrated module 1.2 is an executable program (compiled, interpreted or otherwise) embodying the rules 18 and operating in the manner described herein for identifying subsets of directed graphs. In the illustrated embodiment, module 12 is implemented in Toss (Java Expert System Shelf), a rule-based expert system shell, commercially available from Sandia National Laboratories. However it can be implemented using any other "expert system"
engine, if tlien-else network, or other software, firmware andlor hardware environment (whether or not expert system-based) suitable for adaptation in accord with the teachings hereof.
The module 12 embodies the rules 18 in a network representation 14, e.g., an if then-else network, or the like, putt \ to the Jess environment. The network nodes are preferably executed so as to effect substantially parallel operation of the piles L8, though they can be executed so as to effect serial and/or iterative operation as well or in addition. In other embodi-ments, the rules are represented in accord with the specifics of the correspon.d.ing engine, if then-else network, or other software, firmware and/or hardware environment on which the embodiment is implemented. These likewise preferably effect parallel execution of the rules 18, though they may effect serial or iterative execution instead or in addition.
The data set 10 is a directed graph, e.g., a collection of nodes representing data and directed arcs connecting nodes to one another. As used herein, a node at the source of an arc is referred to as an "ancestor" (or "direct ancestor"), while the node at the target o.f.the arc is referred to herein as a "descendent" (or "direct descendent"). In the illustrated embodiment, each arc has an associated type or name, e.g., in the manner of predicates of RDF triples-which, themselves, constitute and/or Norm directed graphs.
By way of example, in addition to R.DF triples, the data set 10 can comprise data struc-tures representing a meta directed graph of the type disclosed in copending, commonly assigned United States Patent Application Serial No. I0/I38,725, filed May 3, 2002, entitled "Methods And Apparatus for Visualizing Relationships Among Triples of Resource Description Frame-work (RDF) Data Sets, e.g., at Figure 4A - 6B and accompanying text, all of which incorpo-rated herein by reference.
Alternatively or in addition, the data set 10 can comprise RDF triples of the type con-ventionally known in the art and described, for example, in Resource Description Framework (RDFI Model and Svntax Specification (February 22, 1999). Briefly, RDF is a play of express-ing the properties of items of data. Those items are referred to as subjects or resources. Their properties are referred to as predicates. And, the values of those properties are referred to as objects. In RDF, an expression of a property of an item is referred to as a triple, a convenience reflecting that the expression contains three parts: subject, predicate and object. Subjects can be anything that is described by an R.DF expression. A predicate identifies a property of a sub-ject. An object gives a "value" of a property. Objects can be literals, i.e., strings that identify or name the corresponding property (predicate). They can also be resources.
The data set 10 may be stored ou disk for input to module 12. Alternatively, or in addi tion, the data set may be a data flow, e.g., a stream of data (real-time or otherwise) originating from e-commerce, point-of sale or other transactions or sources (whefher or not business- or enterprise-oriented). Moreover, the data set may comprise multiple parts, each operated on by module 12 at different times-for example, a first part representing a database and a second part representing updates to that database.
Criteria 16 contains expressions including, for example, literals, wildcards, Boolean operators and so forth, against which nodes in the data set are tested. In embodiments that operate on .RDF data sets, the criteria can specify subject, predicate and/or object values or other attributes. In embodiments that operate on directed graphs of other types other appropri-ate values and attributes may be specified. Criteria can be input by a user, e.g., from a user interface, e.g., on an ad hoc basis. Alternatively or in addition, they can be stored and re-used, such as Where numerous data sets exist of which the same criteria is applied.
Further, the cri-teria .16 can be generated via dynamically, e.g., via other software (or hardware) applications.
Rules 18 define the tests for identifying data in the data set 20 that match the criteria or that are related thereto. These are expressed in teens of the types and values of the data items as well as their interrelationships or connectedness.
Rules applicable to a data set comprised of RDF triples can be expressed as follows:
Rule No. Purpose Rule 0 ("Criteria Rule") Match criteria to triples in If triple's object is a literal, identify triple data set as related if both triple's predicate and the object match those specified in the crite-ria.
If triple's object is a resource, identify triple as related if triple's predicate matches that specified in criteria, if any, and if triples object matches that specified in criteria.
1 ("Sibling Rule") Find as related other Identify as related a triple that shares the triples at the same level same subject (i.e., siblings), except those siblings that have the same predicate as that specified in the criteria.
DIRECTED GRAPH HAVING NAMED ARCS
Background of the Invention The invention pertains to digital. data processing and, more particularly, to methods and apparatus for identifying subsets of related data in a data set. The invention has application, for example, in enterprise business visibility and insight using real-time reporting tools.
It is not uncommon for a single company to have several database systems-separate systems not interfaced-to track internal and external planning and transaction data. Such sys-tems might have been developed at different times throughout the history of the company and are therefore of differing generations of computer technology. For example, a marketing data-base system tracking customers may be ten years old, while an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system tracking inventory might be two or three years old. Integration between these systems is difficult at best, consuming specialized programming skill and constant mainte-nance expenses.
A major impediment to enterprise business visibility is the consolidation of these dispa-rate legacy databases with one another and with newer databases. For instance, inventory on-hand data gleaned from a legacy ERP system may be difficult to combine with customer order data gleaned from web servers that support e-commerce (and other web-based) transactions.
This is not to mention difficulties, for example, in consolidating resource scheduling data from the ERP system with the forecasting data from the marketing database system.
Even where data from disparate databases can be consolidated, e.g., through data mining, directed queries, brute-force conversion and combination, or otherwise, it may be dif ficult (if not impossible) to use. For example, the manager of a corporate marketing campaign may be wholly unable to identify relevant customers from a listing o.f tens, hundreds or even thousands of pages of consolidated corporate ERP, e-commerce, marketing and other data.
An object of this invention is to provide improved methods and apparatus for digital data processing and, more particularly, for identifying subsets of related data in a data set.
A related object is to provide such methods and apparatus as facilitate enterprise busi-ness visibility and insight.
A further object is to provide such methods and apparatus as can rapidly identify sub-sets of related data in a data set, e.g., in response to user directives or otherwise.
A further object of the invention is to provide such methods and apparatus as can be readily and inexpensively implemented.
Summary of the Invention The foregoing are among the objects attained by the invention which provides, in one aspect, a method for identifying related data in a directed graph, such as an RI7F data set. A
"first" step-though the steps are not necessarily executed in sequential order-includes iden-tifying (or marking) as related data expressly satisfying a criteria (e.g., specified by a user). A
"second" step includes identifying as related ancestors of any data identified as related, e.g., in the first step, unless that ancestor conflicts with the criteria. A "third"
step of the method is identifying descendents of any data identified, e.g., in fhe prior steps, unless that descendent conflicts with the criteria or has a certain relationship with the ancestor from which it descends.
The methods generates, e.g., as output, an indication of each of the nodes identified as related in these steps.
By way of example, in the first step, a method according to this aspect of the invention can identify nodes in the directed graph that explicitly match a criteria in the form fieldl =
value l, where fieldT is a characteristic (or attribute) of one or more of the nodes and value.? is a value of the specific characteristic (or attribute). Of course, criteria are specific to the types of data in the data set and can be more complex, including f'or example, Boolean expressions and operators, wildcards, and so forth. 'Thus, for example, a criteria of a data set composed of RDF triples might be of the form predicate=CTO and object=Colin, which identifies, as related, triples having a predicate ''CTO'' and an object ''Colin.'' By way of further example, in second step, the method "walks" up the directed graph from each node identified as related in first step (or any of the steps) to find ancestor nodes.
Cach of these is identified as related unless it conflicts with the criteria.
To continue the exam-ple, if the first step marks as related a first RDF triple that matches the criteria predicate=C'TO
and object=Cvlin, the second step marks as related a second, parent triple whose object is the subject of the first triple, unless that second (or parent) triple otherwise conflicts with the crite-ria, e..g., has another object specifying that Dave is the CTO.
By way of further example, in the third step, the method walks down the directed graph from each node identified in the previously described steps (or any of the steps) to find descen-dent nodes. Each of these is identified as related unless (i) it conflicts with the criteria or (ii) its relationship with the ancestor from which walking occurs is of the same type as the relation-ship that ancestor has with a child, if any, .from which the ancestor was identified by operation of the second step. To continue the example, if the first step marks as related a first RDF triple that matches the criteria predicate=C'TO and object=Colin and the second step marks as related a second, parent triple whose object is the subject of the first triple via a predicate rela-tionship "Subsidiary," the third step marks as related a third, descendent triple whose subject is the object of the second, parent triple, unless that descendent triple conflicts with the criteria (e.g., has a predicate-object pair specifying that Dave is the CTO) or unless its relationship with the parent triple is also defined by a predicate relationship of type "Subsidiary."
As evident in the discussion above, according to some aspects of the invention, the data are defined by RDF triples and the nodes by subjects (or resource-type objects) of those triples.
In other aspects, the data and nodes are of other data types-including, for example, meta directed graph data (of the type defined in one of the aforementioned incorporated-by-refer-ence applications) where a node represents a plurality of subjects each sharing a named rela-tionship with a plurality of objects represented by a node.
Still further aspects of the invention provide methods as described above in which the so-called first, second and third steps are executed in parallel, e.g., as by an expert system rule-engine. In other aspects, the steps are executed in series and/or iteratively.
In still further aspects of the. invention, the invention provides methods for identifying related data in a directed graph by exercising only the first and second aforementioned steps.
Other aspects provide such methods in which only the first and third such steps are exercised.
Still other aspects of the invention provide methods as described above in which the directed graph is made up of, at least in part, a data flow, e.g. of the type containing transac-tional or enterprise data.. Related aspects provide such methods in which the steps are executed on a first portion of a directed graph and, then, separately on a second portion of the directed graph, e.g., as where the second portion reflects updates to a data set represented by the first portion.
These and other aspects are evident in the drawings and in the description that follows.
Brief Description of the Drawings A more complete understanding of the invention may be attained by reference to the drawings, in which:
Figure 1 is a block diagram of a system according to the invention for identifying related data in a data set;
figure 2 depicts a data set suitable for processing by a methods and apparatus according to the invention;
Figures 3-5 depict operation of the system of Figure 1 on the data set of Figure 2 with different criteria.
Detailed Description of the Illustrated Embodiment Figure 1. depicts a system 8 according to the invention for identifying and/or generating (collectively, "identifying") a subset of a directed graph, namely, that subset matching or related to a criteria. The embodiment (and, more generally, the invention) is suited for use inter alia in generating subsets ofRDF data sets consolidated from one or more data sources, e.g., in the manner described in the following copending, commonly assigned application, the teach-ings of which are incorporated herein by reference United States Patent Application Number Serial No. 09/917,264, filed July 27, 2001, entitled "Methods and Apparatus for )Jnterprise Application Integration,"
United States Patent Application Number Serial No. 10/051,619, filed October 29, 2001, entitled "Methods And Apparatus I'or Real-time Business Visibility Using Per-sistent Schema-less Data Storage,"
United States Patent Application Number Serial No. 60/332,219, filed. November 21, 2001, entitled "Methods And Apparatus For Calculation And Reduction Of Time-series Metrics From Event Streams Or Legacy Databases In A System For Real-time Business Visibility," and United States Patent Application Number Serial No. 60/332,053, filed November 21, 2001., entitled "Methods And Apparatus For Querying A Relational Database Of RDF
Triples In A System For Real-tinge Business Visibility."
'fhe embodiment (and, again, more generally, the invention) is also suited inter alia for generating subsets of ''meta" directed graphs of the type described in copending, commonly assigned application United States Patent Application Number Serial No.
10/138,725, filed May 3, 2002, entitled "Methods And Apparatus for Visualizing Relationships Among Triples of Resource Description Framework (RDF) Data Sets," the teachings of which are incorpo-rated herein by reference.
The illustrated system 8 includes a module 12 that executes a set of rules 18 with respect to a set of facts 1.6 representing criteria in order to generate a subset 20 of a set of facts 10 representing an input data set, where that subset 20 represents those input data facts that match the criteria or are related thereto. For simplicity, in the discussion that follows the set of facts 16 representing criteria are referred to as ''criteria" or "criteria 16,'' while the set of facts 10 representing data are referred to as ''data" or "data 10." The illustrated system 8 is imple-mented on a general- or special-purpose digital data processing system, e.g., a workstation, server, mainframe or other digital data processing system of the type conventionally available in the marketplace, configured and operated in accord with the teachings herein. Though not shown in the drawing, the digital data processing system can be coupled for communication with other such devices, e.g., via a network or otherwise, and can include input/output devices, such as a keyboard, pointing device, display, printer and the like.
Illustrated module 1.2 is an executable program (compiled, interpreted or otherwise) embodying the rules 18 and operating in the manner described herein for identifying subsets of directed graphs. In the illustrated embodiment, module 12 is implemented in Toss (Java Expert System Shelf), a rule-based expert system shell, commercially available from Sandia National Laboratories. However it can be implemented using any other "expert system"
engine, if tlien-else network, or other software, firmware andlor hardware environment (whether or not expert system-based) suitable for adaptation in accord with the teachings hereof.
The module 12 embodies the rules 18 in a network representation 14, e.g., an if then-else network, or the like, putt \ to the Jess environment. The network nodes are preferably executed so as to effect substantially parallel operation of the piles L8, though they can be executed so as to effect serial and/or iterative operation as well or in addition. In other embodi-ments, the rules are represented in accord with the specifics of the correspon.d.ing engine, if then-else network, or other software, firmware and/or hardware environment on which the embodiment is implemented. These likewise preferably effect parallel execution of the rules 18, though they may effect serial or iterative execution instead or in addition.
The data set 10 is a directed graph, e.g., a collection of nodes representing data and directed arcs connecting nodes to one another. As used herein, a node at the source of an arc is referred to as an "ancestor" (or "direct ancestor"), while the node at the target o.f.the arc is referred to herein as a "descendent" (or "direct descendent"). In the illustrated embodiment, each arc has an associated type or name, e.g., in the manner of predicates of RDF triples-which, themselves, constitute and/or Norm directed graphs.
By way of example, in addition to R.DF triples, the data set 10 can comprise data struc-tures representing a meta directed graph of the type disclosed in copending, commonly assigned United States Patent Application Serial No. I0/I38,725, filed May 3, 2002, entitled "Methods And Apparatus for Visualizing Relationships Among Triples of Resource Description Frame-work (RDF) Data Sets, e.g., at Figure 4A - 6B and accompanying text, all of which incorpo-rated herein by reference.
Alternatively or in addition, the data set 10 can comprise RDF triples of the type con-ventionally known in the art and described, for example, in Resource Description Framework (RDFI Model and Svntax Specification (February 22, 1999). Briefly, RDF is a play of express-ing the properties of items of data. Those items are referred to as subjects or resources. Their properties are referred to as predicates. And, the values of those properties are referred to as objects. In RDF, an expression of a property of an item is referred to as a triple, a convenience reflecting that the expression contains three parts: subject, predicate and object. Subjects can be anything that is described by an R.DF expression. A predicate identifies a property of a sub-ject. An object gives a "value" of a property. Objects can be literals, i.e., strings that identify or name the corresponding property (predicate). They can also be resources.
The data set 10 may be stored ou disk for input to module 12. Alternatively, or in addi tion, the data set may be a data flow, e.g., a stream of data (real-time or otherwise) originating from e-commerce, point-of sale or other transactions or sources (whefher or not business- or enterprise-oriented). Moreover, the data set may comprise multiple parts, each operated on by module 12 at different times-for example, a first part representing a database and a second part representing updates to that database.
Criteria 16 contains expressions including, for example, literals, wildcards, Boolean operators and so forth, against which nodes in the data set are tested. In embodiments that operate on .RDF data sets, the criteria can specify subject, predicate and/or object values or other attributes. In embodiments that operate on directed graphs of other types other appropri-ate values and attributes may be specified. Criteria can be input by a user, e.g., from a user interface, e.g., on an ad hoc basis. Alternatively or in addition, they can be stored and re-used, such as Where numerous data sets exist of which the same criteria is applied.
Further, the cri-teria .16 can be generated via dynamically, e.g., via other software (or hardware) applications.
Rules 18 define the tests for identifying data in the data set 20 that match the criteria or that are related thereto. These are expressed in teens of the types and values of the data items as well as their interrelationships or connectedness.
Rules applicable to a data set comprised of RDF triples can be expressed as follows:
Rule No. Purpose Rule 0 ("Criteria Rule") Match criteria to triples in If triple's object is a literal, identify triple data set as related if both triple's predicate and the object match those specified in the crite-ria.
If triple's object is a resource, identify triple as related if triple's predicate matches that specified in criteria, if any, and if triples object matches that specified in criteria.
1 ("Sibling Rule") Find as related other Identify as related a triple that shares the triples at the same level same subject (i.e., siblings), except those siblings that have the same predicate as that specified in the criteria.
2 ("Ancestor Rule") Walk up the directed Identify as related a triple that is a direct graph to find valid triples. ancestor of a triple identified by a~~y of the other rules and that is not in substantial conflict with t:he criteria;
For purposes hereof, a triple whose object is the subject of another triple is deemed a direct ancestor of that other triple: a triple whose subject is the object of another triple is deemed a direct descendent o.f that other triple.
For purposes hereof, a triple whose object is the subject of another triple is deemed a direct ancestor of that other triple: a triple whose subject is the object of another triple is deemed a direct descendent o.f that other triple.
3 ("Descendent Walk down the directed Identify as related a triple (hereinafter Ruie") graph to find valid triples. "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of a triple (h.ereinafter "iden-tified ancestor") identified as related by any of the other rules and which identified descendent (a) is not associated with the identi-fied ancestor vi.a a predicate sub-stantially matching a predicate named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) is not associated with the identi-fied ancestor via a predicate.
matching a predicate by which the identified ancestor is associated with a triple, if any, as a result of which the identified mcestor was identified during execution of the Ancestor Rule.
As used above and throughout "substantial conflict" means conflict that is direct or otherwise material in regard to determining related data vis-a-vis the use for which the inven-tion. is employed (e.g., as determined by default in an embodiment and/or by selection made by a user thereof). By way of non-limiting example, for some uses (and/or embodiments) differ-ences of any sort between the object of an RDIj triple and that specified in a criteria am mate-rial, while for other uses (and/or embodiments) differences with respect to suffix, case and/or tense are immaterial. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that for other uses and/or embodi-ments, factors other than suffix, case and/or tense may be used in determining materiality or lack thereof.
Rules applicable to other directed graphs (e.g., not comprised of RDF triples) can be expressed as shown below. As noted above, these other directed graphs cm include the afore-mentioned meta directed graphs, by way of non-limiting example. It will be appreciated that the rules which follow are fimctionally equivalent to those expressed above.
However, they l0 take into that the data nodes in those other directed graphs may have attributes in addition to those represented in their connectedness to other data nodes. To this end, the aforemenrioned Sibling Rule is subsumed in those aspects of the rules that follow which call for testing each data node to determine whether they conflict with the criteria.
Rule No. Purpose Rale 0 (''Criteria Rule") Match criteria to Identify as related data substantially matching data in data set a criteria;
1 (Ancestor Rule) Walk upthe directed Identified as related data that is a direct ances-graph to find valid for of data identified in any of these rules, and data that is not in substantial con$ict with the crite-rta;
2 (Descendent Rule) Walk down the Identify as related data (hereinafter "identified directed graph to descendent") that is a direct descendent of find valid data data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identi-fied as related in any of these rules, and which identified descendent:
(a) Does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor substantially matching a relationship named in the criteria, if any, and (b) Is not in substantial conflict with the crite-ria; and (c} Does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor matching a relationship the identified ancestor has with a data, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified during execution of Rule 1.
Referring to back to .Figvtre 1, the related data 20 output or otherwise generated by 'nodule 1.2 represents those nodes or triples identified as "related" during exercise of the rules.
The data 20 can be output in the same form as the input data or some alternate farm, e.g., point-ers or other references to identified data within the data set 10. In some embodiments, it can be displayed via a user interface or printed, or digitally communicated to further applications for additional processing, e.g., via a network or the Internet. In one non-limiting example, the related data 20 can be used to generate mailings or to trigger message events.
, In operation, the module 12 is loaded with rules 18. In the illustrated embodiment, this is accomplished via compilation of source code embodying those rules (expressed above in pseudo code) in the native or appropriate language of the expert system engine or other envi-ronment in which the module is implemented. .See, step A. Of course, those skilled in the art will appreciate that, alternatively, rules in source code format can be retrieved at run time and interpreted instead of compiled.
The criteria 16 is then supplied to the module 12. See, step B. These can be entered by an operator, e.g., via a keyboard or other input device. Alternatively, or in addition, they can be retrieved from disk or input from another application (e.g., a messaging system) or device, e.g., via network, interprocess communication or otherwise.
The data set .I 0 is applied to the module 12 in step C. The data set .10 can be as described above, to wit, a ItDF data set or other directed graph stored in a. data base or contained in a data stream, or otherwise. The data. set can be applied to the module l2 via conventional techniques known in the a<~t, e.g., retrieval from disk, communication via network, or via any other tech-nique capable of communicating a data set to a digital application.
In step D, the module 12 uses the rules 18 to apply the criteria 16 to the data set 10. In the illustrated embodiment, by way of non-limiting example, this step is executed via the net-work 14 configured (via the rules engine) in accord with the rules. In other embodiments, this step is executed via the corresponding internal representation of those rules.
Triples (in the case of RI7F data sets) or data (in the case of data sets comprising other types of directed graphs) identified by the module as ''related"-meaning, in the context hereof;
that those triples match the criteria or are related thereto-are output as "identified data" in Step D. As described above, the output can be a list or other tabulation o.f identified data 20, or it can be a pointer or reference to that data., for example, a reference to a location within the data set 10.
In some embodiments, the output of identified data 20 can be stored .for future use, e.g., for use with a mail-merge or other applications. In other embodiments, i.t can be digitally com-municated to other data base systems or information repositories. Still further, in some embodiments, it can be added to a data base containing other related data, or even replace por-tions of that data based.
The table below lists a directed gaph-here, the triples of an RDF data set-of the type suitable for processing by module 12 to identify data matching a criteria and related thereto. It will be appreciated that in practice, directed graphs processed by module 12 may contain hun-dreds, thousands or more nodes, e.g., as would be typical for an RDF set representing transac-tional and enterprise-related data. Moreover, it will be appreciated that the directed graphs and/or triples are typically expressed in a conventional data format (e.g., X.ML,), or otherwise, for transfer to and from the module 12.
Subject Predicate Object company://id#3 customer company://id#1 company://id#3 customer company://id#4 company://id#3 customer company://id#2 company://id#1 employee I-Loward company://id#1 employee Alan company://id# 1 CTU Colin company://id#2 employee David company://id#2 C'fO Colin Figure 2 is a graphical depiction of this directed graph, i.e., RDF data set.
Per conven-lion, subjects and resource-type objects are depicted as oval-shaped nodes;
literal-type objects are depicted as rectangular nodes; and predicates are depicted as arcs connecting those nodes.
h'igure 3 depicts application by module 12 of criteria on the data set shown in higure 2 using the above-detailed rules, specifically, those of the RDF type. The criteria is predicate =
CTO and object = Colin. The depiction is simplified insofar as it shows execution of the rules serially: in practice, a preferred module 12 implemented in a rules engine (such as Jess) exe cutes the rules in accord with the engine's underlying algorithm (e.g., a Rete algorithm as dis closed by Forgy, "Rete: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object Pattern Match,"
Problem Artificial lntelligence, .19( I 982) 17-37, by http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess/docs/52/
rete.html; or other underlying algorithm).
In a sequence of twelve frames, the depiction shows successive identification of triples as "related" (i.e., matching the criteria or related thereto) as each rule is applied or re-applied.
The illustrated sequence proceeds from left-lo-right then top-to-bottom, as indicated by the dashed-line arrows. For sake of simplicity, the data set is depicted in abstract in each frame, i.e., by a small directed graph of identical shape as that of Figure 2, but without the labels.
Triples identified as related are indicated in black.
Referring to the first frame of Figure 3, the module 12 applies the Criteria Rule to the data set. Because the company://id#l.-CTO-Colin triple matches the criteria (to repeat, predicate = CTO and object = Calin), it is identified as "related" and marked accordingly.
In the second frame, the module applies the Sibling Rule to find triples at the same level as the ones) previously identified by the Criteria Rule. In this instance, the company://id#1.-employee-Howard and company://id#1--employee-Alan triples are identified and marked accordingly.
In the third .frame, the module applies the Ancestor .Rule to walk up the directed graph to find ancestors of the triples previously identified as related. In this instance, the company://
id#3--customer-company://id#1 triple is identified and marked accordingly.
In the fourth frame, the module applies the Descendent Rule to walk down the directed graph to find descendents of the triples previously identified as related. No triples are selected since both company://id#3--customer--company://id#2 and company://id#3-customer-company://id#4 share the same predicate as company://id#3-customer-company://id#1.
Referring back to the detailed rules, compa.ny://id#2, by way of example, is a direct descendent that has a predicate (to wit, customer) connecting it with its identified direct ancestor (to wit, company://id#3) which matches a predicate that ancestor (to wit, company://id#3) has with a direct descendent (to wit, company://id#1.) via which that direct ancestor (to wit, company://
id#3) was identified during the execution of the Ancestor Rule.
In frames 5-8, the module 12 reapplies the rules, this time beginning with a Criteria Rule match of company://id#2-CTO-Colin. In frames 9-12, the module 12 finds no fixrther matches upon reapplication of the rules.
Figure 4 parallels Figure 3, showing however application by module 12 of the criteria predicate -- employee and object -- Alan to the data set o.f Figure 2. Only eight frames are shown since module 12 finds no further matches during execution of the rules represented in the final four frames.
Of note in Figure 4 is frame two. Here, application of the Sibling Rule by module 12 does not result in identification of all of the siblings of company://id#1-employee-Alan (which had been identified as relevant in the prior execution of the Criteria Rule). This is because, one of siblings company://id#1--employee-Howard has the same predicate as that specified in the criteria. Accordingly, that triple is not identified or marked as related.
Figure 5 also parallels Figure 3, showing however application by module 12 of the cri-teria resource = company: llid#I to the data set of Figure 2. Again, only eight frames are shown since module 12 finds no further matches during execution ofthe rules represented in the final four frames. Of note in Figure 5 is the identifications effected by specification of a resource as a criteria.
A further understanding of these examples may be attained by reference the Appendices A and B, filed herewith, which provide XML/RDF listings of the data sets and criteria, and which also show rule-by-rule identification or ("validation") of the triples.
Though the examples show application ofthe rules by module l.2 to an RDF data set, it will be appreciated that alternate embodiments of the module can likewise apply the rules to data sets representing the meta directed graphs disclosed in copending, commonly assigned application United States 1'atentApplication Number Serial No. 10/1.38,725, filed May 3, 2002, entitled ".Methods And Apparatus for Visualizing Relationships Among Triples of Resource Description Framework (RDF) Data Sets," the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Described above are methods and apparatus meeting the desired objects. Those skilled in the art will, of course, appreciate that these are merely examples and that other embodiments, incorporating modifications to those described herein fall within tlae scope of the invention, of which we claim:
(c) is not associated with the identi-fied ancestor via a predicate.
matching a predicate by which the identified ancestor is associated with a triple, if any, as a result of which the identified mcestor was identified during execution of the Ancestor Rule.
As used above and throughout "substantial conflict" means conflict that is direct or otherwise material in regard to determining related data vis-a-vis the use for which the inven-tion. is employed (e.g., as determined by default in an embodiment and/or by selection made by a user thereof). By way of non-limiting example, for some uses (and/or embodiments) differ-ences of any sort between the object of an RDIj triple and that specified in a criteria am mate-rial, while for other uses (and/or embodiments) differences with respect to suffix, case and/or tense are immaterial. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that for other uses and/or embodi-ments, factors other than suffix, case and/or tense may be used in determining materiality or lack thereof.
Rules applicable to other directed graphs (e.g., not comprised of RDF triples) can be expressed as shown below. As noted above, these other directed graphs cm include the afore-mentioned meta directed graphs, by way of non-limiting example. It will be appreciated that the rules which follow are fimctionally equivalent to those expressed above.
However, they l0 take into that the data nodes in those other directed graphs may have attributes in addition to those represented in their connectedness to other data nodes. To this end, the aforemenrioned Sibling Rule is subsumed in those aspects of the rules that follow which call for testing each data node to determine whether they conflict with the criteria.
Rule No. Purpose Rale 0 (''Criteria Rule") Match criteria to Identify as related data substantially matching data in data set a criteria;
1 (Ancestor Rule) Walk upthe directed Identified as related data that is a direct ances-graph to find valid for of data identified in any of these rules, and data that is not in substantial con$ict with the crite-rta;
2 (Descendent Rule) Walk down the Identify as related data (hereinafter "identified directed graph to descendent") that is a direct descendent of find valid data data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identi-fied as related in any of these rules, and which identified descendent:
(a) Does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor substantially matching a relationship named in the criteria, if any, and (b) Is not in substantial conflict with the crite-ria; and (c} Does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor matching a relationship the identified ancestor has with a data, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified during execution of Rule 1.
Referring to back to .Figvtre 1, the related data 20 output or otherwise generated by 'nodule 1.2 represents those nodes or triples identified as "related" during exercise of the rules.
The data 20 can be output in the same form as the input data or some alternate farm, e.g., point-ers or other references to identified data within the data set 10. In some embodiments, it can be displayed via a user interface or printed, or digitally communicated to further applications for additional processing, e.g., via a network or the Internet. In one non-limiting example, the related data 20 can be used to generate mailings or to trigger message events.
, In operation, the module 12 is loaded with rules 18. In the illustrated embodiment, this is accomplished via compilation of source code embodying those rules (expressed above in pseudo code) in the native or appropriate language of the expert system engine or other envi-ronment in which the module is implemented. .See, step A. Of course, those skilled in the art will appreciate that, alternatively, rules in source code format can be retrieved at run time and interpreted instead of compiled.
The criteria 16 is then supplied to the module 12. See, step B. These can be entered by an operator, e.g., via a keyboard or other input device. Alternatively, or in addition, they can be retrieved from disk or input from another application (e.g., a messaging system) or device, e.g., via network, interprocess communication or otherwise.
The data set .I 0 is applied to the module 12 in step C. The data set .10 can be as described above, to wit, a ItDF data set or other directed graph stored in a. data base or contained in a data stream, or otherwise. The data. set can be applied to the module l2 via conventional techniques known in the a<~t, e.g., retrieval from disk, communication via network, or via any other tech-nique capable of communicating a data set to a digital application.
In step D, the module 12 uses the rules 18 to apply the criteria 16 to the data set 10. In the illustrated embodiment, by way of non-limiting example, this step is executed via the net-work 14 configured (via the rules engine) in accord with the rules. In other embodiments, this step is executed via the corresponding internal representation of those rules.
Triples (in the case of RI7F data sets) or data (in the case of data sets comprising other types of directed graphs) identified by the module as ''related"-meaning, in the context hereof;
that those triples match the criteria or are related thereto-are output as "identified data" in Step D. As described above, the output can be a list or other tabulation o.f identified data 20, or it can be a pointer or reference to that data., for example, a reference to a location within the data set 10.
In some embodiments, the output of identified data 20 can be stored .for future use, e.g., for use with a mail-merge or other applications. In other embodiments, i.t can be digitally com-municated to other data base systems or information repositories. Still further, in some embodiments, it can be added to a data base containing other related data, or even replace por-tions of that data based.
The table below lists a directed gaph-here, the triples of an RDF data set-of the type suitable for processing by module 12 to identify data matching a criteria and related thereto. It will be appreciated that in practice, directed graphs processed by module 12 may contain hun-dreds, thousands or more nodes, e.g., as would be typical for an RDF set representing transac-tional and enterprise-related data. Moreover, it will be appreciated that the directed graphs and/or triples are typically expressed in a conventional data format (e.g., X.ML,), or otherwise, for transfer to and from the module 12.
Subject Predicate Object company://id#3 customer company://id#1 company://id#3 customer company://id#4 company://id#3 customer company://id#2 company://id#1 employee I-Loward company://id#1 employee Alan company://id# 1 CTU Colin company://id#2 employee David company://id#2 C'fO Colin Figure 2 is a graphical depiction of this directed graph, i.e., RDF data set.
Per conven-lion, subjects and resource-type objects are depicted as oval-shaped nodes;
literal-type objects are depicted as rectangular nodes; and predicates are depicted as arcs connecting those nodes.
h'igure 3 depicts application by module 12 of criteria on the data set shown in higure 2 using the above-detailed rules, specifically, those of the RDF type. The criteria is predicate =
CTO and object = Colin. The depiction is simplified insofar as it shows execution of the rules serially: in practice, a preferred module 12 implemented in a rules engine (such as Jess) exe cutes the rules in accord with the engine's underlying algorithm (e.g., a Rete algorithm as dis closed by Forgy, "Rete: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object Pattern Match,"
Problem Artificial lntelligence, .19( I 982) 17-37, by http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess/docs/52/
rete.html; or other underlying algorithm).
In a sequence of twelve frames, the depiction shows successive identification of triples as "related" (i.e., matching the criteria or related thereto) as each rule is applied or re-applied.
The illustrated sequence proceeds from left-lo-right then top-to-bottom, as indicated by the dashed-line arrows. For sake of simplicity, the data set is depicted in abstract in each frame, i.e., by a small directed graph of identical shape as that of Figure 2, but without the labels.
Triples identified as related are indicated in black.
Referring to the first frame of Figure 3, the module 12 applies the Criteria Rule to the data set. Because the company://id#l.-CTO-Colin triple matches the criteria (to repeat, predicate = CTO and object = Calin), it is identified as "related" and marked accordingly.
In the second frame, the module applies the Sibling Rule to find triples at the same level as the ones) previously identified by the Criteria Rule. In this instance, the company://id#1.-employee-Howard and company://id#1--employee-Alan triples are identified and marked accordingly.
In the third .frame, the module applies the Ancestor .Rule to walk up the directed graph to find ancestors of the triples previously identified as related. In this instance, the company://
id#3--customer-company://id#1 triple is identified and marked accordingly.
In the fourth frame, the module applies the Descendent Rule to walk down the directed graph to find descendents of the triples previously identified as related. No triples are selected since both company://id#3--customer--company://id#2 and company://id#3-customer-company://id#4 share the same predicate as company://id#3-customer-company://id#1.
Referring back to the detailed rules, compa.ny://id#2, by way of example, is a direct descendent that has a predicate (to wit, customer) connecting it with its identified direct ancestor (to wit, company://id#3) which matches a predicate that ancestor (to wit, company://id#3) has with a direct descendent (to wit, company://id#1.) via which that direct ancestor (to wit, company://
id#3) was identified during the execution of the Ancestor Rule.
In frames 5-8, the module 12 reapplies the rules, this time beginning with a Criteria Rule match of company://id#2-CTO-Colin. In frames 9-12, the module 12 finds no fixrther matches upon reapplication of the rules.
Figure 4 parallels Figure 3, showing however application by module 12 of the criteria predicate -- employee and object -- Alan to the data set o.f Figure 2. Only eight frames are shown since module 12 finds no further matches during execution of the rules represented in the final four frames.
Of note in Figure 4 is frame two. Here, application of the Sibling Rule by module 12 does not result in identification of all of the siblings of company://id#1-employee-Alan (which had been identified as relevant in the prior execution of the Criteria Rule). This is because, one of siblings company://id#1--employee-Howard has the same predicate as that specified in the criteria. Accordingly, that triple is not identified or marked as related.
Figure 5 also parallels Figure 3, showing however application by module 12 of the cri-teria resource = company: llid#I to the data set of Figure 2. Again, only eight frames are shown since module 12 finds no further matches during execution ofthe rules represented in the final four frames. Of note in Figure 5 is the identifications effected by specification of a resource as a criteria.
A further understanding of these examples may be attained by reference the Appendices A and B, filed herewith, which provide XML/RDF listings of the data sets and criteria, and which also show rule-by-rule identification or ("validation") of the triples.
Though the examples show application ofthe rules by module l.2 to an RDF data set, it will be appreciated that alternate embodiments of the module can likewise apply the rules to data sets representing the meta directed graphs disclosed in copending, commonly assigned application United States 1'atentApplication Number Serial No. 10/1.38,725, filed May 3, 2002, entitled ".Methods And Apparatus for Visualizing Relationships Among Triples of Resource Description Framework (RDF) Data Sets," the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Described above are methods and apparatus meeting the desired objects. Those skilled in the art will, of course, appreciate that these are merely examples and that other embodiments, incorporating modifications to those described herein fall within tlae scope of the invention, of which we claim:
Claims (42)
1. A method for identifying related data in a directed graph, comprising:
A. executing the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data that is a direct ancestor of data identified in any of sub-steps (i), (ii) and (iii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the crite-ria;
(iii) identifying as related data (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified as related in any of sub-steps (i), (ii) and (iii), and which identified descendent (a) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor substan-tially matching a relationship named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor match-ing a relationship the identified ancestor has with a data, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified during execution of sub-step (ii), B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
A. executing the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data that is a direct ancestor of data identified in any of sub-steps (i), (ii) and (iii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the crite-ria;
(iii) identifying as related data (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified as related in any of sub-steps (i), (ii) and (iii), and which identified descendent (a) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor substan-tially matching a relationship named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor match-ing a relationship the identified ancestor has with a data, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified during execution of sub-step (ii), B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the criteria specifies a named relationship and a char-acteristic of that named relationship, and wherein sub-step (ii) includes comparing at least one of the relationship and the characteristic named in a criteria with any of attributes of the direct ancestor, and a relationship between the direct ancestor and any data that descends therefrom, in order to determine whether the director ancestor is in substantial conflict with the criteria.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the criteria specifies a named relationship and a char-acteristic of that named relationship, and wherein sub-step (iii) includes comparing at least one of the relationship and the characteristic named in a criteria with any of attributes of the identified descendent, and a relationship between the identified descendent and any data that descends therefrom, in order to determine whether the identified descendent ancestor is in substantial con-flict with the criteria.
4. The method of claim 1, comprising executing any of the sub-steps of step (A) any of serially, in parallel, or recursively.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising executing any of the sub-steps of step (A) using a rule-based engine.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the rule-based engine uses a Rete algorithm to effect execution of one or more of the sub-steps of step (A).
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the directed graph comprises a data flow.
8. The method of claim 7, wherein the data flow comprises any of transactional informa-tion and enterprise-related information.
9. The method of claim 1, comprising executing step (A) with respect to a first data set representing a first portion of the directed graph, and executing step (A) separately with respect to a second data set representing a second portion of the directed graph.
10. A method of claim 9, wherein the second data set comprises an update to the first data set.
11. A method for identifying related data-in a directed graph, comprising:
A. executing the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data that is a direct ancestor of data identified as related in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
A. executing the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data that is a direct ancestor of data identified as related in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
12. The method of claim 11, wherein the criteria specifies a named relationship and a char-acteristic of that named relationship, and wherein sub-step (ii) includes comparing at least one of the relationship and the characteristic named in a criteria with any of attributes of the direct ancestor, and a relationship between the direct ancestor and any data that descends therefrom, in order to determine whether the director ancestor is in substantial conflict with the criteria.
13. The method of claim 11, wherein the directed graph comprises a data flow.
14. The method of claim 13, wherein the data flow comprises any of transactional informa-tion and enterprise-related information.
15. A method for identifying related data in a directed graph, comprising:
A. executing the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and which identified descendent (a) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor substan-dally matching a relationship named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor match-ing a relationship the identified ancestor has with a data, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified as related.
A. executing the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and which identified descendent (a) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor substan-dally matching a relationship named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor match-ing a relationship the identified ancestor has with a data, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified as related.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein the criteria specifies a named relationship and a char-acteristic of that named relationship, and wherein sub-step (ii) includes comparing at least one of the relationship and the characteristic named in a criteria with any of attributes of the identified descendent, and a relationship between the identified descendent and any data that descends therefrom, in order to determine whether the identified descendent ancestor is in substantial con-flict with the criteria.
17. The method of claim 15, wherein the directed graph comprises a data flow.
18. The method of claim 17, wherein the data flow comprises any of transactional informa-tion and enterprise-related information.
19. The method of claim 15, comprising executing step (A) with respect to a first data set representing a first portion of the directed graph, and executing step (A) separately with respect to a second data set representing a second portion of the directed graph.
20. A method of claim 19, wherein the second data set comprises an update to the first data set.
21. A method for identifying related triples in a resource description framework (RDF) data set, comprising A. executing with respect to the data set the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related a triple substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related a triple that is a direct ancestor of a triple identified as related in any of sub-steps (i), (ii) and (iii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria, where, for purposes hereof, a triple whose object is the subject of another triple is deemed a direct ancestor of that other triple, and, conversely, where a triple whose subject is the object of another triples is deemed a direct descendent of that other triple;
(iii) identifying as related a triple (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendant of triple (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified as related in any of sub-steps (i), (ii) and (iii), and which identified descendent (a) is not associated with the identified ancestor via a predicate substantially matching a predicate named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) is not associated with the identified ancestor via a predicate matching a predicate by which the identified ancestor is associated with a triple, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified during execution of sub-step (ii), B. generating an indication of triples identified as related in step (A).
(ii) identifying as related a triple that is a direct ancestor of a triple identified as related in any of sub-steps (i), (ii) and (iii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria, where, for purposes hereof, a triple whose object is the subject of another triple is deemed a direct ancestor of that other triple, and, conversely, where a triple whose subject is the object of another triples is deemed a direct descendent of that other triple;
(iii) identifying as related a triple (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendant of triple (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified as related in any of sub-steps (i), (ii) and (iii), and which identified descendent (a) is not associated with the identified ancestor via a predicate substantially matching a predicate named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) is not associated with the identified ancestor via a predicate matching a predicate by which the identified ancestor is associated with a triple, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified during execution of sub-step (ii), B. generating an indication of triples identified as related in step (A).
22. The method of claim 21, comprising identifying as related a triple that is a sibling of a triple identified as related in sub-step (i) and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria, where, for purposes hereof, triples that share a common subject are deemed siblings.
23. The method of claim 21, wherein the criteria specifies a predicate and an object associ-ated with that predicate, and wherein sub-step (ii) includes comparing at least one of the predicate and object specified in the criteria with direct ancestor in order to deter-mine whether the director ancestor is in substantial conflict with the criteria.
24. The method of claim 21, wherein the criteria specifies a predicate and an object associ-ated with that predicate, and wherein sub-step (iii) includes comparing at least one of the predicate and object specified in the criteria with the identified descendent in order to determine whether the identified descendent ancestor is in substantial conflict with the criteria.
25. The method of claim 21, comprising executing any of the sub-steps of step (A) any of serially, in parallel, or recursively.
26. The method of claim 21, further comprising executing any of the sub-steps of step (A) using a rule-based engine.
27. The method of claim 26, wherein the rule-based engine uses a Rete algorithm to elect execution of one or more of the sub-steps of step (A).
28. The method of claim 21, wherein the data set comprises a data flow.
29. The method of claim 28, wherein the data flow comprises any of transactional informa-tion and enterprise-related information.
30. The method of claim 21, comprising executing step (A) with respect to a first data set of RDF triples, executing step (A) separately with respect to a second, related data set of RDF triples.
31. A method of claim 30, wherein the second data set comprises an update to the first data set.
32. A method for identifying related triples in a resource description framework (RDF) data set, comprising A. executing with respect to the data set the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related a triple that is a direct ancestor of a triple identified in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria, where, for purposes hereof, a triple whose object is the subject of another triple is deemed a direct ancestor of that other triple; a triple whose subject is the object of another triples is deemed a direct descendent of that other triple;
B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
(ii) identifying as related a triple that is a direct ancestor of a triple identified in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria, where, for purposes hereof, a triple whose object is the subject of another triple is deemed a direct ancestor of that other triple; a triple whose subject is the object of another triples is deemed a direct descendent of that other triple;
B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
33. The method of claim 32, wherein the criteria specifies a predicate and an object associ-ated with that predicate, and wherein sub-step (ii) includes comparing at least one of the predicate and object specified in the criteria with direct ancestor in order to deter-mine whether the director ancestor is in substantial conflict with the criteria.
34. The method of claim 33, wherein the data set comprises a data flow.
35. The method of claim 34, wherein the data flow comprises any of transactional informa-tion and enterprise-related information.
36. A method for identifying related triples in a resource description framework (RDF) data set, comprising A. executing with respect to the data set the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data substantially matching a criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified as related in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and which identified descendent (a) is not associated with the identified ancestor via a predicate substantially matching a predicate named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) is not associated with the identified ancestor via a predicate matching a predicate by which the identified ancestor is associated with a triple, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified as related, B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
(ii) identifying as related data (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified as related in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and which identified descendent (a) is not associated with the identified ancestor via a predicate substantially matching a predicate named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) is not associated with the identified ancestor via a predicate matching a predicate by which the identified ancestor is associated with a triple, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified as related, B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
37. The method of claim 36, wherein the criteria specifies a predicate and an object associ-ated with that predicate, and wherein sub-step (iii) includes comparing at least one of the predicate and object specified in the criteria with the identified descendent in order to determine whether the identified descendent ancestor is in substantial conflict with the criteria.
38. The method of claim 36, wherein the data set comprises a data flow.
39. The method of claim 38, wherein the data flow comprises any of transactional informa-tion and enterprise-related information.
40. The method of claim 21, comprising executing step (A) with respect to a first data set of RDF triples, executing step (A) separately with respect to a second, related data set of RDF triples.
41. A. method of claim 40, wherein the second data set comprises an update to the first data set.
42. A method for identifying related data in a directed graph, comprising:
A. executing the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data that is a direct ancestor of data identified in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified as related in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii) and which identified descendent (a) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor substan-tially matching a relationship named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor match-ing a relationship the identified ancestor has with a data, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified during execution of sub-step (ii), B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
A. executing the sub-steps of (i) identifying as related data that is a direct ancestor of data identified in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii), and that is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(ii) identifying as related data (hereinafter "identified descendent") that is a direct descendent of data (hereinafter "identified ancestor") identified as related in any of sub-steps (i) and (ii) and which identified descendent (a) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor substan-tially matching a relationship named in the criteria, if any, and (b) is not in substantial conflict with the criteria;
(c) does not have a named relationship with the identified ancestor match-ing a relationship the identified ancestor has with a data, if any, as a result of which the identified ancestor was identified during execution of sub-step (ii), B. generating an indication of data identified as related in step (A).
Applications Claiming Priority (3)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US41661602P | 2002-10-07 | 2002-10-07 | |
| US60/416,616 | 2002-10-07 | ||
| PCT/US2003/031636 WO2004034625A2 (en) | 2002-10-07 | 2003-10-07 | Methods and apparatus for identifying related nodes in a directed graph having named arcs |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2501847A1 true CA2501847A1 (en) | 2004-04-22 |
Family
ID=32093877
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002501847A Abandoned CA2501847A1 (en) | 2002-10-07 | 2003-10-07 | Methods and apparatus for identifying related nodes in a directed graph having named arcs |
Country Status (5)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (2) | US6954749B2 (en) |
| EP (1) | EP1588286A2 (en) |
| AU (1) | AU2003279845A1 (en) |
| CA (1) | CA2501847A1 (en) |
| WO (1) | WO2004034625A2 (en) |
Families Citing this family (54)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US6856992B2 (en) * | 2001-05-15 | 2005-02-15 | Metatomix, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for real-time business visibility using persistent schema-less data storage |
| GB0226697D0 (en) * | 2002-11-15 | 2002-12-24 | Hewlett Packard Co | Processing of data |
| US8036907B2 (en) * | 2003-12-23 | 2011-10-11 | The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation | Method and system for linking business entities using unique identifiers |
| US7702725B2 (en) * | 2004-07-02 | 2010-04-20 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Digital object repositories, models, protocol, apparatus, methods and software and data structures, relating thereto |
| US7656804B2 (en) * | 2004-08-16 | 2010-02-02 | Motorola, Inc. | Method and apparatus for operating an AD-HOC communication system |
| US20070185897A1 (en) * | 2006-02-06 | 2007-08-09 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for tracking and storing semantic web revision history |
| US7840542B2 (en) * | 2006-02-06 | 2010-11-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for controlling access to semantic web statements |
| US20070198541A1 (en) * | 2006-02-06 | 2007-08-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for efficiently storing semantic web statements in a relational database |
| US20070198479A1 (en) * | 2006-02-16 | 2007-08-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Streaming XPath algorithm for XPath expressions with predicates |
| US7774189B2 (en) * | 2006-12-01 | 2010-08-10 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for simulating data flow using dataflow computing system |
| US7834875B2 (en) * | 2007-04-02 | 2010-11-16 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for automatically assembling stream processing graphs in stream processing systems |
| US8863102B2 (en) * | 2007-04-02 | 2014-10-14 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for assembling information processing applications based on declarative semantic specifications |
| US8370812B2 (en) | 2007-04-02 | 2013-02-05 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for automatically assembling processing graphs in information processing systems |
| US8166465B2 (en) * | 2007-04-02 | 2012-04-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for composing stream processing applications according to a semantic description of a processing goal |
| US8098248B2 (en) * | 2007-04-02 | 2012-01-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for semantic modeling of stream processing components to enable automatic application composition |
| US7882485B2 (en) | 2007-04-02 | 2011-02-01 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for modeling components of an information processing application using semantic graph transformations |
| US8307372B2 (en) * | 2007-04-02 | 2012-11-06 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for declarative semantic expression of user intent to enable goal-driven information processing |
| US8117233B2 (en) * | 2007-05-14 | 2012-02-14 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for message-oriented semantic web service composition based on artificial intelligence planning |
| US7941460B2 (en) * | 2007-09-05 | 2011-05-10 | International Business Machines Corporation | Compilation model for processing hierarchical data in stream systems |
| US7860863B2 (en) * | 2007-09-05 | 2010-12-28 | International Business Machines Corporation | Optimization model for processing hierarchical data in stream systems |
| US8050965B2 (en) * | 2007-12-14 | 2011-11-01 | Microsoft Corporation | Using a directed graph as an advertising system taxonomy |
| JP5407169B2 (en) * | 2008-04-11 | 2014-02-05 | 富士通株式会社 | Clustering program, search program, clustering method, search method, clustering device, and search device |
| US8161380B2 (en) * | 2008-06-26 | 2012-04-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | Pipeline optimization based on polymorphic schema knowledge |
| US10481878B2 (en) | 2008-10-09 | 2019-11-19 | Objectstore, Inc. | User interface apparatus and methods |
| US8583701B2 (en) * | 2009-08-06 | 2013-11-12 | Sap Ag | Uniform data model and API for representation and processing of semantic data |
| US20110035418A1 (en) * | 2009-08-06 | 2011-02-10 | Raytheon Company | Object-Knowledge Mapping Method |
| EP2486698B1 (en) * | 2009-09-23 | 2013-06-12 | Correlix Ltd. | Method and system for reconstructing transactions in a communication network |
| WO2011044865A1 (en) * | 2009-10-12 | 2011-04-21 | Beel Joeran | Method for determining a similarity of objects |
| US8762417B2 (en) * | 2010-05-04 | 2014-06-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Event impact analysis |
| US20110320431A1 (en) * | 2010-06-25 | 2011-12-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Strong typing for querying information graphs |
| WO2012031301A1 (en) | 2010-09-03 | 2012-03-08 | Jackson Robert Lewis Jr | Sparse dynamic selection trees |
| US8732569B2 (en) | 2011-05-04 | 2014-05-20 | Google Inc. | Predicting user navigation events |
| US8788711B2 (en) | 2011-06-14 | 2014-07-22 | Google Inc. | Redacting content and inserting hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) error codes in place thereof |
| US9769285B2 (en) | 2011-06-14 | 2017-09-19 | Google Inc. | Access to network content |
| US8650139B2 (en) | 2011-07-01 | 2014-02-11 | Google Inc. | Predicting user navigation events |
| US8745212B2 (en) | 2011-07-01 | 2014-06-03 | Google Inc. | Access to network content |
| US8744988B1 (en) | 2011-07-15 | 2014-06-03 | Google Inc. | Predicting user navigation events in an internet browser |
| US8600921B2 (en) | 2011-09-15 | 2013-12-03 | Google Inc. | Predicting user navigation events in a browser using directed graphs |
| US8655819B1 (en) | 2011-09-15 | 2014-02-18 | Google Inc. | Predicting user navigation events based on chronological history data |
| US9183279B2 (en) * | 2011-09-22 | 2015-11-10 | International Business Machines Corporation | Semantic questioning mechanism to enable analysis of information architectures |
| US9104664B1 (en) | 2011-10-07 | 2015-08-11 | Google Inc. | Access to search results |
| US9584579B2 (en) | 2011-12-01 | 2017-02-28 | Google Inc. | Method and system for providing page visibility information |
| US8793235B2 (en) | 2012-01-19 | 2014-07-29 | Google Inc. | System and method for improving access to search results |
| US8666951B2 (en) * | 2012-01-20 | 2014-03-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Managing multiple versions of enterprise meta-models using semantic based indexing |
| US9946792B2 (en) | 2012-05-15 | 2018-04-17 | Google Llc | Access to network content |
| US8887239B1 (en) | 2012-08-08 | 2014-11-11 | Google Inc. | Access to network content |
| US9141722B2 (en) | 2012-10-02 | 2015-09-22 | Google Inc. | Access to network content |
| US9420058B2 (en) | 2012-12-27 | 2016-08-16 | Akamai Technologies, Inc. | Stream-based data deduplication with peer node prediction |
| US9451000B2 (en) | 2012-12-27 | 2016-09-20 | Akamai Technologies, Inc. | Stream-based data deduplication with cache synchronization |
| US9342556B2 (en) * | 2013-04-01 | 2016-05-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | RDF graphs made of RDF query language queries |
| US9405796B2 (en) | 2014-02-12 | 2016-08-02 | Verisign, Inc. | Systems and methods for analyzing registrar and hosting provider relationships |
| US9703830B2 (en) * | 2014-10-09 | 2017-07-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Translation of a SPARQL query to a SQL query |
| US9977797B2 (en) * | 2015-09-28 | 2018-05-22 | Salesforce.Com, Inc. | Combined directed graphs |
| US11693896B2 (en) * | 2018-09-25 | 2023-07-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Noise detection in knowledge graphs |
Family Cites Families (133)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US624417A (en) * | 1899-05-02 | Pump for inflating pneumatic tires | ||
| US4701130A (en) * | 1985-01-11 | 1987-10-20 | Access Learning Technology Corporation | Software training system |
| US4895518A (en) * | 1987-11-02 | 1990-01-23 | The University Of Michigan | Computerized diagnostic reasoning evaluation system |
| US4953106A (en) | 1989-05-23 | 1990-08-28 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Technique for drawing directed graphs |
| US5119465A (en) * | 1989-06-19 | 1992-06-02 | Digital Equipment Corporation | System for selectively converting plurality of source data structures through corresponding source intermediate structures, and target intermediate structures into selected target structure |
| US5129043A (en) * | 1989-08-14 | 1992-07-07 | International Business Machines Corporation | Performance improvement tool for rule based expert systems |
| US5301270A (en) * | 1989-12-18 | 1994-04-05 | Anderson Consulting | Computer-assisted software engineering system for cooperative processing environments |
| JP3245655B2 (en) | 1990-03-05 | 2002-01-15 | インキサイト ソフトウェア インコーポレイテッド | Workspace display processing method |
| US6185516B1 (en) * | 1990-03-06 | 2001-02-06 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | Automata-theoretic verification of systems |
| US5761493A (en) * | 1990-04-30 | 1998-06-02 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Apparatus and method for adding an associative query capability to a programming language |
| US5311422A (en) * | 1990-06-28 | 1994-05-10 | The United States Of America As Represented By The Administrator Of The National Aeronautics And Space Administration | General purpose architecture for intelligent computer-aided training |
| SE9002558D0 (en) * | 1990-08-02 | 1990-08-02 | Carlstedt Elektronik Ab | PROCESSOR |
| US5199068A (en) * | 1991-01-22 | 1993-03-30 | Professional Achievement Systems, Inc. | Computer-based training system with student verification |
| US5270920A (en) | 1991-05-13 | 1993-12-14 | Hughes Training, Inc. | Expert system scheduler and scheduling method |
| US5326270A (en) * | 1991-08-29 | 1994-07-05 | Introspect Technologies, Inc. | System and method for assessing an individual's task-processing style |
| US5395243A (en) * | 1991-09-25 | 1995-03-07 | National Education Training Group | Interactive learning system |
| US5333254A (en) | 1991-10-02 | 1994-07-26 | Xerox Corporation | Methods of centering nodes in a hierarchical display |
| US5421730A (en) * | 1991-11-27 | 1995-06-06 | National Education Training Group, Inc. | Interactive learning system providing user feedback |
| US5381332A (en) * | 1991-12-09 | 1995-01-10 | Motorola, Inc. | Project management system with automated schedule and cost integration |
| US5259766A (en) | 1991-12-13 | 1993-11-09 | Educational Testing Service | Method and system for interactive computer science testing, anaylsis and feedback |
| US5267865A (en) | 1992-02-11 | 1993-12-07 | John R. Lee | Interactive computer aided natural learning method and apparatus |
| US5310349A (en) * | 1992-04-30 | 1994-05-10 | Jostens Learning Corporation | Instructional management system |
| US5450480A (en) | 1992-08-25 | 1995-09-12 | Bell Communications Research, Inc. | Method of creating a telecommunication service specification |
| US5463682A (en) | 1992-08-25 | 1995-10-31 | Bell Communications Research, Inc. | Method of creating user-defined call processing procedures |
| US5579486A (en) | 1993-01-14 | 1996-11-26 | Apple Computer, Inc. | Communication node with a first bus configuration for arbitration and a second bus configuration for data transfer |
| WO1994020918A1 (en) * | 1993-03-11 | 1994-09-15 | Fibercraft/Descon Engineering, Inc. | Design and engineering project management system |
| US5809212A (en) | 1993-07-12 | 1998-09-15 | New York University | Conditional transition networks and computational processes for use interactive computer-based systems |
| US5374932A (en) | 1993-08-02 | 1994-12-20 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | Airport surface surveillance system |
| US5519618A (en) * | 1993-08-02 | 1996-05-21 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | Airport surface safety logic |
| US5548506A (en) * | 1994-03-17 | 1996-08-20 | Srinivasan; Seshan R. | Automated, electronic network based, project management server system, for managing multiple work-groups |
| US5655118A (en) * | 1994-03-21 | 1997-08-05 | Bell Communications Research, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for managing information on activities of an enterprise |
| US5597312A (en) * | 1994-05-04 | 1997-01-28 | U S West Technologies, Inc. | Intelligent tutoring method and system |
| US5862321A (en) * | 1994-06-27 | 1999-01-19 | Xerox Corporation | System and method for accessing and distributing electronic documents |
| JPH0876680A (en) | 1994-09-02 | 1996-03-22 | Fujitsu Ltd | Management education system |
| US5732192A (en) | 1994-11-30 | 1998-03-24 | The United States Of America As Represented By The Administrator Of The National Aeronautics And Space Administration | Global qualitative flow-path modeling for local state determination in simulation and analysis |
| US5745753A (en) | 1995-01-24 | 1998-04-28 | Tandem Computers, Inc. | Remote duplicate database facility with database replication support for online DDL operations |
| US5499293A (en) * | 1995-01-24 | 1996-03-12 | University Of Maryland | Privacy protected information medium using a data compression method |
| JP2765506B2 (en) | 1995-01-30 | 1998-06-18 | 日本電気株式会社 | Logic circuit delay information retention method |
| US5701451A (en) | 1995-06-07 | 1997-12-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for fulfilling requests of a web browser |
| US5907837A (en) * | 1995-07-17 | 1999-05-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Information retrieval system in an on-line network including separate content and layout of published titles |
| US5873076A (en) | 1995-09-15 | 1999-02-16 | Infonautics Corporation | Architecture for processing search queries, retrieving documents identified thereby, and method for using same |
| US5788504A (en) * | 1995-10-16 | 1998-08-04 | Brookhaven Science Associates Llc | Computerized training management system |
| US6546406B1 (en) * | 1995-11-03 | 2003-04-08 | Enigma Information Systems Ltd. | Client-server computer system for large document retrieval on networked computer system |
| US5765140A (en) * | 1995-11-17 | 1998-06-09 | Mci Corporation | Dynamic project management system |
| US5832483A (en) | 1995-12-15 | 1998-11-03 | Novell, Inc. | Distributed control interface for managing the interoperability and concurrency of agents and resources in a real-time environment |
| US5852715A (en) | 1996-03-19 | 1998-12-22 | Emc Corporation | System for currently updating database by one host and reading the database by different host for the purpose of implementing decision support functions |
| US5795155A (en) * | 1996-04-01 | 1998-08-18 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | Leadership assessment tool and method |
| JPH09297768A (en) * | 1996-05-07 | 1997-11-18 | Fuji Xerox Co Ltd | Management device and retrieval method for document data base |
| US5826252A (en) | 1996-06-28 | 1998-10-20 | General Electric Company | System for managing multiple projects of similar type using dynamically updated global database |
| US6137797A (en) * | 1996-11-27 | 2000-10-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Process definition for source route switching |
| US5822780A (en) * | 1996-12-31 | 1998-10-13 | Emc Corporation | Method and apparatus for hierarchical storage management for data base management systems |
| US5818463A (en) * | 1997-02-13 | 1998-10-06 | Rockwell Science Center, Inc. | Data compression for animated three dimensional objects |
| US5995958A (en) | 1997-03-04 | 1999-11-30 | Xu; Kevin Houzhi | System and method for storing and managing functions |
| US6122632A (en) * | 1997-07-21 | 2000-09-19 | Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. | Electronic message management system |
| US6052685A (en) | 1997-08-13 | 2000-04-18 | Mosaix, Inc. | Integration of legacy database management systems with ODBC-compliant application programs |
| US5983267A (en) | 1997-09-23 | 1999-11-09 | Information Architects Corporation | System for indexing and displaying requested data having heterogeneous content and representation |
| US5974443A (en) | 1997-09-26 | 1999-10-26 | Intervoice Limited Partnership | Combined internet and data access system |
| US6044373A (en) * | 1997-09-29 | 2000-03-28 | International Business Machines Corporation | Object-oriented access control method and system for military and commercial file systems |
| US6044466A (en) * | 1997-11-25 | 2000-03-28 | International Business Machines Corp. | Flexible and dynamic derivation of permissions |
| US6769019B2 (en) * | 1997-12-10 | 2004-07-27 | Xavier Ferguson | Method of background downloading of information from a computer network |
| US6151624A (en) | 1998-02-03 | 2000-11-21 | Realnames Corporation | Navigating network resources based on metadata |
| US6012098A (en) * | 1998-02-23 | 2000-01-04 | International Business Machines Corp. | Servlet pairing for isolation of the retrieval and rendering of data |
| US6185534B1 (en) | 1998-03-23 | 2001-02-06 | Microsoft Corporation | Modeling emotion and personality in a computer user interface |
| US6078982A (en) * | 1998-03-24 | 2000-06-20 | Hewlett-Packard Company | Pre-locking scheme for allowing consistent and concurrent workflow process execution in a workflow management system |
| US6154738A (en) | 1998-03-27 | 2000-11-28 | Call; Charles Gainor | Methods and apparatus for disseminating product information via the internet using universal product codes |
| US6085188A (en) * | 1998-03-30 | 2000-07-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method of hierarchical LDAP searching with relational tables |
| US6125363A (en) * | 1998-03-30 | 2000-09-26 | Buzzeo; Eugene | Distributed, multi-user, multi-threaded application development method |
| US6360330B1 (en) | 1998-03-31 | 2002-03-19 | Emc Corporation | System and method for backing up data stored in multiple mirrors on a mass storage subsystem under control of a backup server |
| US6509898B2 (en) | 1998-04-17 | 2003-01-21 | Xerox Corporation | Usage based methods of traversing and displaying generalized graph structures |
| US6151595A (en) | 1998-04-17 | 2000-11-21 | Xerox Corporation | Methods for interactive visualization of spreading activation using time tubes and disk trees |
| US6369819B1 (en) | 1998-04-17 | 2002-04-09 | Xerox Corporation | Methods for visualizing transformations among related series of graphs |
| US6389460B1 (en) * | 1998-05-13 | 2002-05-14 | Compaq Computer Corporation | Method and apparatus for efficient storage and retrieval of objects in and from an object storage device |
| US6182085B1 (en) | 1998-05-28 | 2001-01-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | Collaborative team crawling:Large scale information gathering over the internet |
| US6094652A (en) | 1998-06-10 | 2000-07-25 | Oracle Corporation | Hierarchical query feedback in an information retrieval system |
| US6594662B1 (en) * | 1998-07-01 | 2003-07-15 | Netshadow, Inc. | Method and system for gathering information resident on global computer networks |
| US6583800B1 (en) * | 1998-07-14 | 2003-06-24 | Brad Ridgley | Method and device for finding, collecting and acting upon units of information |
| US6177932B1 (en) * | 1998-08-21 | 2001-01-23 | Kana Communications, Inc. | Method and apparatus for network based customer service |
| US6243713B1 (en) * | 1998-08-24 | 2001-06-05 | Excalibur Technologies Corp. | Multimedia document retrieval by application of multimedia queries to a unified index of multimedia data for a plurality of multimedia data types |
| US6415283B1 (en) * | 1998-10-13 | 2002-07-02 | Orack Corporation | Methods and apparatus for determining focal points of clusters in a tree structure |
| US8006177B1 (en) * | 1998-10-16 | 2011-08-23 | Open Invention Network, Llc | Documents for commerce in trading partner networks and interface definitions based on the documents |
| US6341277B1 (en) | 1998-11-17 | 2002-01-22 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for performance complex heterogeneous database queries using a single SQL expression |
| US6941321B2 (en) * | 1999-01-26 | 2005-09-06 | Xerox Corporation | System and method for identifying similarities among objects in a collection |
| US6418413B2 (en) | 1999-02-04 | 2002-07-09 | Ita Software, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing availability of airline seats |
| US6246320B1 (en) * | 1999-02-25 | 2001-06-12 | David A. Monroe | Ground link with on-board security surveillance system for aircraft and other commercial vehicles |
| JP3484096B2 (en) | 1999-03-03 | 2004-01-06 | インターナショナル・ビジネス・マシーンズ・コーポレーション | Logical zoom method in logical zoom device for directed graph |
| US6308163B1 (en) | 1999-03-16 | 2001-10-23 | Hewlett-Packard Company | System and method for enterprise workflow resource management |
| US6751663B1 (en) * | 1999-03-25 | 2004-06-15 | Nortel Networks Limited | System wide flow aggregation process for aggregating network activity records |
| US6405251B1 (en) * | 1999-03-25 | 2002-06-11 | Nortel Networks Limited | Enhancement of network accounting records |
| US6625657B1 (en) * | 1999-03-25 | 2003-09-23 | Nortel Networks Limited | System for requesting missing network accounting records if there is a break in sequence numbers while the records are transmitting from a source device |
| US6446200B1 (en) * | 1999-03-25 | 2002-09-03 | Nortel Networks Limited | Service management |
| US6393423B1 (en) | 1999-04-08 | 2002-05-21 | James Francis Goedken | Apparatus and methods for electronic information exchange |
| US6463440B1 (en) | 1999-04-08 | 2002-10-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Retrieval of style sheets from directories based upon partial characteristic matching |
| US6530079B1 (en) | 1999-06-02 | 2003-03-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for optimizing locks in computer programs |
| US6539374B2 (en) * | 1999-06-03 | 2003-03-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods, apparatus and data structures for providing a uniform representation of various types of information |
| US6778971B1 (en) * | 1999-06-03 | 2004-08-17 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods and apparatus for analyzing computer-based tasks to build task models |
| US6330554B1 (en) * | 1999-06-03 | 2001-12-11 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods and apparatus using task models for targeting marketing information to computer users based on a task being performed |
| US6606613B1 (en) * | 1999-06-03 | 2003-08-12 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods and apparatus for using task models to help computer users complete tasks |
| US6427151B1 (en) | 1999-06-29 | 2002-07-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method, computer program product, system and data structure for formatting transaction results data |
| US6446256B1 (en) * | 1999-06-30 | 2002-09-03 | Microsoft Corporation | Extension of parsable structures |
| US6405211B1 (en) * | 1999-07-08 | 2002-06-11 | Cohesia Corporation | Object-oriented representation of technical content and management, filtering, and synthesis of technical content using object-oriented representations |
| US6381738B1 (en) | 1999-07-16 | 2002-04-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for optimizing creation and destruction of objects in computer programs |
| US6389429B1 (en) | 1999-07-30 | 2002-05-14 | Aprimo, Inc. | System and method for generating a target database from one or more source databases |
| US6577769B1 (en) * | 1999-09-18 | 2003-06-10 | Wildtangent, Inc. | Data compression through adaptive data size reduction |
| US6598043B1 (en) * | 1999-10-04 | 2003-07-22 | Jarg Corporation | Classification of information sources using graph structures |
| US6496833B1 (en) | 1999-11-01 | 2002-12-17 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | System and method for generating code for query object interfacing |
| US6714952B2 (en) * | 1999-11-10 | 2004-03-30 | Emc Corporation | Method for backup and restore of a multi-lingual network file server |
| US6418448B1 (en) * | 1999-12-06 | 2002-07-09 | Shyam Sundar Sarkar | Method and apparatus for processing markup language specifications for data and metadata used inside multiple related internet documents to navigate, query and manipulate information from a plurality of object relational databases over the web |
| US6556983B1 (en) * | 2000-01-12 | 2003-04-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods and apparatus for finding semantic information, such as usage logs, similar to a query using a pattern lattice data space |
| US20020049788A1 (en) * | 2000-01-14 | 2002-04-25 | Lipkin Daniel S. | Method and apparatus for a web content platform |
| US6721747B2 (en) * | 2000-01-14 | 2004-04-13 | Saba Software, Inc. | Method and apparatus for an information server |
| WO2001052054A2 (en) * | 2000-01-14 | 2001-07-19 | Saba Software, Inc. | Method and apparatus for a business applications server |
| US6701314B1 (en) * | 2000-01-21 | 2004-03-02 | Science Applications International Corporation | System and method for cataloguing digital information for searching and retrieval |
| AU4733601A (en) * | 2000-03-10 | 2001-09-24 | Cyrano Sciences Inc | Control for an industrial process using one or more multidimensional variables |
| US6643638B1 (en) | 2000-03-25 | 2003-11-04 | Kevin Houzhi Xu | System and method for storing and computing data and functions |
| US20020059566A1 (en) * | 2000-08-29 | 2002-05-16 | Delcambre Lois M. | Uni-level description of computer information and transformation of computer information between representation schemes |
| AU2001290646A1 (en) * | 2000-09-08 | 2002-03-22 | The Regents Of The University Of California | Data source integration system and method |
| US6678679B1 (en) * | 2000-10-10 | 2004-01-13 | Science Applications International Corporation | Method and system for facilitating the refinement of data queries |
| US20020118688A1 (en) * | 2000-10-25 | 2002-08-29 | Ravi Jagannathan | Generation of fast busy signals in data networks |
| US7290061B2 (en) * | 2000-12-05 | 2007-10-30 | Citrix Systems, Inc. | System and method for internet content collaboration |
| US20020091678A1 (en) * | 2001-01-05 | 2002-07-11 | Miller Nancy E. | Multi-query data visualization processes, data visualization apparatus, computer-readable media and computer data signals embodied in a transmission medium |
| US20020133502A1 (en) * | 2001-01-05 | 2002-09-19 | Rosenthal Richard Nelson | Method and system for interactive collection of information |
| US6804677B2 (en) * | 2001-02-26 | 2004-10-12 | Ori Software Development Ltd. | Encoding semi-structured data for efficient search and browsing |
| US7171415B2 (en) * | 2001-05-04 | 2007-01-30 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Distributed information discovery through searching selected registered information providers |
| US6925457B2 (en) * | 2001-07-27 | 2005-08-02 | Metatomix, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for querying a relational data store using schema-less queries |
| WO2005029365A2 (en) * | 2003-07-07 | 2005-03-31 | Metatomix, Inc. | Surveillance, monitoring and real-time events platform |
| US6792420B2 (en) * | 2001-06-29 | 2004-09-14 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method, system, and program for optimizing the processing of queries involving set operators |
| US20030004934A1 (en) * | 2001-06-29 | 2003-01-02 | Richard Qian | Creating and managing portable user preferences for personalizion of media consumption from device to device |
| US7130861B2 (en) | 2001-08-16 | 2006-10-31 | Sentius International Corporation | Automated creation and delivery of database content |
| US20030050834A1 (en) * | 2001-09-07 | 2003-03-13 | Sergio Caplan | System and method for dynamic customizable interactive portal active during select computer time |
| AUPR796801A0 (en) * | 2001-09-27 | 2001-10-25 | Plugged In Communications Pty Ltd | Computer user interface tool for navigation of data stored in directed graphs |
| AUPR796701A0 (en) * | 2001-09-27 | 2001-10-25 | Plugged In Communications Pty Ltd | Database query system and method |
| US20050060372A1 (en) * | 2003-08-27 | 2005-03-17 | Debettencourt Jason | Techniques for filtering data from a data stream of a web services application |
| JP2005149126A (en) * | 2003-11-14 | 2005-06-09 | Sony Corp | Information acquiring system and method, and information processing program |
-
2003
- 2003-10-07 WO PCT/US2003/031636 patent/WO2004034625A2/en not_active Application Discontinuation
- 2003-10-07 EP EP03773173A patent/EP1588286A2/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2003-10-07 US US10/680,049 patent/US6954749B2/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 2003-10-07 CA CA002501847A patent/CA2501847A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2003-10-07 AU AU2003279845A patent/AU2003279845A1/en not_active Abandoned
-
2005
- 2005-10-07 US US11/245,994 patent/US7613712B2/en active Active
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| AU2003279845A8 (en) | 2004-05-04 |
| WO2004034625A2 (en) | 2004-04-22 |
| US20070198454A1 (en) | 2007-08-23 |
| US7613712B2 (en) | 2009-11-03 |
| AU2003279845A1 (en) | 2004-05-04 |
| US20040073545A1 (en) | 2004-04-15 |
| EP1588286A2 (en) | 2005-10-26 |
| US6954749B2 (en) | 2005-10-11 |
| WO2004034625A3 (en) | 2005-05-26 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US7613712B2 (en) | Methods and apparatus for identifying related nodes in a directed graph having named arcs | |
| US9798781B2 (en) | Strategy trees for data mining | |
| US8176002B2 (en) | Method and system for user alteration of the configuration of a data warehouse | |
| US8566787B2 (en) | System and method for improving modularity of large legacy software systems | |
| US6865566B2 (en) | Approach for re-using business rules | |
| US7613671B2 (en) | Approach for re-using business rules | |
| US6820089B2 (en) | Method and system for simplifying the use of data mining in domain-specific analytic applications by packaging predefined data mining models | |
| CN101606149B (en) | Apparatus and method for categorical filtering of data | |
| US8776009B2 (en) | Method and system for task modeling of mobile phone applications | |
| US20060242180A1 (en) | Extracting data from semi-structured text documents | |
| US8090677B2 (en) | Method and system for altering the configuration of a data warehouse | |
| US20070118551A1 (en) | Semantic business model management | |
| Mukherjea et al. | BioPatentMiner: an information retrieval system for biomedical patents | |
| EP2019362A2 (en) | Spatial data validation systems | |
| Guyet et al. | Efficiency analysis of ASP encodings for sequential pattern mining tasks | |
| US20190325258A1 (en) | Early feedback of schematic correctness in feature management frameworks | |
| Bibi et al. | Combining probabilistic models for explanatory productivity estimation | |
| US20030084054A1 (en) | Directed non-cyclic graph walking system and method | |
| Berkani et al. | ETL processes in the era of variety | |
| Simitsis | Modeling and optimization of extraction-transformation-loading (ETL) processes in data warehouse environments | |
| Embury et al. | Incorporating domain-specific information quality constraints into database queries | |
| Meskine et al. | A support architecture to MDA contribution for data mining | |
| Rivas et al. | Business process model retrieval based on graph indexing method | |
| US20070022137A1 (en) | Data source business component generator | |
| Fournier-Viger et al. | Finding strongly correlated trends in dynamic attributed graphs |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEER | Examination request | ||
| FZDE | Discontinued |