Talk:Information integration

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Statistics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

There was a debate in the mid 80s on information integration versus information fusion. Integration is the combining of data, where fusion is the integration followed by reduction or replacement. Integration might be viewed as set combination wherein the larger set is retained, whereas Information Fusion is a set reduction technique with improved confidence (e.g. Bayesian estimation technqiue, Kalman filter). While the layman might consider these the same, there are larger contextual and mathematical issues that distinguish the two. See www.isif.org for more details - Erik Blasch - President of ISIF

This phrase has newer, or evolving, meanings, especially with regard to scientific data systems. While the Integration vs. Fusion debate was interesting in the time, at least to those following it closely, I'm not sure that this page is actually useful at this point. Could be considered misleading, in some ways. Bnichols (talk) 01:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

I propose to forward 'information integration' to 'data integration' for the following reasons. 1) Experts use the terms synonymously (e.g., Halevy wrote a book on data integration, but IBM has an information integration department). 2) The first sentence of the information integration article, "Information integration (II) (also called deduplication and referential integrity)" doesn't make sense - II is not those things, but those things are captured by the techniques of data integration. 3) The data integration article is pretty good. -Ryan Wisnesky, September 10, 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.112.164 (talk) 18:28, 10 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Information integration. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:OrNCxOpaXAMJ:infolab.stanford.edu/pub/papers/integration-using-views.ps+information+integration&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a with https://web.archive.org/web/20120722013426/http://infolab.stanford.edu/pub/papers/integration-using-views.ps on http://infolab.stanford.edu/pub/papers/integration-using-views.ps

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:31, 23 May 2017 (UTC)Reply