1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 商學院
  3. 資訊管理學系
  4. 學位論文
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/35259
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisor諶家蘭zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorSeng,Jia Langen_US
dc.contributor.author林玫儀zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorLin,Mei Yien_US
dc.creator林玫儀zh_TW
dc.creatorLin,Mei Yien_US
dc.date2003en_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-09-18T06:34:30Z-
dc.date.available2009-09-18T06:34:30Z-
dc.date.issued2009-09-18T06:34:30Z-
dc.identifierG0913560131en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/35259-
dc.description碩士zh_TW
dc.description國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description資訊管理研究所zh_TW
dc.description91356013zh_TW
dc.description92zh_TW
dc.description.abstract隨著網際網路和企業內部網路的盛行，異質資訊整合成為電子化企業中一個重要的議題，在網路上進行異質資訊整合涉及許多不同新的資訊技術，目前已經有些研究試圖利用延伸標記語言以及本體論當作中介技術來整合異質資訊，為了有效管理企業內的資訊，我們需要一個績效評估模型來衡量異質資訊整合的效能。在本研究中，我們提出了一個在異質資訊整合中運用延伸標記語言及本體論的績效評估工作量模型，並且建立了一個工作量產生器雛形；本研究的目標是希望發展出一個結合延伸標記語言及本體論的工作量模型，以測試在電子化企業中的異質資訊整合是否能整合不同的資訊模型，並且從這些資訊模型中衍生出語意，此工作量模型包含了延伸標記語言與本體論的資料模型與查詢模型，它們是依照延伸標記語言與本體論學名式的資料結構與查詢功能所制訂的，此外，控制模型則定義了績效評估執行環境中所需設定的變數，為了讓此工作量模型能具可攜性和延展性，以便輕易地應用在不同的領域情境中，本研究採取學名結構式且使用者定義、領域獨立的設計方法，最後，我們利用雛形實作來驗證本研究所提出的研究方法。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractWith the popularity of Internet/Intranet, heterogeneous information integration becomes a hot IT topic in electronic business (EB) field. Heterogeneous information integration on the Web involves a number of new techniques. There have been research projects applying XML and ontology as mediated techniques to consolidate heterogeneous information. In order to manage and use information more effectively within the enterprise, a benchmark used to evaluate the mechanism of heterogeneous information integration is needed. In this research, we develop a XML and ontology benchmark workload model in heterogeneous information integration, and build a workload generation prototype. The objective of this research is to develop a workload model combines XML and ontology to test whether the heterogeneous information integration system under EB environment can overcome the diverse formats of content and derive meaning from this content. The workload model consists of XML and ontology data model and query model according to the generic data structure and query functionality. Also, a control model is created to set up the benchmark environment. In order to apply the workload model to different scenarios easier, this workload model is designed to be domain independent and generic-construct-based. Finally, we validate the research model through the prototype implementation.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontentsChapter 1. Introduction 1\n1.1. Research Motivation 1\n1.2. Research Problem 2\n1.3. Research Objective 3\n1.4. Research Flow 3\n1.5. Organization of Thesis 6\nChapter 2. Literature Review 7\n2.1. XML Query Capability 7\n2.2. XML Benchmarks 10\n2.2.1. XMark 11\n2.2.2. XMach-1 13\n2.2.3. XOO7 15\n2.3. XML Benchmarks Comparison 18\n2.4. Ontology 20\n2.4.1. Ontology and Information Integration 20\n2.4.2. Ontology and Reasoning 21\n2.4.3. Ontology and Benchmark 24\nChapter 3. Research Method 26\n3.1. Research Structure 26\n3.2. Research Model 28\n3.3. XML Data Model 28\n3.4. XML Query Model 31\n3.4.1. Exact Match 33\n3.4.2. Joins 34\n3.4.3. Regular Path Expressions 36\n3.4.4. Document Construction 37\n3.4.5. Ordered Access 38\n3.4.6. Sorting 39\n3.4.7. Missing Elements 40\n3.4.8. Text Search 41\n3.4.9. Data-type Cast 42\n3.4.10. Function Application 42\n3.5. Ontology Data Model 44\n3.6. Ontology Query Model 46\n3.7. Test Database Generation 49\n3.8. Control Model 53\n3.9. Performance Metrics 54\nChapter 4. Prototype Implementation 57\n4.1. Prototype Platform and Architecture 57\n4.2. Experimental Design 59\n4.3. Prototype Functions 64\n4.3.1. Data Loader 65\n4.3.2. Query Generator 67\n4.3.3. Scheduler 71\n4.3.4. Result Collector 72\nChapter 5. Research Discussions and Limitations 74\n5.1. Research Implications 74\n5.2. Research Limitations 76\nChapter 6. Conclusions and Future Research Directions 78\n6.1. Summary 78\n6.2. Future Research Directions 79\nReferences 81\nAppendix A: Global Schema 85\nAppendix B: Relations in Microsoft SQL Server 88\nAppendix C: Schemas in Tamino XML Server 90zh_TW
dc.format.extent106499 bytes-
dc.format.extent97938 bytes-
dc.format.extent158399 bytes-
dc.format.extent459773 bytes-
dc.format.extent479063 bytes-
dc.format.extent563467 bytes-
dc.format.extent631295 bytes-
dc.format.extent879310 bytes-
dc.format.extent499923 bytes-
dc.format.extent469631 bytes-
dc.format.extent499926 bytes-
dc.format.extent576772 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoen_US-
dc.source.urihttp://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0913560131en_US
dc.subject延伸標記語言zh_TW
dc.subject本體論zh_TW
dc.subject異質資訊整合zh_TW
dc.subject績效評估zh_TW
dc.subject工作量模型zh_TW
dc.subjectXMLen_US
dc.subjectOntologyen_US
dc.subjectHeterogeneous Information Integrationen_US
dc.subjectBenchmarken_US
dc.subjectWorkload Modelen_US
dc.subjectPerformance Evaluationen_US
dc.titleA Workload Model on the Use of XML and Ontology in Benchmarking Heterogeneous Information Integrationzh_TW
dc.title異質資訊整合中運用XML與Ontology之績效評估模型之研究zh_TW
dc.typethesisen
dc.relation.reference1. Andersen, B. (2001). What is an ontology. Retrieved February 5, 2004, from http://www.ontologyworks.com/docs/what-is-ontology.pdfzh_TW
dc.relation.reference2. Arasu, A., Cho, J., Garcia-Molina, H., Paepcke, A., & Raghavan, S. (2001). Searching the Web. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, 1(1), 2–43.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference3. Böhme, T., & Rahm, E. (2001). XMach-1: A Benchmark for XML Data Management. Proceedings of German database conference BTW2001, Oldenburg, Germany, 264-273.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference4. Böhme, T., & Rahm, E. (2003). Multi-User Evaluation of XML Data Management Systems with XMach-1. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), 2590, 148-159.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference5. Bos, B. (1997). The XML Datamodel. Retrieved January 30, 2004, from http://www.w3.org/XML/Datamodel.htmlzh_TW
dc.relation.reference6. Beech, D., Malhotra, A., & Rys, M. (1999). A Formal Data Model and Algebra for XML. W3C XML Query working group note.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference7. Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C. M., & Maler, E. (2000). Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second Edition). Retrieved January 30, 2004, from http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xmlzh_TW
dc.relation.reference8. Baader, F., Horrocks, I., & Sattler, U. (2003). Description logics as ontology languages for the semantic web. In Dieter Hutter and Werner Stephan (Ed.), Festschrift in honor of Jörg Siekmann, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference9. Chamberlin, D., Fankhauser, P., Marchiori, M., & Robie, J. (2003). XML Query Requirements. Retrieved January 8, 2004, from http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-requirements/zh_TW
dc.relation.reference10. Cui, Z., Jones, D., & O’Brien, P. (2001). Issues in ontology-based information integration. Proceedings of IJCAI-01 Workshop on E-Business & the Intelligent Web.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference11. Elhaik, Q., Rousset, M-C, & Ycart., B. (1998). Generating Random Benchmarks for Description Logics. Proceedings of DL’98.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference12. Fernández, M., Malhotra, A., Marsh, J., Nagy, M., & Walsh, N. (2003). XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 Data Model. Retrieved January 30, 2004, from http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-datamodel/zh_TW
dc.relation.reference13. Gray, J. (1993). The Benchmark Handbook (2nd ed.) . Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, Retrieved January 8, 2004, from http://www.benchmarkresources.com/handbook/index.aspzh_TW
dc.relation.reference14. Gruber, T. R. (1993). Towards Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing. International Workshop on Formal Ontology, Padova, Italy.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference15. Guo, Y., Heflin, J., & Pan, Z. (2003). Benchmarking DAML+OIL Repositories. Proceedings of the 2nd International Semantic Web Conference, LNCS, 2870, 613-627.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference16. Gómez-Pérez, A. (1994). Some Ideas and Examples to Evaluate Ontologies. Technical Report KSL-94-65, Knowedge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference17. Gruninger, M., & Fox, M. S. (1995). Methodology for the design and evaluation of ontologies. Proceedings of IJCAI`95 Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference18. Horrocks, I. (2002). DAML+OIL: A Reason-able Web Ontology Language, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Extending Database Technology: Advances in Database Technology, 2-13.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference19. Horrocks, I. (2002). DAML+OIL and Description Logic Reasoning. Retrieved February 12, 2004, from http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~angus/daml-oil-workshop/presentations/horrocks.pdfzh_TW
dc.relation.reference20. Horrocks, I., & Patel-Schneider, P. (1998). DL systems comparison. Proceedings of DL’98.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference21. Heflin, J. (2003). OWL Web Ontology Language Use Cases and Requirements. Retrieved February 5, 2004, from http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/zh_TW
dc.relation.reference22. Jiang, H., Lu, H., Wang, W., & Yu, J. X. (2002). Path Materialization Revisited: An Efficient Storage Model for XML Data. The 13th Australasian Database Conference (ADC 2002), Melbourne, Australia, 85-94.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference23. Li, Y. G., Bressan, S., Dobbie, G., Lacroix, Z., Lee, M. L., Nambiar, U., & Wadhwa, B. (2001). XOO7: applying OO7 benchmark to XML query processing tool. Proceedings of the tenth international conference on Information and knowledge management (CIKM), Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 167-174.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference24. Lehti, P. (2001). Design and implementation of a data manipulation processor for an xml query processor. Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany, Diplomarbeit.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference25. Maier, A., Aguado, J., Bernaras, A., Laresgoiti, I., Pedinaci, C., Pena, N., & Smithers, T. (2003). Integration with Ontologies. Wissensmanagement 2003, 21-24.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference26. Manolescu, I., Florescu, D., & Kossmann, D. (2001). Answering XML Queries over Heterogeneous Data Sources. Proceedings of the 27th VLDB Conference, Roma, Italy.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference27. Nambiar, U., Lacroix, Z., Bressan, S., Lee, M. L., & Li, Y. G. (2002). Efficient XML Data Management: An Analysis. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Electronic Commerce and Web Technologies (ECWeb), Aix en Provence, France, 87-98.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference28. Nambiar, U., Lacroix, Z., Bressan, S., Lee, M. L., & Li, Y. G. (2002). Current Approaches to XML Management. IEEE Internet Computing Journal, 6(4), 43-51.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference29. Noy, N. F., & McGuinness, D. L. (2001). Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology. Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory Technical Report KSL-01-05 and Stanford Medical Informatics Technical Report SMI-2001-0880.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference30. Noy, N. F., & Musen, M. A. (2002). Evaluating Ontology-Mapping Tools: Requirements and Experience. Proceedings of the OntoWeb-SIG3 Workshop EON 2002 at EKAW 2002, Siguenza, Spain, 1-14.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference31. Omelayenko B. (2002). Ontology-Mediated Business Integration. Proceedings of the 13-th EKAW 2002 Conference, Siguenza, Spain, LNAI 2473, 264-269.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference32. Rys, M. (2002). Proposal for an xml data modification language. Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, Proposal.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference33. Schmidt, A., Waas, F., Manegold, S., & Kersten, M. (2003). A Look Back on the XML Benchmark Project. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), 2818, 263-278.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference34. Schmidt, A. R., Waas, F., Kersten, M. L., Florescu, D., Manolescu, I., Carey, M. J., & Busse, R. (2001). The XML Benchmark Project. Technical Report INS-R0103, CWI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference35. Schmidt, A., Waas, F., Kersten, M., Florescu, D., Carey, M. J., Manolescu, I., & Busse, R. (2001). Why and how to benchmark XML databases. ACM SIGMOD Record, 30(3), 27-32.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference36. Schmidt, A. R., Waas, F., Kersten, M. L., Carey, M. J., Manolescu, I., & Busse, R. (2002). XMark: A Benchmark for XML Data Management. Proceedings of the International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), Hong Kong, China, 974-985.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference37. Sengupta, A., & Mohan, S. (2003). Formal and conceptual models for XML structures - the past, present and future. Retrieved January 30, 2004, from http://www.indiana.edu/~isdept/research/papers/tr137-1.pdfzh_TW
dc.relation.reference38. Stevens, R., Goble, C.A., & Bechhofer, S. (2000). Ontology-based Knowledge Representation for Bioinformatics. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 1(4), 398-414.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference39. Suarez-Figueroa, M. C., & Gomez-Perez, A. (2003). Results of Taxonomic Evaluation of RDF(S) and DAML+OIL ontologies using RDF(S) and DAML+OIL Validation Tools and Ontology Platforms import services. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Evaluation of Ontology-based Tools (EON2003), Sanibel Island, Florida, USA.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference40. Staab, S., Schnurr, H. P., Studer, R., & Sure, Y. (2001). Knowledge Processes and Ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16(1), 26-34.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference41. Simov, K., & Jordanov, S. (2002). BOR: a pragmatic DAML+OIL reasoner. On-To-Knowledge deliverable D-40, OntoText Lab.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference42. Sullivan, D. (2003). Search Engine Sizes. Retrieved May 6, 2004 from http://searchenginewatch.com/reports/article.php/2156481zh_TW
dc.relation.reference43. Tempich, C., & Volz, R. (2003). Towards a benchmark for Semantic Web reasoners - an analysis of the DAML ontology library. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Evaluation of Ontology-based Tools (EON2003), Sanibel Island, Florida, USA.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference44. Uschold, M., King, M., Moralee, S., & Zorgios, Y. (1998). The Enterprise Ontology. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 13(1), 31-89.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference45. Uschold, M., & Gruninger, M. (1996). Ontologies: principles, methods and applications. Knowledge Engineering Review, 11(2), 122-147.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference46. Weißenberg, N., & Gartmann, R. (2003). Ontology Architecture for Semantic Geo Services for Olympia 2008. In: Bernard, L., A. Sliwinski and C. Senkler (Eds). Münsteraner GI-Tage, Münster. IfGIprints 18. 267-283.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference47. Weinberger, H., Te’eni, D., & Frank, A. J. (2003). Ontologies of Organizational Memory as a Basis for Evaluation. 11th ECIS`03 European Conference on Information Systems, Naples, Italy.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference48. Wache, H., Vögele, T., Visser, U., Stuckenschmidt, H., Schuster, G., Neumann, H., & Hübner, S. (2001). Ontology-Based Integration of Information - A Survey of Existing Approaches. Proceedings of the IJCAI-01 Workshop: Ontologies and Information Sharing, 108-117.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference49. Weiss, S. (1997). Glossary for Information Retrieval. Retrieve February 22, 2004, from http://www.cs.jhu.edu/~weiss/glossary.htmlzh_TW
dc.relation.reference50. YoshiKawa, M., & Amagasa, T. (2001). XRel: A path-based approach to storage and retrieval of XML documents using relational databases. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, 1(1), 110-141.zh_TW
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.languageiso639-1en_US-
item.openairetypethesis-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec-
Appears in Collections:學位論文
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
56013101.pdf104 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013102.pdf95.64 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013103.pdf154.69 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013104.pdf449 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013105.pdf467.83 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013106.pdf550.26 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013107.pdf616.5 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013108.pdf858.7 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013109.pdf488.21 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013110.pdf458.62 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013111.pdf488.21 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
56013112.pdf563.25 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.