Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Wolfram Wöß

Publications and source records attributed to Wolfram Wöß.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Data Quality Rule Generation with LLMs

The validation of data, such as customer and employee data, is an important task in many organizations. Errors in data can have severe consequences. For example, a wrong drug unit in a patient record can lead to life-threatening medication errors, and a missing street number in an address to failed deliveries. Companies often employ rule-based enterprise data quality (DQ) tools, which allow domain experts to specify rules to validate the data over time. While rule-based DQ tools are computationally efficient and provide explainable reports, maintaining a comprehensive rule set manually is challenging, as domain experts often overlook essential rules, especially in complex domains and large data volumes. Hence, closing these gaps remains an open problem in practice. In this paper, we address the challenge of automated DQ rule generation. For this, we formalize a generalizable generate-filter framework and introduce LeDQeR, an LLM-based DQ rule generation approach. First, a large language model (LLM) generates candidates rules from an observed dirty data tuple for a given rule-based DQ tool syntax. Second, we apply four filter techniques that ensure the (i) executability, (ii) correctness, and (iii) generalizability, and avoid (iv) redundancy of the generated rules. An extensive experimental evaluation suggests that LeDQeR is able to produce effective and compact rule sets for various datasets and error types.

cs.LG↗

Evaluating Data Quality Tools: Measurement Capabilities and LLM Integration

High data quality is critical for reliable analytics and operational efficiency. A growing ecosystem of tools has emerged to support data quality management, ranging from lightweight open-source libraries to comprehensive enterprise platforms. This paper evaluates six data quality tools: Great Expectations, Deequ, Evidently, Informatica, Experian, and Ataccama. The evaluation criteria cover rule definition, duplicate detection, metric aggregation, and uncertainty handling, and were derived from real-world use cases of company partners. We further examine to what extent these tools integrate Large Language Models (LLMs). Our findings show that proprietary tools offer more comprehensive measurement features and emerging LLM-based assistance, while open-source tools provide flexibility at the cost of higher implementation effort. Across all tools, LLM integration remains limited to rule creation workflows. Direct data validation through LLMs is not yet supported by any of the evaluated tools.

cs.DB↗

A Survey of Data Quality Measurement and Monitoring Tools

High-quality data is key to interpretable and trustworthy data analytics and the basis for meaningful data-driven decisions. In practical scenarios, data quality is typically associated with data preprocessing, profiling, and cleansing for subsequent tasks like data integration or data analytics. However, from a scientific perspective, a lot of research has been published about the measurement (i.e., the detection) of data quality issues and different generally applicable data quality dimensions and metrics have been discussed. In this work, we close the gap between research into data quality measurement and practical implementations by investigating the functional scope of current data quality tools. With a systematic search, we identified 667 software tools dedicated to "data quality", from which we evaluated 13 tools with respect to three functionality areas: (1) data profiling, (2) data quality measurement in terms of metrics, and (3) continuous data quality monitoring. We selected the evaluated tools with regard to pre-defined exclusion criteria to ensure that they are domain-independent, provide the investigated functions, and are evaluable freely or as trial. This survey aims at a comprehensive overview on state-of-the-art data quality tools and reveals potential for their functional enhancement. Additionally, the results allow a critical discussion on concepts, which are widely accepted in research, but hardly implemented in any tool observed, for example, generally applicable data quality metrics.

cs.DB↗