VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Patricia C. Arocena
dblp:61/8235 · also Patricia Rodríguez-Gianolli
· DBLP profile ↗
10ranked-venue papers
7as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 10 · 7 first-author
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
7 papers |
Data integration and cleaning · 63% Database theory · 12% Distributed and cloud data management · 11% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Empirical software engineering · 100% |
Topics — the 16 heaviest of 18, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Data integration and cleaning
schema mapping |
0.4 | 3 | 2015 | Gain Control over your Integration Evaluations · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2015 Value invention in data exchange · SIGMOD Conference 2013 The iBench Integration Metadata Generator · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2015 |
Data integration and cleaning
integration benchmarking |
0.4 | 2 | 2015 | The iBench Integration Metadata Generator · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2015 Gain Control over your Integration Evaluations · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2015 |
Data integration and cleaning
data extraction |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Data Lake Management: Challenges and Opportunities · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2019 |
Distributed and cloud data management › data lake
data lake management |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Data Lake Management: Challenges and Opportunities · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2019 |
Data integration and cleaning › data discovery
dataset discovery |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Data Lake Management: Challenges and Opportunities · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2019 |
Transaction processing and concurrency control
versioning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Data Lake Management: Challenges and Opportunities · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2019 |
Data integration and cleaning › data preprocessing › data cleaning
data repair |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | BART in Action: Error Generation and Empirical Evaluations of Data-Cleaning Systems · SIGMOD Conference 2016 |
Information retrieval › document processing
metadata generation |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | The iBench Integration Metadata Generator · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2015 |
Data integration and cleaning
data exchange |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Value invention in data exchange · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Database theory
dependency theory |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Value invention in data exchange · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Database theory › dependency theory
functional dependency |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Value invention in data exchange · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Database theory › data dependencies
second-order tuple generating dependencies |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Value invention in data exchange · SIGMOD Conference 2013 |
Data integration and cleaning
metadata management |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Data Lake Management: Challenges and Opportunities · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2019 |
Empirical software engineering › software engineering research methodology
empirical study |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Gain Control over your Integration Evaluations · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2015 |
Mathematical optimization › combinatorial optimization
greedy algorithm |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Messing Up with BART: Error Generation for Evaluating Data-Cleaning Algorithms · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2015 |
Distributed and cloud data management
data sharing |
0.0 | 1 | 2005 | Data Sharing in the Hyperion Peer Database System · VLDB 2005 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
greedy algorithm · 0.4unskolemization · 0.2skolem functions · 0.2linearization · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Data Lake Management: Challenges and OpportunitiesabstractThe ubiquity of data lakes has created fascinating new challenges for data management research. In this tutorial, we review the state-of-the-art in data management for data lakes. We consider how data lakes are introducing new problems including dataset discovery and how they are changing the requirements for classic problems including data extraction, data cleaning, data integration, data versioning, and metadata management. Fatemeh Nargesian, Erkang Zhu, Renée J. Miller, Ken Q. Pu, Patricia C. Arocena |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 5 |
| 2016 | BART in Action: Error Generation and Empirical Evaluations of Data-Cleaning SystemsabstractRepairing erroneous or conflicting data that violate a set of constraints is an important problem in data management. Many automatic or semi-automatic data-repairing algorithms have been proposed in the last few years, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. Bart is an open-source error-generation system conceived to support thorough experimental evaluations of these data-repairing systems. The demo is centered around three main lessons. To start, we discuss how generating errors in data is a complex problem, with several facets. We introduce the important notions of detectability and repairability of an error, that stand at the core of Bart. Then, we show how, by changing the features of errors, it is possible to influence quite significantly the performance of the tools. Finally, we concretely put to work five data-repairing algorithms on dirty data of various kinds generated using Bart, and discuss their performance. Donatello Santoro, Patricia C. Arocena, Boris Glavic, Giansalvatore Mecca, Renée J. Miller, Paolo Papotti |
SIGMOD Conference | 2 |
| 2015 | Gain Control over your Integration EvaluationsabstractIntegration systems are typically evaluated using a few real-world scenarios (e.g., bibliographical or biological datasets) or using synthetic scenarios (e.g., based on star-schemas or other patterns for schemas and constraints). Reusing such evaluations is a cumbersome task because their focus is usually limited to showcasing a specific feature of an approach. This makes it difficult to compare integration solutions, understand their generality, and understand their performance for different application scenarios. Based on this observation, we demonstrate some of the requirements for developing integration benchmarks. We argue that the major abstractions used for integration problems have converged in the last decade which enables the application of robust empirical methods to integration problems (from schema evolution, to data exchange, to answering queries using views and many more). Specifically, we demonstrate that schema mappings are the main abstraction that now drives most integration solutions and show how a metadata generator can be used to create more credible evaluations of the performance and scalability of data integration systems. We will use the demonstration to evangelize for more robust, shared empirical evaluations of data integration systems. Patricia C. Arocena, Radu Ciucanu, Boris Glavic, Renée J. Miller |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 1 |
| 2015 | The iBench Integration Metadata GeneratorabstractGiven the maturity of the data integration field it is surprising that rigorous empirical evaluations of research ideas are so scarce. We identify a major roadblock for empirical work - the lack of comprehensive metadata generators that can be used to create benchmarks for different integration tasks. This makes it difficult to compare integration solutions, understand their generality, and understand their performance. We present iBench, the first metadata generator that can be used to evaluate a wide-range of integration tasks (data exchange, mapping creation, mapping composition, schema evolution, among many others). iBench permits control over the size and characteristics of the metadata it generates (schemas, constraints, and mappings). Our evaluation demonstrates that iBench can efficiently generate very large, complex, yet realistic scenarios with different characteristics. We also present an evaluation of three mapping creation systems using iBench and show that the intricate control that iBench provides over metadata scenarios can reveal new and important empirical insights. iBench is an open-source, extensible tool that we are providing to the community. We believe it will raise the bar for empirical evaluation and comparison of data integration systems. Patricia C. Arocena, Boris Glavic, Radu Ciucanu, Renée J. Miller |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 1 |
| 2015 | Messing Up with BART: Error Generation for Evaluating Data-Cleaning AlgorithmsabstractWe study the problem of introducing errors into clean databases for the purpose of benchmarking data-cleaning algorithms. Our goal is to provide users with the highest possible level of control over the error-generation process, and at the same time develop solutions that scale to large databases. We show in the paper that the error-generation problem is surprisingly challenging, and in fact, NP-complete. To provide a scalable solution, we develop a correct and efficient greedy algorithm that sacrifices completeness, but succeeds under very reasonable assumptions. To scale to millions of tuples, the algorithm relies on several non-trivial optimizations, including a new symmetry property of data quality constraints. The trade-off between control and scalability is the main technical contribution of the paper. Patricia C. Arocena, Boris Glavic, Giansalvatore Mecca, Renée J. Miller, Paolo Papotti, Donatello Santoro |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 1 |
| 2013 | Value invention in data exchangeabstractThe creation of values to represent incomplete information, often referred to as value invention, is central in data exchange. Within schema mappings, Skolem functions have long been used for value invention as they permit a precise representation of missing information. Recent work on a powerful mapping language called second-order tuple generating dependencies (SO tgds), has drawn attention to the fact that the use of arbitrary Skolem functions can have negative computational and programmatic properties in data exchange. In this paper, we present two techniques for understanding when the Skolem functions needed to represent the correct semantics of incomplete information are computationally well-behaved. Specifically, we consider when the Skolem functions in second-order (SO) mappings have a first-order (FO) semantics and are therefore programmatically and computationally more desirable for use in practice. Our first technique, linearization, significantly extends the Nash, Bernstein and Melnik unskolemization algorithm, by understanding when the sets of arguments of the Skolem functions in a mapping are related by set inclusion. We show that such a linear relationship leads to mappings that have FO semantics and are expressible in popular mapping languages including source-to-target tgds and nested tgds. Our second technique uses source semantics, specifically functional dependencies (including keys), to transform SO mappings into equivalent FO mappings. We show that our algorithms are applicable to a strictly larger class of mappings than previous approaches, but more importantly we present an extensive experimental evaluation that quantifies this difference (about 78% improvement) over an extensive schema mapping benchmark and illustrates the applicability of our results on real mappings. Patricia C. Arocena, Boris Glavic, Renée J. Miller |
SIGMOD Conference | 1 |
| 2010 | Composing local-as-view mappings: closure and applicationsabstractSchema mapping composition is a fundamental operation in schema management and data exchange. The mapping composition problem has been extensively studied for a number of mapping languages, most notably source-to-target tuple-generating dependencies (s-t tgds). An important class of s-t tgds are local-as-view (LAV) tgds. This class of mappings is prevalent in practical data integration and exchange systems, and recent work by ten Cate and Kolaitis shows that such mappings possess desirable structural properties. Patricia C. Arocena, Ariel Fuxman, Renée J. Miller |
ICDT | 1 |
| 2005 | Data Sharing in the Hyperion Peer Database System
Patricia C. Arocena, Maddalena Garzetti, Lei Jiang 0002, Anastasios Kementsietsidis, Iluju Kiringa, Mehedi Masud, Renée J. Miller, John Mylopoulos |
VLDB | 1 |
| 2001 | A Semantic Approach to XML-based Data Integration
Patricia C. Arocena, John Mylopoulos |
ER | 1 |
| 2001 | Semantic Models for Knowledge ManagementabstractWe explore the use of a semantic model to support a group of strategic business analysts in their daily work. In particular, we present a set of modeling constructs for representing goals, events and actors that are relevant to the work of analysts. We also describe a qualitative goal analysis procedure which makes it possible to reason about a goal model under different assumptions. The paper also reports on an incremental document classification scheme that can be used to classify relevant documents with respect to the concepts constituting the semantic model. Raoul Jarvis, Gregory McArthur, John Mylopoulos, Patricia C. Arocena |
WISE (1) | 4 |