Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:07:42.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taming primary key violations to query large inconsistent data via ASP

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2015

MARCO MANNA ,
FRANCESCO RICCA  and
GIORGIO TERRACINA
MARCO MANNA
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Calabria, Italy (e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])
FRANCESCO RICCA
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Calabria, Italy (e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])
GIORGIO TERRACINA
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Calabria, Italy (e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Consistent query answering over a database that violates primary key constraints is a classical hard problem in database research that has been traditionally dealt with logic programming. However, the applicability of existing logic-based solutions is restricted to data sets of moderate size. This paper presents a novel decomposition and pruning strategy that reduces, in polynomial time, the problem of computing the consistent answer to a conjunctive query over a database subject to primary key constraints to a collection of smaller problems of the same sort that can be solved independently. The new strategy is naturally modeled and implemented using Answer Set Programming (ASP). An experiment run on benchmarks from the database world prove the effectiveness and efficiency of our ASP-based approach also on large data sets.

Keywords

Inconsistent DatabasesConsistent Query AnsweringASP
Type
Regular Papers
Information
Theory and Practice of Logic Programming , Volume 15 , Special Issue 4-5: 31st International Conference on Logic Programming , July 2015 , pp. 696 - 710
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., and Vianu, V. 1995. Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Alviano, M., Dodaro, C., and Ricca, F. 2014a. Anytime computation of cautious consequences in answer set programming. TPLP 14, 4–5, 755–770.Google Scholar
Alviano, M., Dodaro, C., and Ricca, F. 2014b. Preliminary report on WASP 2.0. CoRR abs/1404.6999.Google Scholar
Arenas, M., Bertossi, L. E., and Chomicki, J. 1999. Consistent query answers in inconsistent databases. In Proceedings of PODS '99. 68–79.Google Scholar
Arenas, M., Bertossi, L. E., and Chomicki, J. 2003. Answer sets for consistent query answering in inconsistent databases. TPLP 3, 4–5, 393–424.Google Scholar
Baral, C. 2003. Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barceló, P. and Bertossi, L. E. 2003. Logic programs for querying inconsistent databases. In Proceedings of PADL'03. LNCS, vol. 2562. Springer, 208–222.Google Scholar
Bertossi, L. E. 2011. Database Repairing and Consistent Query Answering. Synthesis Lectures on Data Management. Morgan & Claypool Publishers.Google Scholar
Bertossi, L. E., Hunter, A., and Schaub, T., Eds. 2005. Inconsistency Tolerance. LNCS, vol. 3300. Springer, Berlin / Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Brewka, G., Eiter, T., and Truszczynski, M. 2011. Answer set programming at a glance. Commun. ACM 54, 12, 92–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calimeri, F., Faber, W., Gebser, M., Ianni, G., Kaminski, R., Krennwallner, T., Leone, N., Ricca, F., and Schaub, T. 2013. Asp-core-2 input language format. Available at https://www.mat.unical.it/aspcomp2013/files/ASP-CORE-2.03b.pdf.Google Scholar
Calimeri, F., Ianni, G., and Ricca, F. 2014. The third open answer set programming competition. TPLP 14, 1, 117–135.Google Scholar
Chomicki, J. and Marcinkowski, J. 2005. Minimal-change integrity maintenance using tuple deletions. Inf. Comput. 197, 1–2, 90–121.Google Scholar
Eiter, T., Fink, M., Greco, G., and Lembo, D. 2003. Efficient evaluation of logic programs for querying data integration systems. In Proceedings of ICLP'03. LNCS, vol. 2916. Springer, 163–177.Google Scholar
Elmagarmid, A. K., Ipeirotis, P. G., and Verykios, V. S. 2007. Duplicate record detection: A survey. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 19, 1, 1–16.Google Scholar
Fuxman, A., Fazli, E., and Miller, R. J. 2005. Conquer: Efficient management of inconsistent databases. In Proceedings of SIGMOD'05. ACM, 155–166.Google Scholar
Fuxman, A. and Miller, R. J. 2007. First-order query rewriting for inconsistent databases. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 73, 4, 610–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gebser, M., Kaminski, R., König, A., and Schaub, T. 2011. Advances in gringo series 3. In Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning - 11th International Conference, LPNMR 2011, Vancouver, Canada, May 16-19, 2011. Proceedings, Delgrande, J. P. and Faber, W., Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6645. Springer, 345–351.Google Scholar
Gebser, M., Kaufmann, B., and Schaub, T. 2013. Advanced conflict-driven disjunctive answer set solving. In IJCAI 2013, Proceedings of the 23rd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Beijing, China, August 3-9, 2013, Rossi, F., Ed. IJCAI/AAAI.Google Scholar
Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V. 1991. Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Comput. 9, 3/4, 365–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greco, G., Greco, S., and Zumpano, E. 2001. A logic programming approach to the integration, repairing and querying of inconsistent databases. In Proceedings of ICLP'01. LNCS, vol. 2237. Springer, 348–364.Google Scholar
Greco, G., Greco, S., and Zumpano, E. 2003. A logical framework for querying and repairing inconsistent databases. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 15, 6, 1389–1408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolaitis, P. G. and Pema, E. 2012. A dichotomy in the complexity of consistent query answering for queries with two atoms. Inf. Process. Lett. 112, 3, 77–85.Google Scholar
Kolaitis, P. G., Pema, E., and Tan, W.-C. 2013. Efficient querying of inconsistent databases with binary integer programming. PVLDB 6, 6, 397–408.Google Scholar
Manna, M., Ricca, F., and Terracina, G. 2013. Consistent query answering via asp from different perspectives: Theory and practice. TPLP 13, 2, 227–252.Google Scholar
Wijsen, J. 2009. On the consistent rewriting of conjunctive queries under primary key constraints. Inf. Syst. 34, 7, 578–601.Google Scholar
Wijsen, J. 2012. Certain conjunctive query answering in first-order logic. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 37, 2, 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar