The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Collective entity resolution in relational data
Open accessAbstract
Many databases contain uncertain and imprecise references to real-world entities. The absence of identifiers for the underlying entities often results in a database which contains multiple references to the same entity. This can lead not only to data redundancy, but also inaccuracies in query processing and knowledge extraction. These problems can be alleviated through the use of entity resolution . Entity resolution involves discovering the underlying entities and mapping each database reference to these entities. Traditionally, entities are resolved using pairwise similarity over the attributes of references. However, there is often additional relational information in the data. Specifically, references to different entities may cooccur. In these cases, collective entity resolution, in which entities for cooccurring references are determined jointly rather than independently, can improve entity resolution accuracy. We propose a novel relational clustering algorithm that uses both attribute and relational information for determining the underlying domain entities, and we give an efficient implementation. We investigate the impact that different relational similarity measures have on entity resolution quality. We evaluate our collective entity resolution algorithm on multiple real-world databases. We show that it improves entity resolution performance over both attribute-based baselines and over algorithms that consider relational information but do not resolve entities collectively. In addition, we perform detailed experiments on synthetically generated data to identify data characteristics that favor collective relational resolution over purely attribute-based algorithms.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Friends and neighbors on the Web
Adamic, L. A., & Adar, E. (2003) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/s0378-8733(03)00009-1 · Cited by 2,954
A guided tour to approximate string matching
Navarro, G. (2001) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/375360.375365 · Cited by 2,561
Fellegi, I. P., & Sunter, A. B. (1969) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1969.10501049 · Cited by 2,475
The link prediction problem for social networks
Liben-Nowell, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2003) · Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on Information and knowledge management · doi:10.1145/956863.956972 · Cited by 1,612
A comparison of string distance metrics for name-matching tasks
Cohen, W. W., Ravikumar, P., & Fienberg, S. E. (2003) · Cited by 1,371
Efficient clustering of high-dimensional data sets with application to reference matching
McCallum, A., Nigam, K., & Ungar, L. H. (2000) · Proceedings of the sixth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining · doi:10.1145/347090.347123 · Cited by 1,096
CiteSeer: an automatic citation indexing system
Giles, C. L., Bollacker, K. D., & Lawrence, S. (1998) · Proceedings of the third ACM conference on Digital libraries - DL '98 · doi:10.1145/276675.276685 · Cited by 1,040
Adaptive duplicate detection using learnable string similarity measures
Bilenko, M., & Mooney, R. J. (2003) · Proceedings of the ninth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining · doi:10.1145/956750.956759 · Cited by 926
Ristad, E. S., & Yianilos, P. N. (1998) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.682181 · Cited by 859
The State of Record Linkage and Current Research Problems
Winkler, W. E. (1999) · Cited by 810
Cited by
A Review of Relational Machine Learning for Knowledge Graphs
Nickel, M., Murphy, K., Tresp, V., & Gabrilovich, E. (2016) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2015.2483592 · Cited by 1,638
A Survey of Fake News: Fundamental Theories, Detection Methods, and Opportunities
Zhou, X., & Zafarani, R. (2021) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3395046 · Cited by 1,184
A Survey of Statistical Network Models
Goldenberg, A., Zheng, A. X., Fienberg, S. E., & Airoldi, E. M. (2010) · Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning · doi:10.1561/2200000005 · Cited by 819
A taxonomy of privacy-preserving record linkage techniques
Vatsalan, D., Christen, P., & Verykios, V. S. (2013) · Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.is.2012.11.005 · Cited by 295
A brief survey of automatic methods for author name disambiguation
Ferreira, A. A., Gonçalves, M. A., & Laender, A. H. F. (2012) · ACM SIGMOD Record · doi:10.1145/2350036.2350040 · Cited by 293
Metadata
- Authors
- Bhattacharya, I., & Getoor, L.
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5
- ISSN
- 1556-4681 (ISSN-L)
- 1556-472X
- OpenAlex
- W254113056
- Cited by
- 593
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 49.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Collective entity resolution in relational data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1217299.1217304
- The paper
- Bhattacharya, I., & Getoor, L. (2007). Collective entity resolution in relational data. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data. https://doi.org/10.1145/1217299.1217304
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.