Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of abduction in database view updating

  • Published:
Journal of Intelligent Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The problem of view updating in databases consists in modifying the extension of view relations (i.e., relations defined in terms of “base” ones) transforming only the content of the extensional database, i.e., the extensional representation of base relations. This task is non-deductive in nature and its relationships with non-monotonic reasoning, and specifically with abduction, have been recently pointed out.

In the paper we investigate the role of abduction in view updating, singling out similarities and differences between view updating and abduction. View updating is regarded as a two-step process: first, view definitions (and constraints) are used to reduce a view update into updates on base relations; then, the content of the extensional database is taken into account to determine the actual transformations to be performed. The first step is abductive in nature; we apply to such a step a definition of abduction based on deduction, which characterizes by means of a unique logical formula the conditions on base predicates which accomplish an update request. We then show how, in the second step, the set of transactions to be performed can be obtained from the formula generated in the first step. We provide a formal result showing the correctness of the approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abiteboul, S. (1988). Updates, a New Frontier.Proc. 2nd International Conference on Database Theory (pp. 1–18). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 326, Springer Verlag.

  • Abiteboul, S. and Grahne, G. (1985). Update semantics for incomplete databases.Proc. 11th VLDB Conference (pp. 1–12), Stockholm.

  • Apt, K.R. and Bezem, M. (1990). Acyclic programs.Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming (pp. 617–633). MIT Press, Jerusalem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bancilhon, F. and Spyratos, N. (1981). Update Semantics of Relational Views.ACM Trans, on Database Systems 6(4), 557–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bry, F. (1990). Intensional Updates: Abduction via Deduction.Proc. 6th International Conference on Logic Programming. MIT Press, Jerusalem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceri, S., Gottlob, G., and Tanca, L. (1989).Logic Programming and Databases. Springer Verlag.

  • Chan, D. (1988). Constructive Negation Based on the Completed Database.Proc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symposium on Logic Programming (pp. 111–125). MIT Press, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, K. (1978). Negation as failure.Logic and Data Bases (pp. 293–322). H. Gallaire and J. Minker, (eds.), Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Console, L., Portinale, L., and Theseider Dupré, D. (1991). Focusing Abductive Diagnosis.Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Expert Systems and Their Applications (Conf. on 2nd Generation Expert Systems) (pp. 231–242). Avignon, also inAI Communications, 4(2/3), 88–97.

  • Console, L., Theseider Dupré, D., and Torasso, P. (1989). Abductive Reasoning through Direct Deduction from Completed Domain Models.Methodologies for Intelligent Systems 4 (pp. 175–182). Z. Ras (Ed.), North Holland.

  • Console, L., Theseider Dupré, D., and Torasso, P. (1991). On the Relationship between Abduction and Deduction.Journal of Logic and Computation, 1(5), 661–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, P.T. and Pietrzykowski, T. (1987). General Diagnosis by Abductive Inference.Proc. IEEE Symposium on Logic Programming (pp. 183–189). San Francisco.

  • Dalai, M. (1988). Investigations into a Theory of Knowledge Base Revision: Preliminary Report.Proc. AAAI-88, Minneapolis.

  • Dayal, U. and Bernstein, P.A. (1982). On the Correct Translation of Update Operations on Relational Views.ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 8(3), 381–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eshghi, K. and Kowalski, R. (1989). Abduction Compared with Negation by Failure.Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming. 234–254. MIT Press, Lisbon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagin, R., Kuper, G., Ullman, J., and Vardi, M. (1986). Updating Logical Databases.Advances in Computer Research, 3, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagin, R., Ullman, J., and Vardi, M. (1983). On the Semantics of Updates in Databases.Proc. 2nd ACM PODS.

  • Gaerdenfors, P. (1988).Knowledge in Flux—Modeling the Dynamics ofEpistemic States. MIT Press.

  • Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V. (1988). The stable models semantics for logic programming.Proc. 5th International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming (pp. 1170–1180). MIT Press, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guessoum, A. and Lloyd, J.W. (1991). Updating Knowledge Bases II.New Generation Computing, 10(1), 73–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guessoum, A. and Lloyd, J.W. (1990). Updating Knowledge Bases.New Generation Computing, 8(1), 71–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kakas, A.C. and Mancarella, P. (1990). Database Updates Through Abduction.Proc. 16th VLDB Conference. Brisbane.

  • Kakas, A.C. and Mancarella, P. (1990). Generalized Stable Models: A Semantics For Abduction.Proc. 9th ECAI, Stockholm.

  • Lloyd, J. (1987).Foundations of Logic Programming, 2nd edition. Springer Verlag.

  • Naqvi, S.A. and Krishnamurthy, R. (1989). Semantics of Updates in Logic Programming.Advances in Database Programming Languages (pp. 313–327). F. Bancilhon and P. Buneman, (Eds.), ACM Press.

  • Poole, D. (1989). Explanation and Prediction: An Architecture for Default and Abductive Reasoning.Computational Intelligence, 5(1), 97–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, D. (1990). A Methodology for Using a Default and Abductive Reasoning System.International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 5(1), 521–548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiter, R. (1988). On Integrity Constraints.Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge (pp. 97–112). M. Vardi (Ed.).

  • Rossi, F. and Naqvi, S.A. (1989). Contributions to the View Update Problem.Proc. 6th International Conference on Logic Programming (pp. 398–415). MIT Press, Libon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selman, B. and Levesque H. (1990). Abductive and Default Reasoning: A Computational Core.Proc. AAAI 90 (pp. 343–348). Boston.

  • Teniente, E. and Olivé, A. (1992). The Events Method for View updating in Deductive Databases.EDBT 92—Lecture Notes in Computer Science 580 (pp. 245–260).

    Google Scholar 

  • Winslett, M. (1988). A Model-Based Approach to Updating Databases with Incomplete Information.ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 13(2), 167–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winslett, M. (1989). Sometimes Updates Are Circumscription.Proc. 11th IJCAI (pp. 859–863). Detroit.

  • Winslett, M. (1990).Updating Logical Databases. Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science.

  • Zaniolo, C. (1984). Database Relations with Null Values.Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 28, 142–166.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Informatica, Università di Torino, Corso Svizzera 185, 10149, Torino, Italy

    Luca Console, Maria Luisa Sapino & Daniele Theseider Dupré

Authors
  1. Luca Console
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Luisa Sapino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniele Theseider Dupré
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Console, L., Sapino, M.L. & Dupré, D.T. The role of abduction in database view updating. J Intell Inf Syst 4, 261–280 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00961655

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00961655

Keywords

Search

Navigation