Entity Resolution via Graph Clustering and LSH Blocking

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing entity resolution techniques are inefficient, inaccurate, and resource-intensive due to the need for frequent reprocessing of large datasets and challenges in accurately blocking textual documents based on similarity and inter-document references, leading to resource wastage and economic inefficiencies.

Innovation Solution

An entity resolution system that employs graph traversal and Locality Sensitive Hashing techniques to block and merge textual documents, using iterative match-merge methods and graph clustering to create resolved entity-documents, allowing for incremental updates without restarting the analysis process.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If entity resolution is performed regularly to accommodate data changes, then the accuracy of entity resolution is improved, but the time and computational resources required increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveentity resolution accuracyVSAvoidreprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the entity resolution process into blocking and matching phases. The blocking phase groups documents into buckets based on similarity, and only documents within the same bucket are compared in the matching phase. This segmentation reduces the number of comparisons needed when updating entity resolution results, as new documents only need to be blocked and matched against relevant buckets rather than the entire dataset.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs blocking as a preliminary action before matching. By pre-grouping documents into buckets based on similarity metrics (such as Jaccard similarity, cosine similarity, or edit distance), the system prepares the data structure in advance so that when new documents arrive or existing documents change, only the affected buckets need to be reprocessed rather than performing full pairwise comparisons across the entire dataset.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If traditional entity resolution methods are used to process large datasets, then complete entity resolution is achieved, but computational resources and processing time are excessively consumed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveentity resolution completenessVSAvoidcomputational resource consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the dataset into multiple buckets based on document similarity using blocking techniques. This segmentation ensures that computational resources are focused only on comparing documents within the same bucket, rather than performing exhaustive pairwise comparisons across the entire dataset. The segmentation maintains resolution completeness by ensuring that similar documents are grouped together in the same bucket.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by performing entity resolution only on subsets of documents (those within the same bucket) rather than all possible document pairs. This selective approach reduces computational resource consumption while still achieving complete entity resolution for the relevant subsets. The blocking mechanism ensures that no potentially matching documents are missed by organizing them into appropriate buckets before matching.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Productivity

If documents are blocked based on textual similarity and inter-document references, then the efficiency of entity resolution is improved, but the complexity of the blocking mechanism increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveentity resolution efficiencyVSAvoidblocking mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the blocking mechanism into multiple independent similarity metrics (e.g., Jaccard similarity, cosine similarity, edit distance, inter-document references). Each metric can be computed independently and combined to form the final blocking decision. This modular segmentation improves efficiency by allowing parallel computation of different metrics while managing complexity through clear separation of concerns.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a universal blocking mechanism that can handle multiple types of similarity metrics and data formats through a unified framework. The blocking system is designed to accommodate different similarity measures (textual, structural, reference-based) and can be configured based on specific application requirements, making it versatile without requiring separate blocking mechanisms for each metric type.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Measurement precision

If frequent entity resolution updates are performed on large datasets, then data accuracy is maintained, but economic inefficiencies arise due to resource wastage

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata accuracyVSAvoidcomputational resource wastage
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs blocking as a preliminary action that can be reused across multiple update cycles. Once documents are blocked into buckets, this blocking structure can be maintained and updated incrementally as new documents arrive or existing documents change. This preliminary blocking action prevents the need to recompute blocking structures frequently, reducing resource wastage while maintaining data accuracy through incremental updates.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent enables selective reprocessing by identifying and discarding only the portions of the dataset that have changed or may be affected by changes. When updating entity resolution results, the system recovers and reprocesses only the affected buckets rather than the entire dataset. This selective approach maintains data accuracy for changed portions while avoiding unnecessary reprocessing of unchanged data, thereby reducing computational resource wastage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #34Discarding and recovering

Data Source

PatentUS10311093B2Entity resolution from documents
Publication Date: 2019.06.04 TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD
  • US10311093B2 patent drawing
  • US10311093B2 patent drawing
  • US10311093B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The present subject matter relates to entity resolution, and in particular, relates to providing an entity resolution from documents. The method comprises obtaining the plurality of documents from at least one data source. The plurality of documents is blocked into at least one bucket based on textual similarity and inter-document references among the plurality of documents. Further, within each bucket, a merged document for each entity may be created based on an iterative match-merge technique. The iterative match-merge technique identifies, from the plurality of documents, at least one matching pair of documents and merges the at least one matching pair of documents to create the merged document for each entity. The merged documents may be merged to generate a resolved entity-document for each entity based on a graph clustering technique.