System and method for discovering similar time sequences in databases

Abstract: A system and method for discovering similar time sequences in a database of time sequences includes a computer-implemented program which first breaks each sequence into small windows. The windows from the first sequence are compared to selected windows from the second sequence to determine which windows are similar. Pairs of similar windows are then stitched together when certain stitching constraints are met to establish pairs of similar subsequences. Likewise, pairs of similar subsequences are stitched together, and the lengths of the stitched subsequences are then compared to the overall length of the time sequences to determine whether the time sequences meet a similarity criteria.

Description: 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates generally to data processing, and more particularly to "computer database mining" in which similar time sequences are discovered. In particular, the invention concerns discovering, in a large database, similarities in the patterns between time sequences of data. 2. Description of the Related Art Sequences of events over time, hereinafter "time sequences", can be and often are electronically recorded in databases. As recognized by the present invention, the capability to identify time sequences that are similar to each other has many applications, including, e.g., identifying companies with similar patterns of earnings and sales growth. As another example, it would be advantageous to identify similar time sequences in product sales patterns, and to discover stocks that have similar price movements over time. Indeed, discovering similar and/or dissimilar time sequences in seismic waves has many useful applications, such as identifying geological irregularities. U.S Patent Application No. 08/398,640, filed March 3, 1995 for "System and method for mining sequential patterns in a large database", also filed in Europe with application number 96301405.5, is related to the problem of computer data base mining. Mining systems to discover similar time sequences have been disclosed in Agrawal et al., "Database Mining: A Performance Perspective", Proc. of the Fourth Int'1 Conf. on Foundations of Data Organization and Algorithms, Chicago, 1993, and in Faloutsos et al., Fast Sub-sequence Matching in Time-series Databases", Proc. of the ACM Sigmod Conf. on Management of Data, May, 1994. The systems and methods disclosed in the above-mentioned publications, however, share several drawbacks which limit their practical application. Among the drawbacks are that the methods are inherently overly sensitive to a few data anomalies. Further, the methods referred to above do not address the problems of amplitude scaling and translation of sequences. Consequently, they are effectively unable to identify, e.g., similarities in the price sequences of two stocks if one stock fluctuates around $10 and the other stock fluctuates around $75. Still further, the methods referred to above are unable to effectively ignore small non-matching regions of two otherwise similar time sequences. Consequently, the methods can fail to identify certain actually similar time sequences as being similar. In addition, prior methods for data processing in time sequence similarity discovery models suffer several drawbacks. Among the disadvantages of prior data processing regimes, which are used to index the time sequences incident to matching similar time sequences, are that many false matches tend to be identified. Also, the previous methods tend to be computationally intensive, and the methods inherently make it difficult for the user to vary the criteria that are used to define the conditions for time sequence similarity. It is an object of the present invention to provide a technique which alleviates the above drawbacks. According to the present invention we provide in a database (20) having a plurality of data elements (DE), each data element being characterized by at least a time and a magnitude, the data elements being organised in a plurality of time sequences each time sequence representing a sequence of events over time, a method for identifying similarities between a first time sequence (S) stored in the database (20) and a second time sequence (T) stored in the database (20) to thereby identify recurring patterns in the database, the method comprising the steps of: identifying at least first and third time subsequence windows (WS), each having a plurality of data elements, each of the first and third windows being a subset of the first time sequence, to be respectively similar to at least second and fourth time subsequence windows (WT), each having a plurality of data elements and each being a subset of the second time sequence, when the difference between a magnitude of a data element of the first window and a magnitude of a data element of the second window is no more than a predetermined value and the difference between a magnitude of a data element of the third window and a magnitude of a data element of the fourth window is no more than the predetermined value; and when the first and third windows and second and fourth windows are separated by respective time gaps (G), and each gap is less than a predetermined value, considering the first and third windows as joined to establish a first subsequence representative of the first time sequence and considering the second and fourth windows as joined to establish a second subsequence representative of the second time sequence for identifying recurring patterns in the database. Further, according to the present invention we provide a program storage device readable by a digital processing apparatus and tangibly embodying a program of instructions executable by the digital processing apparatus to perform in a database having a plurality of data elements, each data element being characterized by at least a time and a magnitude, the data elements being organised in a plurality of time sequences each time sequence representing a sequence of events over time, method steps for identifying first and second time sequences stored in a database as being similar, the method steps comprising: identifying first and third time subsequence windows, each having a plurality of data elements, each of the first and third windows being a subset of the first time sequence, to be respectively similar to second and fourth time subsequence windows, each having a plurality of data elements and each being a subset of the second time sequence, when the difference between a magnitude of a data element of the first window and a magnitude of a data element of the second window is no more than a predetermined value and the difference between a magnitude of a data element of the third window and a magnitude of a data element of the fourth window is no more than the predetermined value; and when the first and third windows and second and fourth windows are separated by respective time gaps, and each gap is less than a predetermined value, considering the first and third windows as joined to establish a first subsequence representative of the first time sequence and considering the second and fourth windows as joined to establish a second subsequence representative of the second time sequence for identifying whether the first and second time sequences are similar. It is to be understood that while for illustration purposes the above disclosure discusses the matching and stitching of only two windows per sequence, the present invention contemplates matching and stitching "n" windows per sequence, wherein n≥2. The details of the present invention, both as to its structure and operation, can best be understood in reference to the accompanying drawings, in which like reference numerals refer to like parts, and in which: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Figure 1 is a functional block diagram of the system for discovering similar time sequences of the present invention; Figure 2 illustrates a machine component embodying the invention, with portions cut away for illustration; Figure 3 is a flow chart showing the overall operation of the present invention; Figure 4 is a graph showing two example time sequences between which it is desired to determine similarities; Figure 5 is a flow chart showing the steps for identifying similar windows in two sequences, using the data tree shown in Figure 6; Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of the R+ data tree of the present invention; Figure 7 is a flow chart showing the steps for stitching windows together to form two similar subsequences; Figure 8 is a schematic diagram showing an example of the stitching process shown in Figure 7; and Figure 9 is a flow chart showing the steps for stitching subsequences together. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Referring initially to Figure 1, a computer system for mining databases for similar time sequences is shown, generally designated 10. In the particular architecture shown, the system 10 includes one or more digital processing apparatus, such as a client computer 12 and a server computer 14. In one intended embodiment, the server computer 14 may be a mainframe computer made by IBM Corp. of Armonk, N.Y., and use an operating system sold under trademarks such as MVS. Or, the server computer 14 may be a Unix computer, or OS/2 server, or Windows NT server, or IBM RS/6000 250 workstation with 128 MB of main memory running AIX 3.2.5. The server computer 14 may own a database system, such as DB2 or ORACLE, or it may have data on files on some data storage medium such as disk, e.g., a 2 GB SCSI 3.5" drive, or tape. It is to be understood that architectures other than the one shown may be used. For example, the functions of the client computer 12 may be incorporated into the server computer 14, and vice versa. As shown, the operating system of the server computer 14 includes a similar time sequence identifier kernel 16 which may be executed by a processor within the server computer 14 as a series of computer-executable instructions. These instructions may reside, for example, in RAM of the computer 14. Alternatively, the instructions may be contained on a data storage device with a computer readable medium, such as a computer diskette 15 shown in Figure 2. Or, the instructions may be stored on a DASD array, magnetic tape, conventional hard disk drive, electronic read-only memory, optical storage device, or other appropriate data storage device. In an illustrative embodiment of the invention, the computer-executable instructions may be lines of compiled C++ language code. Figures 3, 5, 7, and 9 illustrate the structure of such instructions as embodied in a computer program. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that Figures 3, 5, 7, and 9 illustrate the structures of computer program code elements that function according to this invention. Manifestly, the invention is practiced in its essential embodiment by a machine component that renders the computer program code elements in a form that instructs a digital processing apparatus (that is, a computer) to perform a sequence of function steps corresponding to those shown in the Figures. The machine component is shown in Figure 2 as a combination of program code elements A-E in computer readable form that are embodied in a computer-usable data medium 17, on the computer diskette 15. As mentioned above, however, such media can also be found in semiconductor devices, on magnetic tape, and on optical disks. Each of the code elements A-E is for directing a digital processing apparatus to facilitate some portion of the method by which this invention is practiced. Even when no single code element A-E includes the complete method, two or more of the code elements together may comprise all of the program means necessary to facilitate the practice of the invention. Figure 1 shows that, through appropriate data access programs and utilities 18, the identifier kernel 16 accesses one or more databases 20 and/or flat files (i.e., text files) 22 which contain data chronicling time sequences. After executing the steps described below, the discovery kernel outputs similar time sequences it discovers to a results repository 24, which can be accessed by the client computer 12. Additionally, Figure 1 shows that the client computer 12 can include an identifier kernel interface 26 which, like the identifier kernel 16, may be implemented in suitable computer code. Among other things, the interface 26 functions as an input mechanism for establishing certain variables, including the maximum distance ε between windows and the other predetermined/user-defined input parameters disclosed below. Further, the client computer 12 preferably includes an output module 28 for outputting/displaying the results on a graphic display 30, print mechanism 32, or data storage medium 34. Figure 3 shows the overall method of the present invention in determining similarities between a first time sequence S that is stored in the database 20 and a second time sequence T that is likewise stored in the database 20. Figure 4 schematically shows two such time sequences, which, in the embodiment shown, are time graphs of the sales price of two stocks. It is to be understood that the sequences S and T can represent time sequences of other parameters, e.g., seismic activity, company sales growth, and indeed virtually any time-dependent patterns. It is to be further understood that the present invention is able to identify similarities between the two time sequences S and T, despite the presence, if any, of gaps (labelled G in Figure 4). Essentially, a "gap" G is a subsequence in S that is dissimilar (as "dissimilar" is defined below using user-defined criteria) from the corresponding subsequence in T. Moreover, the system 10 can identify similarities between the sequences S, T despite the fact that the similarities may not be co-existent in time. Even further, the system 10 can identify similarities between the sequences S, T despite the fact that the two sequences S, T may have significantly different average magnitudes (i.e., S may denote a stock trading around $50 while T can denote a stock trading around $10). Beginning with block 36 in Figure 3, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 finds all windows in S that match corresponding windows in T, as disclosed in detail below. Thus, block 36 is essentially a match determiner for generating first and second sets of windows which respectively represent the first and second sequences S and T. Further, the match determiner established by block 36 matches a window in the first sequence S with a window in the second sequence T upon the occurrence of user-defined match criteria described below. In accordance with the present invention and as schematically shown in Figure 4, a "window" of the first sequence S (labelled WS) is essentially an atomic subsequence which, when matched with a corresponding window WT of the second sequence T, is devoid of gaps. As intended by the present invention, each window WS, WT consists of a user-defined number of data elements DE that are sequentially ordered in time, wherein ω ≤ 3 and preferably wherein 5 ≤ ω ≤ 20. In the example shown in Figure 4,ω = 3. Each data element DE accordingly is characterized by at least a time and a magnitude, and, in the example shown in Figure 4, the magnitude of each data element DE represents a sell price of the corresponding stock, while the time of each data element DE corresponds to a day. Next, at block 38, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 joins (or, as termed herein, "stitches") two or more pair of matching windows upon the occurrence of the user-defined stitching criteria disclosed below to generate a pair of subsequences. Thus, block 38 establishes a window stitcher for joining at least two windows in the first sequence S and for joining their corresponding windows in the second sequence T, when predetermined stitching criteria are met. While parts of the discussion herein focus on matching and stitching two windows per time sequence S, T, the present invention contemplates that an arbitrary number "n" windows per sequence S will be matched with "n" corresponding windows in the sequence T, wherein n≥2. Then, at block 40, two or more pair of subsequences are stitched such that the longest match length is determined for the time sequences S, T. Based upon the ratio of the match length to the total length of at least one of the sequences S, T, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 determines whether the first time sequence S is similar to the second time sequence T. Accordingly, block 40 establishes a similarity identifier for identifying whether one or more subsequences in the first time sequence S are similar to corresponding subsequences in the second time sequence T, and then identify whether the sequences S, T are similar in accordance with user-defined similarity criteria. Now referring to Figure 5, the method of identifying pairs of similar windows in the sequences S, T is shown. One approach to identify pairs of similar windows would be to simply compare a window with all other windows, but as recognized by the present invention, such an approach would consume relatively long computational time. Figure 5 shows the preferred approach of the present invention in identifying pairs of similar windows which does not require relatively long computational time. At block 41, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 normalizes each window by normalizing the magnitude of each data point in the window to be a value between -1 and 1, inclusive. To normalize a window, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 undertakes the following transformation for each data point of the window: W [i] = (W[i] - (W min + W max )/2)/(W max - W min )/2, wherein W[i] = magnitude of the data point being transformed, W [i] = magnitude of the normalized data point, and W min and W max are the minimum and maximum magnitudes, respectively, in the window. As more fully disclosed below, under the principles of the present invention two windows W and 1 [i] and W and 2 [i] are similar if and only if ∀i, W and 1 [i] - W and 2 [i]≤ε, wherein ε is a user-defined predetermined value. Recall that the number of data points contained in each window is a user-defined predetermined integer number represented herein by the Greek letter ω. With this in mind, at block 42 of Figure 5, each normalized window is considered as a single point in ω-dimensional space, with the coordinates of the window being defined by its normalized data elements, and the window is inserted into a hierarchical data tree structure. An example of such a structure for ω = 2 is shown in Figure 6. It is to be understood that the data tree structure shown in Figure 6 is accessible to one or both of the computers 12, 14 shown in Figure 1, in accordance with principles discussed above. In the presently preferred embodiment, the data tree structure is a so-called R + -Tree structure disclosed in Sellis et al., "The R + -Tree: A Dynamic Index for Multidimensional Objects", Proc. 13 th Int'l Conf. on VLDB , pp. 507-518, England, 1987, with the modification disclosed herein. As disclosed in Sellis et al., an R + -Tree is a data structure which grows new data nodes as data is inserted into the structure. Depending on the data values, as the structure grows it can split and/or reconfigure nodes to support the inserted data. As shown in reference to Figure 6 and disclosed in Sellis et al., an R + -Tree is a hierarchical data tree structure. More specifically, using Figure 6 as an example, an R + -Tree includes a plurality of leaf nodes (first and second leaf nodes 43, 44 shown) which depend from a parent node 46. Likewise, additional leaf nodes 48, 50 depend from a parent node 52, and both parent nodes 46, 52 depend from a root node 54. It is to be understood that while only four leaf nodes 43, 44, 48, 50 and three hierarchical levels are shown in Figure 6, the data tree of the present invention can include a greater number of leaf nodes and levels. Taking the first leaf node 43 as an example, a plurality of data points DP are entered into the first leaf node 43. Each data point DP represents a window, and the data points DP of a particular leaf node, e.g., the first leaf node 43, are relatively close together. Thus, for example, the first leaf node 43 contains a first data point DP 1 , schematically represented as a rectangle to indicate that its high value is -.9 and its low value is -1. In the example shown, the first leaf node 43 also contains a last data point DP L , schematically represented as a rectangle to indicate that its high value is -.8 and its low value is -.9. In accordance with principles of R-Tree data structures, the data points DP are grouped in their respective leaf nodes, such that the data points DP that are between the first and last data points DP 1 and DP L in the first leaf node 43 range in value from the highest value (-.8) of the last data point DP L to the lowest value (-1) of the first data point DP 1 . Accordingly, the first window 43 includes a marker M1 that indicates the highest and lowest data point values contained in the window 43. Likewise, the second window 44 includes a marker M2 that indicates the highest and lowest data point values contained in the window 44, which in the example shown are -.2 and -.8, respectively. As the skilled artisan accordingly will recognize, the leaf nodes of the R-Tree do not overlap, in that the values of the data points of one leaf node do not overlap any values of any data points in other leaf nodes. Indeed, the boundaries of the leaf nodes need not touch, but instead are constrained to the minimum necessary to encompass the data points contained in the node. Also, to indicate the range of data points in its path, as shown in Figure 6 the parent node 46 contains a marker indicating the highest and lowest values contained in the leaf nodes that depend from the parent node 46, in this case, -.2 and -1. In light of the above disclosure, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the R + -Tree of the present invention does not store so-called "dead space", i.e., potentially large regions between actual data points. Moreover, the R + -Tree is comparatively resilient to higher dimensionalities (recall that can range up to and indeed exceed 20). As recognized by the present invention, however, one problem with the data structure disclosed in Sellis et al. is that uneven distribution of data points can occur in the nodes of the structure, resulting in under-filled internal and leaf nodes and undesirably fast growth of the tree. The present invention addresses this problem by releasing a node from the tree when a downward split in the tree during growth results in an underfilled leaf node. For purposes of the present invention, a leaf node is underfilled if it is filled to 40% or less. The data points of the released node are reinserted in the tree at the node that had been the immediate parent of the released node. Likewise, when a data point is inserted that will cause adjacent nodes to overlap, the data point is stored and reinserted in the tree at a time at which succeeding node splitting and tree restructuring allow for the point to be inserted smoothly into an existing node. After all windows have been inserted into the data tree shown in Figure 6, similar windows are identified by ascertaining, for a given window or windows, which other data points (representing other windows) are within a distance ε of it. Referring back to Figure 5, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 accomplishes this by moving to block 56, wherein one of the nodes of the data tree is selected, and then moving to decision block 58, wherein the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 determines whether the node under test is a non-leaf node. If it is, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 moves to block 60, wherein the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 recursively calls the process shown in Figure 5 for the descendants of the node under test until a leaf node is reached. On the other hand, if the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 determines at decision block 58 that the node under test is a leaf node, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds in parallel to block 62, wherein the node is joined with itself, and to block 64, wherein the node is joined to any other nodes that are within a distance ε of the node under test. In Figure 6, a portion of the second leaf node 44 is within the distance ε of the first leaf node 43, and so is joined with the first leaf node 43 at block 64. From blocks 62 and 64, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to block 66, wherein the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 outputs all data points (i.e., windows) that are within the distance ε of each other and, hence, which satisfy the user-defined condition of similarity. From block 66, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to block 68 to retrieve the next node for test, and thence to block 56. To ensure that two leaf nodes are not needlessly joined more than once, an ancestor list is used in the recursive call an order is imposed on the descendants of each node. At block 64, the only nodes tested for joining with the node under test are nodes that come later in the order than the node under test. To yet further reduce computation, the only data points in a node that is to be joined with the node under test which are considered at block 64 are those data points that lie within a distance ε of the boundary of the node to be joined. Still further, the data points in a given node are themselves ordered by one or more of their selected dimensions; hence, once a first data point in a self-joined node at block 62 has been compared with a second data point in the node, and the second data point has been found to be beyond the distance ε from the first data point, the first data point is not tested against data points that succeed the second data point in the order and hence are by definition further than the distance ε away from the first data point. Turning now to Figures 7 and 8, the method by which the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 stitches together pairs of similar windows can be appreciated. Starting at block 70 of Figure 7, a match graph of pairs of similar windows in the time sequences S, T is constructed. A simplified graphic example of such a graph is shown in Figure 8. In Figure 8, each window is represented by a straight line in one of two rows, and the upper row represents windows S i in the sequence S while the lower row represents corresponding matched windows T i in the sequence T. The dotted lines indicate a matched pair, i.e., the dotted lines indicate a pair of windows that are similar. In the example shown, five matches A-E between four sets of windows exist. Next, at block 72 in Figure 7, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 represents each match as a corresponding vertex M i ...M j ,... and then attempts to establish a stitching arc between two pairs of windows M i , M j under test. To determine whether to establish a stitching arc, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to decision block 74, wherein the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 determines whether the times of the earliest data points in both windows S j , T j , represented by M j , are respectively later than the times of the earliest data points in both windows S i , T i , represented by M i . If the test at decision block 74 is negative, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 moves to block 76 to conduct the next test. In contrast, if the test at decision block 74 is positive, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 moves to decision block 78, wherein the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 determines whether either one of the windows S i , T i overlaps its corresponding window S j , T j . If it is determined at decision block 78 that Si does not overlap S j and that T i does not overlap T j , the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 moves to decision block 80, wherein it is determined whether the gap between the windows S i and S j and the gap between the windows T i and T j are less than a user-defined value . On the other hand, if it is determined at decision block 78 that S i overlaps S j and that T i overlaps T j , the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 moves to decision block 82, wherein it is determined whether the distance over which S i overlaps Sj equals the distance over which T i overlaps T j . If either test at decision block 80 or 82 is negative, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 returns to block 76. If either test at decision block 80 or 82 is positive, however, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to block 84, wherein an arc is established between the vertices M i and M j under test to establish a path between the vertices. Appreciation of the above-described process can be had in reference to Figure 8. For an assumed value of γ, arc A-D meets the criteria of decision blocks 74, 78, and 80 of Figure 7, and hence is established as drawn. Likewise, arcs A-C and C-E meet the criteria of decision blocks 74, 78, and 80 of Figure 7, while arc E-F meets the criteria of decision blocks 74, 78, and 82. On the other hand, no arc B-D exists because the constraint of decision block 74 is not met; no arc A-E exists because the constraint of decision block 80 is not met; and no arc B-F exists because the constraint of decision block 82 is not met. From block 84 in Figure 7, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to block 86, wherein the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 stitches together vertices in the longest path found at block 84 to thereby establish a pair of first and second subsequences, each of which consists of the stitched windows from the associated sequence S, T. In finding the longest path in a match graph, e.g, the graph shown in Figure 8 (the longest path of which is path A-C-E-F), the match graph is traversed in reverse topological sort order using, for example, the procedures set forth in Carre, Graphs and networks , Claredon Press, Oxford, 1978. Preferably, the normalization scale is the same or approximately the same for all windows in a subsequence. During stitching, the scales for the windows corresponding to the arc being established can be compared to the scale used for the arc windows that have already been stitched, to ensure this occurs. After stitching matching pairs of windows to establish subsequences, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to Figure 9 to stitch subsequences together and determine whether the first time sequence S is similar to the second time sequence T. While Figure 9 shows a set of executable steps that are separate from the steps shown in Figure 7, it is to be understood that the processes can be combined. Commencing at block 88 of Figure 9, a match graph is constructed of the subsequences found in Figure 7, in accordance with principles disclosed above. Then, each subsequence is represented as a respective vertex M i , M j ,... at block 90, again using principles disclosed above. From block 90, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to decision block 92, wherein the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 determines whether the times of the earliest data points in both subsequences S j , T j , represented by M j , are respectively later than the times of the latest data points in both subsequences S i , T i , represented by M i . In other words, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 determines whether the subsequences under test overlap. If the subsequences under test overlap, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 moves to block 94 to conduct the next test. Hence, in contrast to window stitching, no overlap is allowed in subsequence stitching. If the subsequences under test do not overlap, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 moves to decision block 96 wherein it is determined whether the gap between the subsequences S i and S j and the gap between the subsequences T i and T j are less than a user-defined value γ. If so, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to block 98, wherein an arc is established between the vertices M i and M j under test and, after all arcs have been established, the longest path in the match graph is determined using principles described previously. If the test condition at decision block 96 is not met, however, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 returns to block 94. Once the longest matching subsequences (designated herein SS i , TT i ) have been identified at block 98, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 moves to block 100. At block 100, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 determines whether the longest matching subsequences SS i , TT i bear a predetermined relationship to at least one of the first or second time sequences S, T. In the presently preferred embodiment, at block 100 the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 sums the lengths of all subsequences SS i and the lengths of all subsequences TT i , and divides the sum by the sum of the lengths of the two time sequences S, T. When the quotient so obtained is at least equal to a user-defined predetermined threshold value ξ, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 proceeds to output block 102, to output the sequences S, T as having met the user-defined criteria for similarity. Otherwise, the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 returns to block 94. Alternatively, if S and T have widely varying lengths, at block 100 the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 can use twice the length of the shorter sequence of S, T as the divisor. Stated differently, at block 100 the identifier kernel 16 of the system 10 identifies the time sequence S as being similar to the time sequence T when the stitched subsequences bear a predetermined relationship to at least one of the time sequences S, T.

Claims: In a database (20) having a plurality of data elements (DE), each data element being characterized by at least a time and a magnitude, the data elements being organised in a plurality of time sequences each time sequence representing a sequence of events over time, a method for identifying similarities between a first time sequence (S) stored in the database (20) and a second time sequence (T) stored in the database (20) to thereby identify recurring patterns in the database, the method comprising the steps of: identifying at least first and third time subsequence windows (WS), each having a plurality of data elements, each of the first and third windows being a subset of the first time sequence, to be respectively similar to at least second and fourth time subsequence windows (WT), each having a plurality of data elements and each being a subset of the second time sequence, when the difference between a magnitude of a data element of the first window and a magnitude of a data element of the second window is no more than a predetermined value and the difference between a magnitude of a data element of the third window and a magnitude of a data element of the fourth window is no more than the predetermined value; and when the first and third windows and second and fourth windows are separated by respective time gaps (G), and each gap is less than a predetermined value, considering the first and third windows as joined to establish a first subsequence representative of the first time sequence and considering the second and fourth windows as joined to establish a second subsequence representative of the second time sequence for identifying recurring patterns in the database. The method of Claim 1, further comprising the step of establishing the first and second subsequences when the first and third windows overlap each other in time by a first overlap distance and the second and fourth windows overlap each other by the first overlap distance. The method of Claim 2, wherein the first and second subsequences are established only when the times of the earliest data elements in the third and fourth windows are later than the times of the earliest data elements in the first and second windows, respectively. The method of Claim 2 or 3, further comprising the steps of: establishing third and fourth subsequences respectively representative of the first and second time sequences, wherein the times of each data element in the third and fourth subsequences is later than the times of each data element in the first and second subsequences, respectively, such that the first and third subsequences are separated by a gap and the second and fourth subsequences are separated by a gap; and considering the first and third subsequences and second and fourth subsequences as joined when the gaps do not exceed a predetermined value. The method of Claim 4, wherein each subsequence and the first and second time sequences are characterized by respective lengths, the method further comprising the steps of: comparing the sum of the lengths of the subsequences to at least one of the lengths of the time sequences to generate a comparison value; and identifying the first and second time sequences as being similar when the comparison value is equal to or greater than a predetermined value. The method of any preceding Claim, further comprising the step of normalizing the data elements in at least the first and third windows, prior to the identifying step. The method of Claim 5, wherein each window contains ω data elements, and each window is represented as a data point in a hierarchical data tree having ω dimensions. A program storage device readable by a digital processing apparatus and tangibly embodying a program of instructions executable by the digital processing apparatus to perform in a database having a plurality of data elements, each data element being characterized by at least a time and a magnitude, the data elements being organised in a plurality of time sequences each time sequence representing a sequence of events over time, method steps for identifying first and second time sequences stored in a database as being similar, the method steps comprising: identifying first and third time subsequence windows, each having a plurality of data elements, each of the first and third windows being a subset of the first time sequence, to be respectively similar to second and fourth time subsequence windows, each having a plurality of data elements and each being a subset of the second time sequence, when the difference between a magnitude of a data element of the first window and a magnitude of a data element of the second window is no more than a predetermined value and the difference between a magnitude of a data element of the third window and a magnitude of a data element of the fourth window is no more than the predetermined value; and when the first and third windows and second and fourth windows are separated by respective time gaps, and each gap is less than a predetermined value, considering the first and third windows as joined to establish a first subsequence representative of the first time sequence and considering the second and fourth windows as joined to establish a second subsequence representative of the second time sequence for identifying whether the first and second time sequences are similar. The program storage device of Claim 8, wherein the method steps further comprise the step of establishing the first and second subsequences when the first and third windows overlap each other in time by a first overlap distance and the second and fourth windows overlap each other by the first overlap distance. The program storage device of Claim 9, wherein each subsequence and the first and second time sequences are characterized by respective lengths, and the method steps further comprise the steps of: establishing third and fourth subsequences respectively representative of the first and second time sequences, wherein the times of each data element in the third and fourth subsequences is later than the times of each data element in the first and second subsequences, respectively, such that the first and third subsequences are separated by a gap and the second and fourth subsequences are separated by a gap; considering the first and third subsequences and second and fourth subsequences as joined when the gaps do not exceed a predetermined value; comparing the sum of the lengths of the subsequences to at least one of the lengths of the time sequences to generate a comparison value; and identifying the first and second time sequences as being similar when the comparison value at least equals a predetermined value. The program storage device of Claim 8, 9 or 10, wherein the method steps further comprise the step of representing each window having ω data elements as a data point in a hierarchical data tree having ω dimensions.

Inventors: AGRAWAL RAKESH, LIN KING-IP, SAWHNEY HARPREET SINGH, SHIM KYUSEOK, AGRAWAL, RAKESH, LIN, KING-IP, SAWHNEY, HARPREET SINGH, SHIM, KYUSEOK
Applicants: IBM, INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES
Application year: 1996
Main classification: G06F9
IPC codes: G06F17, G06F12