A.Olive. Integrity checking in deductive databases. Proc. VLDB'91 , pp.513-523, 1991.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....that is obtained by running T in the A system together with an i optimizer [respectively, together with a c optimizer] s.t. Insert = Insert . 6 Related works Coherent integration and proper representation of amalgamated data is extensively studied in the literature (see, e.g. [8, 12, 22, 24, 25, 31 34, 38, 41]) Common approaches for dealing with this task are based on techniques of belief revision [31] methods of resolving contradictions by quantitative considerations (such as majority vote [32] or qualitative ones (e.g. de ning priorities on di erent sources of information or preferring certain ....

A.Olive. Integrity checking in deductive databases. Proc. VLDB'91 , pp.513-523, 1991.

....that what is obtained would properly re ect the combination of the distributed data on one hand , and would still be coherent (in terms of consistency) on the other hand. Coherent integration and proper representation of amalgamated data is extensively studied in the literature (see, e.g. [1, 3, 7, 13, 14, 20 23, 26, 29]) Common approaches for dealing with this task are based on techniques of belief revision [20] methods of resolving contradictions by quantitative considerations (such as majority vote [21] or qualitative ones (e.g. de ning priorities on di erent sources of information or preferring certain ....

A.Olive. Integrity checking in deductive databases. Proc VLBD'91 , 513-523, 1991.

....analysis is followed by a pragmatic analysis where we describe the origin of these statements come, and in which kinds of processes they are involved. 1 Introduction There are many papers in the literature about integrity constraints in the context of databases or information systems (IS) [8, 9, 10, 11, 12], but the meaning of term constraint is not very well explained, and there are several different definitions. If we analyse how integrity constraints are used by information systems we can see that the term integrity constraint refers to different sorts of statements. Constraints may be ....

A. Oliv'e. Integrity checking in Deductive Databases. In 17th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases, 1991.

....x has a PhD if x has written his her PhD Thesis and has not failed the thesis examination. Integrity constraints state that is not possible to have a research certificate and not be graduated; to be a professor without having a PhD; and to be Dean not being a professor. 3. The Augmented Database [Oli91, UO92] Our approach is based on taking into account a set of rules that precisely define the difference between two consecutive database states. This set of rules, together with the original database D, form the Augmented Database [Oli91, UO92] denoted by A(D) which explicitly defines the insertions ....

....be Dean not being a professor. 3. The Augmented Database [Oli91, UO92] Our approach is based on taking into account a set of rules that precisely define the difference between two consecutive database states. This set of rules, together with the original database D, form the Augmented Database [Oli91, UO92], denoted by A(D) which explicitly defines the insertions and deletions induced by T. The concept of Augmented Database is based on the concept of event. For each predicate P, a distinguished insertion event predicate iP and a distinguished deletion event predicate dP are used to define the ....

Oliv, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17 th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....benefits and that a person may not work in two different companies. ut 3 The Augmented Database Our method is based on a set of rules that define the difference between two consecutive database states. This set of rules, together with the original database, form the Augmented Database A(D) [16, 19], which explicitly defines the insertions, deletions and modifications induced by an update. The definition of the Augmented Database is based on the concept of event . For each predicate P in a given deductive database D, an insertion event predicate P , a deletion event predicate ffiP and a ....

Oliv'e, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17th VLDB Conference. Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523. Dealing with Modification Requests : : : 209

....methods are explicitly or implicitly based on a set of rules that define the changes that occur in a transition from an old state of a database to a new one. Therefore, these rules provide the basis of a framework for classifying and specifying these problems. We propose to use the event rules [Oli91], which explicitly define the insertions and deletions induced by an update, for such a basis. We define two interpretations of the event rules: the upward interpretation and the downward one, which allow us to classify deductive database updating problems in two different types: upward problems ....

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17 th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....base states. Transition integrity constraints have the same form as static integrity constraints (see in section 2) but literals can be knowledge base predicates as well as transition and event predicates. A typical example could be a constraint stating that salaries cannot decrease. See [Oli91] for details of transition and events rules in this case. 4.2 Example The following example illustrates our approach. We give the formal definition of our method in section 4.3. Let K be a knowledge base with the following base and derived predicates: Cont (k,x) teacher k has a contract with the ....

.... The differences between our method and the Events Method are mainly due to the fact that we deal with modifications of base and view predicates as a new basic update operation.This extension has mainly been possible because we consider the procedure proposed in [TO92, Urp93] in spite of that of [Oli91] in order to automatically derive the transition and event rules for a given knowledge base. The differences between both methods can be stated in three main directions. First, the semantic of insertion and deletion update requests has changed with respect to their semantic in the Events Method. ....

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17 th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....may be violated. That is, the update, together with the current content of the deductive database, may falsify some integrity constraint. The classical approach to deal with this problem has been to develop methods for checking whether a given update violates an integrity constraint (see [Oli91, CGMD94] and the references therein) When a violation is detected, the transaction is rolled back in its entirety. That is, the update request is rejected and, in this case, the user intention cannot be satisfied. We will refer to this approach as integrity checking. In some cases, this solution may not ....

....This approach is based on incorporating also in the previous graph the information corresponding to the integrity constraints to be checked, and considering its relationship with constraints to be maintained and their corresponding repairs. Our approach is based on a set of rules (proposed in [Oli91, UO92]) that define the precise difference between two consecutive database states, by explicitly stating the exact insertions, deletions and modifications induced by the application of a transaction. We will use these rules for obtaining the graph which contains the relationships between constraints ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17 th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....interrelationships with other updating problems. This was also the case of our group s previous work on the subject. However, a distinguishing feature of the methods we proposed for tasks such as integrity checking and maintenance, view updating and view materialization, and condition monitoring [Oli91, UO92, MT93, TO95, PO95] was the common theoretical basis upon which they all were developed. This basis has facilitated their merging into an integrative framework [Oli91, UO92] and their uniform specification and combination [TU95] in terms of this framework. Furthermore, by using these results, we have been able to ....

....for tasks such as integrity checking and maintenance, view updating and view materialization, and condition monitoring [Oli91, UO92, MT93, TO95, PO95] was the common theoretical basis upon which they all were developed. This basis has facilitated their merging into an integrative framework [Oli91, UO92] and their uniform specification and combination [TU95] in terms of this framework. Furthermore, by using these results, we have been able to develop the FOLRE DDBMS prototype, aimed at providing advanced update capabilities and that is implemented on a Sun OS environment, using ECLiPSe [ECL94] ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. 17 th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), Barcelona, 1991, pp. 513-523.

.... Common Framework for Classifying and Specifying Deductive Database Updating Problems Ernest Teniente and Toni Urp Universitat Polit cnica de Catalunya e mail: teniente urpi] lsi.upc.es Abstract In this paper we propose two interpretations of the event rules [Oli91] which provide a common framework for classifying and specifying deductive database updating problems such as view updating, materialized view maintenance, integrity constraints checking, integrity constraints maintenance, repairing inconsistent databases, integrity constraints satisfiability or ....

....methods are explicitly or implicitly based on a set of rules that define the changes that occur in a transition from an old state of a database to a new one. Therefore, these rules provide the basis of a framework for classifying and specifying these problems. We propose to use the event rules [Oli91], which explicitly define the insertions and deletions induced by an update, for such a basis. In this paper we define two interpretations of the event rules: the upward interpretation and the downward one, which allow us to classify deductive database updating problems in two different types: ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", 17 th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....strong interrelationships with other updating problems. This was also the case of our group s previous work on the subject, from which several competitive methods were produced for tasks such as integrity checking and maintenance, view updating and view materialization, and condition monitoring [Oli91, UO92, MT93, TO95, PO95]. However, a distinguishing feature of our methods is the common theoretical basis upon which they all were developed, which has facilitated their merging into a integrative framework [Oli91, UO92] for dealing with update problems in deductive databases as well as for their specification and ....

.... and maintenance, view updating and view materialization, and condition monitoring [Oli91, UO92, MT93, TO95, PO95] However, a distinguishing feature of our methods is the common theoretical basis upon which they all were developed, which has facilitated their merging into a integrative framework [Oli91, UO92] for dealing with update problems in deductive databases as well as for their specification and combination [TU95] Furthermore, by using these results, we have been able to develop the FOLREDDBMS prototype, where FOLRE stands for Facing On towards Logic database Rule Enforcement . This paper is ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. 17 th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), Barcelona, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....MT95, TO92, TO95] and it could be easily adapted to be applicable to other existing methods. A different approach to enforce database consistency is integrity checking; which is concerned with developing methods for checking whether a given update violates an integrity constraint (see for example [Oli91, GCMD94]) In this case, when a violation is detected, the transaction is rejected. Both integrity constraint enforcement approaches are reasonable [Win90] The correct choice of an approach for a particular integrity constraint depends on the semantics of the integrity constraint and of the deductive ....

....also in the previous graph the information corresponding to the integrity constraints to be checked, and considering its relationship with constraints to be maintained. This paper is organised as follows. Next section reviews basic concepts of deductive databases. Section 3, which is based on [Oli91, UO92], reviews the concepts of event, transition rules and event rules. In Section 4 we propose the Precedence Graph as a tool for structuring the process of integrity enforcement. In Section 5 we propose a mechanism to execute that graph. In Section 6 we relate our approach to other relevant previous ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....of p in D, but is independent of any transaction T and of any extensional database EDB. A more formal declarative characterization of the meaning of ip and dp and a description and discussion of the implementation of these event rules by database clause definitions of ip and dp can be found in [Oli91, UO92, TO95]. For example, if works(employee, unit) is a derived predicate, iworks(john, marketing) denotes an insertion event corresponding to predicate works: works(john, marketing) is true after the application of the transaction and it was false before. On the other hand dworks(mary, sales) denotes a ....

Olivé, A.: Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases, Proc.17 th VLDB Conference, 513-523, 1991.

....updates in deductive databases [MT95, TO95] and it could be easily adapted to other existing methods. A different approach to enforce database consistency is integrity checking; which is concerned with developing methods for checking whether a given update violates an integrity constraint [Oli91, GCMD94]. In this case, when a violation is detected, the transaction is rejected. Both integrity constraint enforcement approaches are reasonable. The correct choice of an approach for a particular integrity constraint depends on the semantics of the integrity constraint and of the deductive database. ....

....also in the Precedence Graph the information corresponding to the integrity constraints to be checked, and considering its relationship with constraints to be maintained. This paper is organised as follows. Next section reviews basic concepts of deductive databases. Section 3, which is based on [Oli91, UO92], reviews the concepts of event, transition rules and event rules. In Section 4 we propose the Precedence Graph as a tool for structuring the process of integrity enforcement. In Section 5 we propose a mechanism to execute that graph. In Section 6 we relate our approach to previous work. Finally, ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....definition, the Augmented Database Generator automatically derives the corresponding augmented database. That is, it obtains a model that specifies the changes that occur in a transition from and old state of a database to a new, 8 updated state, as described in previous work of our group [Oli91, UO92, UO94]. The augmented database plays a key role in our system since all the methods that we have proposed for dealing with database updating problems are based on it. At the present stage, we have a prototype of this module implemented in QUINTUS Prolog. In our system, the designer may also specify at ....

....constraints, it must be rejected. Otherwise, it is accepted and our system proceeds with determining views to materialize and conditions to monitor. Our contributions in this area propose to use the concept of augmented database for checking whether a transaction violates some integrity constraint [Oli91, UO92, UO94]. At the present stage, we have a prototype of this module implemented in QUINTUS Prolog. Example: continuing our example, the Integrity Constraints Checking Module verifies whether T 2 and T 3 satisfy ic1 and ic4. In this case, the translation T 2 violates ic4 because, if it was applied, ....

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. 17 th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), Barcelona, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....SLDNF resolution to obtain all possible minimal ways of updating a deductive database while maintaining its consistency. In this paper we propose an abductive framework for handling consistency preserving updates in deductive databases. This framework is based on the concept of Augmented Database [Oli91], which extends a deductive database with a set of rules, called transition and event rules, that explicitly define the insertions and deletions induced by a database update. We also show how the Events Method can be formulated in terms of this abductive framework. The paper is organized as ....

....the deductive database to be allowed [Llo87] that is, any variable that occurs in a deductive or integrity rule has an occurrence in a positive condition of the rule. 3. The Augmented Database and the Events Method In section 3. 1 we review the concept of the Augmented Database, as presented in [Oli91]. This concept is needed to describe in section 3.2 the main features of the Events Method [TO92, TO95] for upating deductive databases while maintaining their consistency. 3.1 The Augmented Database [Oli91] The Events Method [TO92, TO95] is based on a set of rules that define the difference ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17 th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....approach improves the extensional one. Finally, section 5 presents our conclusions and points out further work. 2 Base Concepts In this section, we briefly review some definitions related to Deductive Databases [Llo87, Ull88] We also survey the concept of the Augmented Database, as presented in [Oli91, UO92], which is needed to describe in section 3 the main features of our approach. Finally, we shortly describe the basic concepts of Constraint Logic Programming [JMSY92, JM94, Stu91, Stu95] that we also use in section 3 for the procedural definition of our method, and we state the correspondence ....

....two consecutive database states. This set of rules together with the original database form the Augmented Database, denoted by A(D) which explicitly defines the insertions and deletions induced by a transaction which consists of a set of updates of the extensional database. We refer the reader to [Oli91, UO92] for a further description of A(D) The Augmented Database is strongly based on the concept of event. For each predicate P in the underlying language of a given deductive database D, a distinguished insertion event predicate iP and a distinguished deletion event predicate dP are used to define ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17 th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523.

....(a set of insertions and or deletions of base facts) satisfies the integrity constraints. If some constraint is violated, then the update is rejected; otherwise the update is accepted. Efficient integrity checking methods have been developed for relational [Nic82] and deductive databases (see [BMM90, Oli91] and the references therein) The problem has also been studied for full, first order logical databases [GMN84, Rei84] An alternative way to deal with integrity constraints is integrity constraints maintenance , which is a process that also starts with a given base update and the integrity ....

....The knowledge base is augmented with a set of rules, called transition and event rules, which explicitly define insertions and deletions induced by an update. These rules are then used for updating a knowledge base. The rules have also been used for developing a new integrity checking method [Oli91] and for condition monitoring in active databases [UO92, Urp93] Our method takes into account not only classical updates of base facts and view updates, but also other kinds of updates like insertions and deletions of deductive rules and integrity constraints. This paper is organized as follows. ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Olivé, A. "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases", Proc. of the 17 th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, Catalonia, 1991, pp. 513-523. - 52 -

No context found.

A. Olivé: "Integrity Checking in Deductive Databases". Proceedings of the 17 th Very Large Data Bases Conference (VLDB'91). Morgan Kaufmann, 1991, pp. 513-523.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC