##  [Name Collision](/name-collision-0) 

 Definition

A situation in bibliographic or administrative data where two or more distinct persons or entities share identical or indistinguishable name strings, producing ambiguity, conflation, or misattribution in records and discovery systems.

 

 

 

 

 

 





## Principle

Principle

A name string alone is insufficient to disambiguate agents; reliable attribution requires supplemental disambiguating attributes (e.g., birth/death dates, affiliation, persistent identifiers) or authority control to map identical names to distinct identities.

 

 

 

 

 





## Demonstration

Demonstration

Illustrative scenario — Situation: Two different authors publish under “A. Garcia.” Recognition: citation counts and search results mix works by both individuals. Action: apply authority control by adding ORCID/ISNI to each author record, separate bibliographic entries, and update discovery facets. Consequence: corrected attributions, improved discoverability, and accurate metrics for each author.

 

 

 

 

## Misapplication

Misapplication

Assuming a middle initial or affiliation at a single point in time suffices for permanent disambiguation. That error ignores name changes, shared initials, and evolving affiliations that can cause future conflation.

 

 

 

 

 





## Consequence

Consequence

Name collisions cause misattribution of works, incorrect citation metrics, patron confusion, legal or reputational errors, and inefficient provenance tracking; these consequences arise because systems resolve identity on inadequate identifiers (name strings) rather than persistent identity metadata.

 

 

 

 

## Reversal

Reversal

In contexts where the shared name intentionally denotes a single legal or corporate entity (e.g., corporate authorship) or where a curatorial policy groups works under a collective name, identical name strings are a correct aggregation rather than a collision; the qualification depends on the intended entity of attribution.

 

 

 

 

 





## Boundary

Boundary

Clearly within: personal name fields in author/patron records that lack persistent identifiers or distinguishing dates. Boundary case: pseudonyms, transliterations, or culture-specific naming conventions that require specialist authority control. Clearly outside: identical titles or subject headings that are not agent names.

 

 

 

 

 





## Semantic Tension

Semantic Tension

Disambiguation ↔ Privacy — collecting richer identifiers (dates, affiliations, identifiers) improves disambiguation but may impinge on privacy or data‑protection constraints; systems must balance identification needs against legal and ethical limits.

 

 

 

 

 





## Synthesis

Synthesis

Name collision shows that strings are not identities: robust disambiguation requires persistent, managed identity metadata and governance (authority files, identifiers, provenance) rather than relying on surface name forms.