This description relates to visualizing relationships between data elements and graphical representations of data element attributes.
Enterprises use complex data processing systems, such as data warehousing, customer relationship management, and data mining, to manage data. In many data processing systems, data are pulled from many different data sources, such as database files, operational systems, flat files, the Internet, etc., into a central repository. Often, data are transformed before being loaded in the data system. Transformation may include cleansing, integration, and extraction. To keep track of data, its sources, and the transformations that have happened to the data stored in a data system, metadata can be used. Metadata (sometimes called “data about data”) are data that describe other data's attributes, format, origins, histories, inter-relationships, etc. Metadata management can play a central role in complex data processing systems.
Sometimes a database user may want to investigate how certain data are derived from different data sources. For example, a database user may want to know how a dataset or data object was generated or from which source a dataset or data object was imported. Tracing a dataset back to sources from which it is derived is called data lineage tracing (or “upstream data lineage tracing”). Sometimes a database user may want to investigate how certain datasets have been used (called “downstream data lineage tracing” or “impact analysis”), for example, which application has read a given dataset. A database user may also be interested in knowing how a dataset is related to other datasets. For example, a user may want to know if a dataset is modified, what tables will be affected.
In a general aspect, a method includes storing metadata in a data storage system. Summary data identifying one or more characteristics of each of multiple metadata objects stored in the data storage system is computed, and the summary data characterizing a given metadata object in association with the given metadata object is stored. A visual representation is generated of a diagram including nodes representing respective metadata objects and relationships among the nodes. Generating the visual representation includes superimposing a representation of a characteristic identified by the summary data characterizing a given metadata object in proximity to the node representing the given metadata object.
Aspects can include one or more of the following features. The representation represents quality of the metadata object. The representation represents whether the metadata object has been recently updated. The representation represents a source from which the metadata object was last updated. The representation is associated with a legend that classifies the representation. Hovering a cursor over the visual representation generates a window containing information related to the representation. The representation represents a characteristic that is selectable by a user.
In a general aspect, a system includes means for storing metadata in a data storage system, and means for computing summary data identifying one or more characteristics of each of multiple metadata objects stored in the data storage system. A system also includes means for storing the summary data characterizing a given metadata object in association with the given metadata object, and means for generating a visual representation of a diagram including nodes representing respective metadata objects and relationships among the nodes. Generating the visual representation includes superimposing a representation of a characteristic identified by the summary data characterizing a given metadata object in proximity to the node representing the given metadata object.
In a general aspect, a computer system is configured to store metadata in a data storage system, and compute summary data identifying one or more characteristics of each of multiple metadata objects stored in the data storage system. The summary data characterizing a given metadata object in association with the given metadata object is stored, and a visual representation is generated of a diagram including nodes representing respective metadata objects and relationships among the nodes. Generating the visual representation includes superimposing a representation of a characteristic identified by the summary data characterizing a given metadata object in proximity to the node representing the given metadata object.
In a general aspect, a computer-readable medium stores a computer program, and the computer program includes instructions for causing a computer to store metadata in a data storage system. Summary data identifying one or more characteristics of each of multiple metadata objects stored in the data storage system is computed, and the summary data characterizing a given metadata object in association with the given metadata object is stored. A visual representation is generated of a diagram including nodes representing respective metadata objects and relationships among the nodes. Generating the visual representation includes superimposing a representation of a characteristic identified by the summary data characterizing a given metadata object in proximity to the node representing the given metadata object.
Aspects can have one or more of the following advantages.
The system enables users to visualize relationships between objects, and view certain attributes of objects in a contextual setting. When working with metadata, users are able to understand the origins of an object before certain actions are taken. Users can know which objects are affected by manipulation of any particular object. Users are also able to view attributes of certain objects in an environment where relationships between those objects are clearly shown.
The system enables users to visualize relationships between objects, stored in a wide variety of data storage systems. The relationships among the objects can represent various dependencies and/or associations appropriate to the applications for which the data objects are used. As an example of one of the types of systems in which these techniques can be used, a system is described in which the objects represent elements of a graph-based computation environment.
In some examples, repository 104 includes both a base data store 105A and an interface data store 105B. A base data store stores technical metadata, and may include applications along with their associated metadata, such as graphs and transforms. In addition to storing technical metadata, the base data store may also perform various kinds of analysis including dependency analysis (e.g., computing data lineage, as described in more detail below), or may receive and store the results of such analysis. In some examples, base data store 105A and interface data store 105B may be combined and implemented as a single data store.
While technical metadata is useful to developers in a variety of functions, there are many instances in which a higher level of metadata needs to be analyzed and manipulated. This higher level metadata, sometimes referred to as “enterprise” or “business” metadata is often useful in data analysis. Some examples of business metadata include data stewardship, which indicates which employee is responsible for the data, and data dictionaries, which are business definitions for files and fields within files. Business metadata goes beyond technical descriptions of data, and can be stored on a platform that is separate from the base data store 105A, such as an interface data store 105B.
The interface data store 105B may be a relational database that primarily serves to store business metadata. The interface data store may communicate with the base data store and extract its metadata, and it can also pull its information from a variety of other sources such as graphs, spreadsheets, logical models, database tables, or additional third party sources of data.
In some examples, the base data store 105A is a scalable object-oriented database system designed to support the development and execution of graph-based applications and the interchange of metadata between the graph-based applications and other systems (e.g., other operating systems). The repository 104 is a storage system for all kinds of metadata, including documentation, record formats (e.g., fields and data types of records in a table), transform functions, graphs, jobs, and monitoring information. The repository 104 also stores metadata objects that represent actual data to be processed by the computing system 100 including data stored in an external data store 112. An example of a repository that includes features for importing and managing metadata from various sources is described in co-pending U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/119,148, entitled “DATA MAINTENANCE SYSTEM,” filed on Dec. 2, 2008, incorporated herein by reference. Similar features can be incorporated into the repository 104.
The parallel operating environment 106 accepts a specification of a data flow graph generated in the GDE 102 and generates computer instructions that correspond to the processing logic and resources defined by the graph. The parallel operating environment 106 then typically executes those instructions on a plurality of processors (which need not be homogeneous). An example of a suitable parallel operating environment is the CO>OPERATING SYSTEM®.
The User Interface module 108 provides a web-browser-based view of the contents of the repository 104. Using the User Interface module 108, a user 103 may browse objects, create new objects, alter existing objects, specify application parameters, schedule jobs, etc. The User Interface module 108 generates forms-based browser screens for a user to search for and view objects and information about objects stored in the repository 104.
The repository 104 stores metadata including metadata objects for graph-based applications including graph components and other functional objects for building computation graphs. As stated previously, metadata stored in base data store 105A of repository 104 includes, for example, “technical” metadata (e.g., application-related business rules, record formats, and execution statistics), while the interface data store 105B may include business metadata such as user-defined documentation of job functions, roles, and responsibilities.
The information stored in the repository 104 in the form of metadata objects enables various kinds of analysis about applications and the data processed by those applications. Subsets of this information may be stored in interface data store 105B. For example, as discussed further below, a user can obtain answers to questions about data lineage (e.g., Where did a given value come from? How was the output value computed? Which applications produce and depend on this data?). A developer can understand the consequences of proposed modifications (e.g., If this piece changes, what else will be affected? If this source format changes, which applications will be affected?). A user/developer can also obtain questions to answers involving both technical metadata and business metadata (e.g., Which groups are responsible for producing and using this data? Who changed this application last? What changes did they make?).
The repository 104 is able to track the state of stored metadata objects. Objects stored in the repository 104 are versioned, making it possible to examine the state of things as of last week, last month, or last year, and to compare it with the state of things today. The repository 104 collects job-tracking, or execution information which enables trend analysis (e.g., How fast is our data growing?) and capacity planning (e.g., How long did that application take to run? How much data did it process, and at what rate? What resources did the application consume? When will we need to add another server?).
A user can view (and optionally, edit) information contained in and/or associated with the stored metadata through the User Interface module 108. A metadata viewing environment can represent various kinds of metadata objects using various graphical representations including icons and groupings of icons presented by the User Interface module 108 on a display. A metadata object can represent different types of data elements (e.g., data used as input or output of an executable program) and/or transformations (e.g., any type of data manipulation associated with a data processing entity, such as data flow graph, that processes or generates data). The viewing environment can show relationships as lines connecting graphical nodes that represent metadata objects or groupings of metadata objects, as described in more detail below. In some cases, the interface data store 105B can extract the relationships (such as lineage information) from the base data store 105A, or from other sources of data. The interface data store 105B may hold a high-level summary of data lineage. The lineage information (or other data dependency analysis) can be computed automatically within the system 100, or can be received from an external system, or from manual input. For example, the system 100 can receive lineage information that has been gathered and prepared by humans analyzing the code. The lineage information can be imported into the repository 104 from files in any of a variety of predetermined formats (e.g., in spreadsheets).
For example, the lineage diagram displays the end-to-end lineage for the data and/or processing nodes that represent the metadata objects stored in the repository 104; that is, the objects a given starting object depends on (its sources) and the objects that a given starting object affects (its targets). In this example, connections are shown between data elements 202A and transformations 204A, two examples of metadata objects. The metadata objects are represented by nodes in the diagram. Data elements 202A can represent datasets, tables within datasets, columns in tables, and fields in files, messages, and reports, for example. An example of a transformation 204A is an element of an executable that describes how a single output of a data element is produced. The connections between the nodes are based on relationships among the metadata objects.
Using the metadata viewing environment to perform data lineage calculations is useful for a number of reasons. For example, calculating and illustrating relationships between data elements and transformations can help a user determine how a reported value was computed for a given field report. A user may also view which datasets store a particular type of data, and which executables read and write to that dataset. In the case of business terms, the data lineage diagram may illustrate which data elements (such as columns and fields) are associated with certain business terms (definitions in an enterprise).
Data lineage diagrams shown within the metadata viewing environment can also aid a user in impact analysis. Specifically, a user may want to know which downstream executables are affected if a column or field is added to a dataset, and who needs to be notified. Impact analysis may determine where a given data element is used, and can also determine the ramifications of changing that data element. Similarly, a user may view what datasets are affected by a change in an executable, or whether it safe to remove a certain database table from production.
Using the metadata viewing environment to perform data lineage calculations for generating data lineage diagrams is useful for business term management. For instance, it is often desirable for employees within an enterprise to agree on the meanings of business terms across that enterprise, the relationships between those terms, and the data to which the terms refer. The consistent use of business terms may enhance the transparency of enterprise data and facilitates communication of business requirements. Thus, it is important to know where the physical data underlying a business term can be found, and what business logic is used in computations.
Viewing relationships between data nodes can also be helpful in managing and maintaining metadata. For instance, a user may wish to know who changed a piece of metadata, what the source (or “source of record”) is for a piece of metadata, or what changes were made when loading or reloading metadata from an external source. In maintaining metadata, it may be desirable to allow designated users to be able to create metadata objects (such as business terms), edit properties of metadata objects (such as descriptions and relationships of objects to other objects), or delete obsolete metadata objects.
The metadata viewing environment provides a number of graphical views of objects, allowing a user to explore and analyze metadata. For example, a user may view the contents of systems and applications and explore the details of any object, and can also view relationships between objects using the data lineage views, which allows a user to easily perform various types of dependency analysis such as the data lineage analysis and impact analysis described above. Hierarchies of objects can also be viewed, and the hierarchies can be searched for specific objects. Once the object is found bookmarks can be created for objects allowing a user to easily return to them.
With the proper permissions, a user can edit the metadata in the metadata viewing environment. For example, a user can update descriptions of objects, create business terms, define relationships between objects (such as linking a business term to a field in a report or column in a table), move objects (for instance, moving a dataset from one application to another) or delete objects.
In
Users can also configure their own diagrams. For example, diagrams can be configured so that they follow primary/foreign key relationships in the metadata. Filters may also be applied to the dependency analysis to exclude information from the lineage diagram. For example, if a user desires to exclude datasets from the lineage diagram that are reject files, the user could toggle the display of reject files in the lineage diagram on and off.
Viewing elements and relationships in the metadata viewing environment can be made more useful by adding information relevant to each of the nodes that represent them. One exemplary way to add relevant information to the nodes is to graphically overlay information on top of certain nodes. These graphics may show some value or characteristic of the data represented by the node, and can be any property in the metadata database. This approach has the advantage of combining two or more normally disparate pieces of information (relationships between nodes of data and characteristics of the data represented by the nodes) and endeavors to put useful information “in context.” For example, characteristics such as metadata quality, metadata freshness, or source of record information can be displayed in conjunction with a visual representation of relationships between data nodes. While some of this information may be accessible in tabular form, it may be more helpful for a user to view characteristics of the data along with the relationships between different nodes of data. A user can select which characteristic of the data will be shown on top of the data element and/or transformation nodes within the metadata viewing environment. Which characteristic is shown can also be set according to default system settings.
In the example of
In the example of
In the example of
The record storage and retrieval approach described above, including the modules of the system 100 and the procedures performed by the system 100, can be implemented using software for execution on a computer. For instance, the software forms procedures in one or more computer programs that execute on one or more programmed or programmable computer systems (which may be of various architectures such as distributed, client/server, or grid) each including at least one processor, at least one data storage system (including volatile and non-volatile memory and/or storage elements), at least one input device or port, and at least one output device or port. The software may form one or more modules of a larger program, for example, that provides other services related to the design and configuration of computation graphs. The nodes and elements of the graph can be implemented as data structures stored in a computer readable medium or other organized data conforming to a data model stored in a data repository.
The approaches described above can be implemented using software for execution on a computer. For instance, the software forms procedures in one or more computer programs that execute on one or more programmed or programmable computer systems (which may be of various architectures such as distributed, client/server, or grid) each including at least one processor, at least one data storage system (including volatile and non-volatile memory and/or storage elements), at least one input device or port, and at least one output device or port. The software may form one or more modules of a larger program, for example, that provides other services related to the design and configuration of computation graphs. The nodes and elements of the graph can be implemented as data structures stored in a computer readable medium or other organized data conforming to a data model stored in a data repository.
The software may be provided on a storage medium, such as a CD-ROM, readable by a general or special purpose programmable computer or delivered (encoded in a propagated signal) over a communication medium of a network to the computer where it is executed. All of the functions may be performed on a special purpose computer, or using special-purpose hardware, such as coprocessors. The software may be implemented in a distributed manner in which different parts of the computation specified by the software are performed by different computers. Each such computer program is preferably stored on or downloaded to a storage media or device (e.g., solid state memory or media, or magnetic or optical media) readable by a general or special purpose programmable computer, for configuring and operating the computer when the storage media or device is read by the computer system to perform the procedures described herein. The inventive system may also be considered to be implemented as a computer-readable storage medium, configured with a computer program, where the storage medium so configured causes a computer system to operate in a specific and predefined manner to perform the functions described herein.
A number of embodiments of the invention have been described. Nevertheless, it will be understood that various modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. For example, some of the steps described above may be order independent, and thus can be performed in an order different from that described.
It is to be understood that the foregoing description is intended to illustrate and not to limit the scope of the invention, which is defined by the scope of the appended claims. For example, a number of the function steps described above may be performed in a different order without substantially affecting overall processing. Other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims.
This application is a continuation of and claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/874,800, filed Jan. 18, 2018, which is a continuation of and claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/629,466, filed Dec. 2, 2009, which claims priority to U.S. Application Ser. No. 61/119,201, filed on Dec. 2, 2008. Each of the above-listed applications is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6003040 | Mital et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6725227 | Li | Apr 2004 | B1 |
7401064 | Arone et al. | Jul 2008 | B1 |
7456840 | Molesky et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7493570 | Bobbin et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7546226 | Yeh et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
7590672 | Slik et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7725433 | Labrie | May 2010 | B1 |
7844582 | Arbilla et al. | Nov 2010 | B1 |
7899833 | Stevens et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7970240 | Chao et al. | Jun 2011 | B1 |
8046385 | Wald et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8266122 | Newcombe et al. | Sep 2012 | B1 |
8332782 | Chang et al. | Dec 2012 | B1 |
8577852 | Haagenson et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8654125 | Gibson | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8819010 | Frankhauser et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
9031895 | Schon | May 2015 | B2 |
9092639 | Winters et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9116603 | Nielsen et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9477786 | Yost et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9760612 | Brainerd et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
9767100 | Bator et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
9852153 | Ikai et al. | Dec 2017 | B2 |
9875241 | Bator et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
10191904 | Bator et al. | Jan 2019 | B2 |
10860635 | Bator et al. | Dec 2020 | B2 |
20020030703 | Robertson et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20030020762 | Budrys et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20040181554 | Heckerman et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040255239 | Bhatt et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050246352 | Moore et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060095466 | Stevens et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060106847 | Eckardt, III et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060149782 | Yeh et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060190844 | Binder et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060218159 | Murphy et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060271505 | Vierich et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060294150 | Stanfill et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070016624 | Powers et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070022000 | Bodart | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070033220 | Drucker et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070061287 | Le et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070061353 | Bobbin et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070112875 | Yagawa | May 2007 | A1 |
20070150496 | Feinsmith | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070255741 | Geiger et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080155119 | Imamura et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080163124 | Bonev et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080172629 | Tien et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080183658 | Mangipudi | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20090012983 | Senneville | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090216728 | Brainerd et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090224941 | Kansal et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090319566 | Wald et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100106752 | Eckardt, III et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100138420 | Bator et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100138431 | Bator et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100223430 | Walker et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100313157 | Carlsson et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110041099 | Weise et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110320460 | Frankhauser et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120059857 | Jackson, Jr. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120209656 | Rojahn | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120254805 | Pic et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120310875 | Prahlad et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120311496 | Cao et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130332423 | Puri et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140019423 | Liensberger et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140095560 | Ikai et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140114907 | Kozina et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140181742 | Nielsen et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140244687 | Shmueli et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140279979 | Yost et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20150142724 | Nair | May 2015 | A1 |
20160063106 | Chai et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20170058320 | Locke et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170286526 | Bar-Or et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170364514 | Bator et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180157702 | Clemens et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180181567 | Bator et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
101084496 | Dec 2007 | CN |
101971165 | Feb 2011 | CN |
102239458 | Nov 2011 | CN |
102890720 | Jan 2013 | CN |
1258814 | Nov 2002 | EP |
1510937 | Mar 2005 | EP |
08-033895 | Feb 1996 | JP |
11-307412 | Nov 1999 | JP |
2002-288403 | Oct 2002 | JP |
2003-044538 | Feb 2003 | JP |
2005-122703 | May 2005 | JP |
2006-190261 | Jul 2006 | JP |
2008-059563 | Mar 2008 | JP |
2008-134705 | Jun 2008 | JP |
2008-524671 | Jul 2008 | JP |
2010-244157 | Oct 2010 | JP |
2011-517352 | Jun 2011 | JP |
2016-520890 | Jul 2016 | JP |
0182068 | Nov 2001 | WO |
0182072 | Nov 2001 | WO |
2005086906 | Sep 2005 | WO |
2007002647 | Jan 2007 | WO |
WO 2010065623 | Jun 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application No. PCT/US2017/064227 dated Jun. 4, 2019. |
Japanese Office Action for Japanese Application. No. 2019-525760, dated Aug. 28, 2020. |
Álvarez-García et al., Compact and efficient representation of general graph databases. Knowledge and Information Systems. arXiv:1812.10977v1. Dec. 2018; 35 pages. |
Álvarez et al., A compact representation of graph databases. Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Mining and Learning with Graphs Jul. 24, 2010; 18-25. |
Nelson, A cosmology for a different computer universe: Data model, mechanisms, virtual machine and visualization infrastructure. Journal of Digital Information. Jul. 2004;5(l):22. |
Zamboulis et al., XML data integration by graph restructuring. British National Conference on Databases Jul. 7, 2004; 16 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/143,362, filed Jun. 20, 2008, Wald et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/629,466, filed Dec. 2, 2009, Bator et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/629,483, filed Dec. 2, 2009, Bator et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/726,837, filed Dec. 26, 2012, Nielsen et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/835,199, filed Mar. 15, 2013, Ikai et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/208,016, filed Mar. 13, 2014, Yost et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/694,192, filed Sep. 1, 2017, Bator et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/829,152, filed Dec. 1, 2017, Clemens et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/874,800, filed Jan. 18, 2018, Bator et al. |
AU 2009-322437, Mar. 17, 2016, Office Action. |
AU 2009-322441, Dec. 16, 2015, Office Action. |
CA 2744240, Jan. 18, 2016, Office Action. |
CA 2744463, Jan. 28, 2016, Office Action. |
CN 200980148414.6, May 10, 2013, Office Action. |
CN 200980148426.9, Jun. 15, 2016, Office Action. |
EP 09767701.1, Sep. 25, 2012, Supplementary European Search Report. |
EP 09831039.4, May 15, 2012, Supplementary European Search Report. |
EP 09831042.8, May 4, 2012, Supplementary European Search Report. |
EP 14768183.7, Oct. 13, 2016, Supplementary European Search Report. |
JP 2011-514796, Jun. 20, 2013, Office Action. |
JP 2011-539651, Oct. 11, 2013, Office Action. |
JP 2011-539652, Dec. 16, 2013, Office Action. |
JP 2011-539652, Nov. 14, 2014, Office Action. |
JP 2014-232962, Nov. 13, 2015, Office Action. |
KR 10-2011-7013820, Oct. 21, 2015, Office Action. |
KR 10-2011-7014656, Oct. 21, 2015, Office Action. |
KR 10-2015-7007990, Jan. 18, 2016, Office Action. |
PCT/US2009/047735, Jul. 23, 2009, International Search Report and Written Opinion. |
PCT/US2009/066390, Jan. 20, 2010, International Search Report and Written Opinion. |
PCT/US2009/066394, Jan. 20, 2010, International Search Report and Written Opinion. |
PCT/US2013/062369, Feb. 28, 2014, International Search Report and Written Opinion. |
PCT/US2013/062369, Apr. 9, 2015, International Preliminary Report on Patentability. |
PCT/US2013/076407, Jun. 18, 2014, International Search Report and Written Opinion. |
PCT/US2014/026133, Aug. 21, 2014, International Search Report and Written Opinion. |
Australian Office Action for Australian Application No. 2009-322437 dated Mar. 17, 2016. |
Australian Office Action for Australian Application No. 2009-322441 dated Dec. 16, 2015. |
Canadian Office Action for Canadian Application No. 2744240 dated Jan. 18, 2016. |
Canadian Office Action for Canadian Application No. 2744463 dated Jan. 28, 2016. |
Chinese Office Action for Chinese Application No. 200980148414.6 dated May 10, 2013. |
Chinese Office Action for Chinese Application No. 200980148426.9 dated Jun. 15, 2016. |
Supplementary European Search Report for European Application No. 09767701.7 dated Sep. 25, 2012. |
Supplementary European Search Report for European Application No. 09831039.4 dated May 15, 2012. |
Supplementary European Search Report For European Application No. 09831042.8 dated May 4, 2012. |
Supplementary European Search Report for European Application No. 14768183.7 dated Oct. 13, 2016. |
Japanese Office Action Application No. 2011-514796, dated Jun. 20, 2013, 9 pages. |
Japanese Office Action for Japanese Application No. 2011-539651 dated Oct. 11, 2013. |
Japanese Office Action for Japanese Application No. 2011-539652 dated Dec. 16, 2013. |
Japanese Office Action for Japanese Application No. 2011-539652 dated Nov. 14, 2014. |
Japanese Office Action for Japanese Application No. 2014-232962 dated Nov. 13, 2015. |
Korean Office Action for Korean Application No. 10-2011-7013820 dated Oct. 21, 2015. |
Korean Office Action for Korean Application No. 10-2011-7014656 dated Oct. 21, 2015. |
Korean Office Action for Korean Application No. 10-2015-7007990 dated Dec. 17, 2015. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2009/047735 dated July 23, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2009/066390 dated Jan. 20, 2010. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2009/066394 dated Jan. 20, 2010. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2013/062369 dated Feb. 28, 2014. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application No. PCT/US2013/062369 dated Apr. 9, 2015. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2013/076407 dated Jun. 18, 2014. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2014/026133 dated Aug. 21, 2014. |
DePauw., et al., “Web Services Navigator: Visualizing the Execution of Web Services.” IBM Systems Journal, vol. 44, No. 4, 2005, pp. 821-845. |
Holm, “A Cosmology for a Different Computer Universe: Data Model, Mechanisms, Virtual Machine and Visualization Infrastructure,” Journal of Digital Information, vol. 5, No. 1, 22 pages (2004). |
Karr et al., “Data quality: A Statistical Perspective,” Statistical Methodology 3 (2006), pp. 137-173. |
Kenji, “An Analysis of Requirements Elicitation Process,” IEICE Technical Report, Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers, vol. 92, No. 128, 47:54 (1992). |
Parker et al., “Visualization of Large Nested Graphs in 3D: Navigation and Interaction, University of New Brunswick, Jul. 18, 2000;” http://com.unh.edu/vislab/PDFs/visualnav.pdf. |
Robertson et al., “Polyarchy Visualization: Visualizing Multiple Intersecting Hierarchies,” Coml2uter Human Interaction—CHI, pp. 423-430, 2002. |
Robertson. “From Hierarchies to Polyarchies: Visualizing Multiple Relationships,” Advanced Visual Interfaces 2000. |
Todd et al., Scientific Lineage and Object-Based Storage Systems. 2009 5th IEEE International Conference on E-Science Workshops Year: 2009, pp. 52-58, DOI: 10.1109/ESCIW.2009.5408005. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190258662 A1 | Aug 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61119201 | Dec 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15874800 | Jan 2018 | US |
Child | 16255607 | US | |
Parent | 12629466 | Dec 2009 | US |
Child | 15874800 | US |