Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Julie Ciccolini
dblp:385/5824
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Information retrieval · 54% Data integration and cleaning · 46% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Data integration and cleaning › data preprocessing
data cleaning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Dealing with Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Typos in Real-World Entity Matching · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2024 |
Data integration and cleaning
entity matching |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Dealing with Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Typos in Real-World Entity Matching · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2024 |
Information retrieval
similarity measure |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Dealing with Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Typos in Real-World Entity Matching · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2024 |
Information retrieval
string matching |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Dealing with Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Typos in Real-World Entity Matching · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2024 |
Information retrieval
text analysis |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Dealing with Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Typos in Real-World Entity Matching · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
synonym rules · 0.8dynamic programming · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Dealing with Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Typos in Real-World Entity MatchingabstractString matching is at the core of data cleaning, record matching, and information retrieval. String matching relies on a similarity measure that evaluates the similarity of two strings, regarding the two as a match if their similarity is larger than a user-defined threshold. In our collaboration with journalists and public defenders, we found that real-world datasets, such as police rosters that journalists and public defenders work with, often contain acronyms, abbreviations, and typos, thanks to errors during manual entry, into, say, a spreadsheet or a form. Unfortunately, traditional similarity measures lead to low accuracy since they do not consider all three aspects together. Some recent work proposes leveraging synonym rules to improve matching, but either requires these rules to be provided upfront, or generated prior to matching, which leads to low accuracy in our setting and similar ones. To address these limitations, we propose Smash, a simple yet effective measure to assess the similarity of two strings with acronyms, abbreviations, and typos, all without relying on synonym rules. We design a dynamic programming algorithm to efficiently compute this measure, along with two optimizations that improve accuracy. We show that compared to the best baselines, including one based on ChatGPT with GPT-4, Smash improves the max and mean F-score by 23.5% and 110.8%, respectively. We implement Smash in OpenRefine, a graphical data cleaning tool, to facilitate its use by journalists, public defenders, and other non-programmers for data cleaning. Joshua Wu, Dixin Tang, Nithin V. Chalapathi, Tristan Chambers, Julie Ciccolini, Cheryl Phillips, Lisa Pickoff-White, Aditya G. Parameswaran |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 5 |