Abstract:Entity resolution (ER) is the process of identifying records that refer to the same entities within one or across multiple databases. Numerous techniques have been developed to tackle ER challenges over the years, with recent emphasis placed on machine and deep learning methods for the matching phase. However, the quality of the benchmark datasets typically used in the experimental evaluations of learning-based matching algorithms has not been examined in the literature. To cover this gap, we propose four different approaches to assessing the difficulty and appropriateness of 13 established datasets: two theoretical approaches, which involve new measures of linearity and existing measures of complexity, and two practical approaches: the difference between the best non-linear and linear matchers, as well as the difference between the best learning-based matcher and the perfect oracle. Our analysis demonstrates that most of the popular datasets pose rather easy classification tasks. As a result, they are not suitable for properly evaluating learning-based matching algorithms. To address this issue, we propose a new methodology for yielding benchmark datasets. We put it into practice by creating four new matching tasks, and we verify that these new benchmarks are more challenging and therefore more suitable for further advancements in the field.
Abstract:Many recent works on Entity Resolution (ER) leverage Deep Learning techniques involving language models to improve effectiveness. This is applied to both main steps of ER, i.e., blocking and matching. Several pre-trained embeddings have been tested, with the most popular ones being fastText and variants of the BERT model. However, there is no detailed analysis of their pros and cons. To cover this gap, we perform a thorough experimental analysis of 12 popular language models over 17 established benchmark datasets. First, we assess their vectorization overhead for converting all input entities into dense embeddings vectors. Second, we investigate their blocking performance, performing a detailed scalability analysis, and comparing them with the state-of-the-art deep learning-based blocking method. Third, we conclude with their relative performance for both supervised and unsupervised matching. Our experimental results provide novel insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the main language models, facilitating researchers and practitioners to select the most suitable ones in practice.