Logical foundations of possibilistic keys

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 8761, Issue , 2014, Pages 181-195

  Koehler, Henning ^a   Leck, Uwe ^b   Link, Sebastian ^c   Prade, Henri ^d  

^a MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SUPERIOR   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^d UNIVERSITÉ PAUL SABATIER   (France)

Author keywords

Armstrong relation; Axiomatization; Data cleaning; Data mining; Database; Implication; Key; Possibility theory; Query processing; Uncertain Data

Indexed keywords

CLEANING; DATA MINING; DATABASE SYSTEMS; QUERY PROCESSING; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

ARMSTRONG RELATIONS; AXIOMATIZATION; DATA CLEANING; IMPLICATION; POSSIBILITY THEORY; UNCERTAIN DATAS;

DATA HANDLING;

EID: 84921841545     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-11558-0_13     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Armstrong, W. W.: Dependency structures of data base relationships. In: IFIP Congress, pp. 580-583 (1974).
2. Beeri, C., Dowd, M., Fagin, R., Statman, R.: On the structure of Armstrong relations for functional dependencies. J. ACM 31(1), 30-46 (1984).
3. Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Towards a possibilistic logic handling of preferences. Appl. Intell. 14(3), 303-317 (2001).
4. Beskales, G., Ilyas, I. F., Golab, L.: Sampling the repairs of functional dependency violations under hard constraints. PVLDB 3(1) (2010).
5. Bistarelli, S., Codognet, P., Rossi, F.: Abstracting soft constraints: Framework, properties, examples. Artif. Intell. 139(2), 175-211 (2002).
6. Bosc, P., Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Fuzzy functional dependencies-an overview and a critical discussion. In: Proc. of the 3rd IEEE Inter. Conf. on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE 1994), Orlando, FL, June 26-29, pp. 325-330 (1994).
7. Bosc, P., Pivert, O.: On the impact of regular functional dependencies when moving to a possibilistic database framework. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 140(1), 207-227 (2003).
8. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: Keys for free in description logics. In: Baader, F., Sattler, U. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2000 International Workshop on Description Logics (DL 2000), Aachen, Germany, August 17-19. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 33, pp. 79-88. CEUR-WS. org (2000).
9. Chu, X., Ilyas, I. F., Papotti, P.: Holistic data cleaning: Putting violations into context. In: Jensen, C. S., Jermaine, C. M., Zhou, X. (eds.) 29th IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering, ICDE 2013, Brisbane, Australia, April 8-12, pp. 458-469. IEEE Computer Society (2013).
10. Codd, E. F.: A relational model of data for large shared data banks. Commun. ACM 13(6), 377-387 (1970).
11. Demetrovics, J., Katona, G. O. H.: Extremal combinatorial problems of database models. In: Biskup, J., Demetrovics, J., Paredaens, J., Thalheim, B. (eds.) MFDBS 1987. LNCS, vol. 305, pp. 99-127. Springer, Heidelberg (1988).
12. Diederich, J., Milton, J.: New methods and fast algorithms for database normalization. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 13(3), 339-365 (1988).
13. Dubois, D., Lang, J., Prade, H.: Automated reasoning using possibilistic logic: Semantics, belief revision, and variable certainty weights. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 6(1), 64-71 (1994).
14. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Epistemic entrenchment and possibilistic logic. Artif. Intell. 50(2), 223-239 (1991).
15. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Fuzzy set and possibility theory-based methods in artificial intelligence. Artif. Intell. 148(1-2), 1-9 (2003).
16. Dubois, D., Prade, H., Schockaert, S.: Stable models in generalized possibilistic logic. In: Brewka, G., Eiter, T., McIlraith, S. A. (eds.) Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference, KR 2012, Rome, Italy, June 10-14. AAAI Press (2012).
17. Eiter, T., Gottlob, G.: Identifying the minimal transversals of a hypergraph and related problems. SIAM J. Comput. 24(6), 1278-1304 (1995).
18. Fagin, R.: Horn clauses and database dependencies. J. ACM 29(4), 952-985 (1982).
19. Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.: Nonmonotonic inference based on expectations. Artif. Intell. 65(2), 197-245 (1994).
20. Geiger, D., Paz, A., Pearl, J.: Axioms and algorithms for inferences involving probabilistic independence. Inf. Comput. 91(1), 128-141 (1991).
21. Grabisch, M., Prade, H.: The correlation problem in sensor fusion in a possibilistic framework. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 16(11), 1273-1283 (2001).
22. Grove, A.: Two modellings for theory change. Journal of Philosophical Logic 17(2), 157-170 (1988).
23. Hartmann, S., Kirchberg, M., Link, S.: Design by example for SQL table definitions with functional dependencies. VLDB J 21(1), 121-144 (2012).
24. Hartmann, S., Leck, U., Link, S.: On Codd families of keys over incomplete relations. Comput. J. 54(7), 1166-1180 (2011).
25. Hartmann, S., Link, S.: Efficient reasoning about a robust XML key fragment. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 34(2) (2009).
26. Hartmann, S., Link, S.: Numerical constraints on XML data. Inf. Comput. 208(5), 521-544 (2010).
27. Heise, A., Quiane-Ruiz, J.-A., Abedjan, Z., Jentzsch, A., Naumann, F.: Scalable discovery of unique column combinations. PVLDB 7(4), 301-312 (2013).
28. Jha, A. K., Rastogi, V., Suciu, D.: Query evaluation with soft-key constraints. In: Lenzerini, M., Lembo, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 2008, Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 9-11, pp. 119-128. ACM (2008).
29. Lutz, C., Areces, C., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Keys, nominals, and concrete domains. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 23, 667-726 (2005).
30. Mannila, H., Räihä, K. J.: Design by example: An application of Armstrong relations. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 33(2), 126-141 (1986).
31. Mannila, H., Räihä, K. J.: Algorithms for inferring functional dependencies from relations. Data Knowl. Eng. 12(1), 83-99 (1994).
32. Niepert, M., Gyssens, M., Sayrafi, B., Gucht, D. V.: On the conditional independence implication problem: A lattice-theoretic approach. Artif. Intell. 202, 29-51 (2013).
33. Qi, G., Wang, K.: Conflict-based belief revision operators in possibilistic logic. In: Hoffmann, J., Selman, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, July 22-26. AAAI Press (2012).
34. Sabbadin, R., Fargier, H., Lang, J.: Towards qualitative approaches to multi-stage decision making. Int. J. Approx. Reasoning 19(3-4), 441-471 (1998).
35. Sarma, A. D., Ullman, J. D., Widom, J.: Schema design for uncertain databases. In: Arenas, M., Bertossi, L. E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd Alberto Mendelzon International Workshop on Foundations of Data Management, Arequipa, Peru, May 12-15. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 450. CEUR-WS. org (2009).
36. Shen, Q., Leitch, R.: Fuzzy qualitative simulation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 23(4), 1038-1061 (1993).
37. Suciu, D., Olteanu, D., Ré, C., Koch, C.: Probabilistic Databases. Synthesis Lectures on Data Management. Morgan & Claypool Publishers (2011).
38. Thalheim, B.: On semantic issues connected with keys in relational databases permitting null values. Elektronische Informationsverarbeitung und Kybernetik 25(1/2), 11-20 (1989).
39. Toman, D., Weddell, G. E.: On keys and functional dependencies as first-class citizens in description logics. J. Autom. Reasoning 40(2-3), 117-132 (2008).
40. Zadeh, L. A.: Approximate reasoning based on fuzzy logic. In: Buchanan, B. G. (ed.) Proceedings of the Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 1979, Tokyo, Japan, August 20-23, vol. 2, pp. 1004-1010. William Kaufmann (1979).