Abstract
Schema matching problems have been historically defined as a semi-automated task in which correspondences are generated by matching algorithms and subsequently validated by a single human expert. Emerging alternative models are based upon piecemeal human validation of algorithmic results and the usage of crowd based validation. We propose an alternative model in which human and algorithmic matchers are given more symmetric roles. Under this model, better insight into the respective strengths and weaknesses of human and algorithmic matchers is required. We present initial insights from a pilot study conducted and outline future work in this area.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
