AI Schema Matching for Semantic Database Mapping

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Traditional schema matching methods rely solely on syntactic features, overlook semantic differences, and face scalability issues due to exhaustive matching, especially with dynamic data changes.

Innovation Solution

A two-stage schema matching approach using generative AI, involving table-level and attribute-level matching, with preliminary filtering and advanced data modeling to enhance accuracy and efficiency.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional exhaustive schema matching is performed, then matching completeness is improved, but computational complexity and processing time increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvematching completenessVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the schema matching process into two distinct stages: table-level matching (comparing table names, structures, and metadata) and attribute-level matching (comparing individual column attributes). This segmentation allows the system to perform comprehensive matching while reducing overall computational complexity by handling comparisons at appropriate granularities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary filtering and table-level matching before conducting detailed attribute-level matching. By pre-identifying candidate table pairs based on structural similarity and metadata comparison, the system reduces the search space for subsequent attribute matching, thereby reducing computational complexity while maintaining matching completeness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If traditional schema matching methods are used, then syntactic matching is achieved, but semantic differences are overlooked

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesyntactic matching accuracyVSAvoidsemantic information loss
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent transforms the matching approach by incorporating multiple parameter types beyond simple syntax: data type semantics, nullability constraints, primary key/foreign key relationships, and cardinality rules. By evaluating multiple parameters with different weights and significance levels, the system achieves both syntactic precision and semantic understanding.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a composite matching criterion that combines multiple factors: syntactic similarity (table names, column names), structural similarity (schema relationships), and semantic similarity (data types, constraints, meanings). This composite approach ensures both syntactic accuracy and semantic information retention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

3Reliability

If schema matching is performed on large-scale databases, then comprehensive coverage is improved, but processing time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveschema matching coverageVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary table-level matching to identify candidate table pairs before conducting time-consuming attribute-level matching. By filtering out non-matching tables early based on structural and metadata comparisons, the system achieves comprehensive coverage while significantly reducing processing time for large-scale databases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the matching process into independent table-level and attribute-level stages that can be executed sequentially. This allows the system to process large databases efficiently by completing faster table-level comparisons first, then focusing computational resources on attribute-level matching only for candidate pairs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

4Stability of the object's composition

If dynamic data changes are handled through traditional methods, then data consistency is maintained, but adaptability to changes decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata consistencyVSAvoidadaptability to data changes
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a dynamic matching framework where the matching process can be re-executed when data changes occur. The system monitors schema modifications and triggers re-matching only for affected tables and attributes, maintaining data consistency while adapting efficiently to changes without requiring full re-matching of the entire database.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentEP4697193A1Database schema matching powered by artificial intelligence
Publication Date: 2026.02.18 SAP SE
  • EP4697193A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4697193A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4697193A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A computer-implemented method for improved schema matching of two databases is disclosed. The method can receive a schema of a source table from a first database and a schema of a plurality of target tables from a second database, identify one or more matching tables among the plurality of target tables based on comparison of the schema of the source table and the schema of the plurality of target tables using a large language model, obtain first sample attribute data from the source table and second sample attribute data from a selected matching table, and identify one or more pairs of matching attributes between the source table and the selected matching table based on comparison of the first sample attribute data and the second sample attribute data using the large language model. Related systems and software for implementing the method are also disclosed.