Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Consistent Query Answering for Primary Keys on Path Queries (2309.15270v1)

Published 26 Sep 2023 in cs.DB

Abstract: We study the data complexity of consistent query answering (CQA) on databases that may violate the primary key constraints. A repair is a maximal consistent subset of the database. For a Boolean query $q$, the problem $\mathsf{CERTAINTY}(q)$ takes a database as input, and asks whether or not each repair satisfies $q$. It is known that for any self-join-free Boolean conjunctive query $q$, $\mathsf{CERTAINTY}(q)$ is in $\mathbf{FO}$, $\mathbf{LSPACE}$-complete, or $\mathbf{coNP}$-complete. In particular, $\mathsf{CERTAINTY}(q)$ is in $\mathbf{FO}$ for any self-join-free Boolean path query $q$. In this paper, we show that if self-joins are allowed, the complexity of $\mathsf{CERTAINTY}(q)$ for Boolean path queries $q$ exhibits a tetrachotomy between $\mathbf{FO}$, $\mathbf{NL}$-complete, $\mathbf{PTIME}$-complete, and $\mathbf{coNP}$-complete. Moreover, it is decidable, in polynomial time in the size of the query~$q$, which of the four cases applies.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (41)
  1. Consistent answers of conjunctive queries on graphs. CoRR, abs/1503.00650, 2015.
  2. Optimization of answer set programs for consistent query answering by means of first-order rewriting. In CIKM, pages 25–34. ACM, 2020.
  3. Consistent query answers in inconsistent databases. In PODS, pages 68–79. ACM Press, 1999.
  4. Answering conjunctive queries under updates. In PODS, pages 303–318. ACM, 2017.
  5. L. E. Bertossi. Database repairs and consistent query answering: Origins and further developments. In PODS, pages 48–58. ACM, 2019.
  6. A. A. Bulatov. Complexity of conservative constraint satisfaction problems. ACM Trans. Comput. Log., 12(4):24:1–24:66, 2011.
  7. Counting database repairs entailing a query: The case of functional dependencies. In PODS, pages 403–412. ACM, 2022.
  8. J. Chomicki and J. Marcinkowski. Minimal-change integrity maintenance using tuple deletions. Inf. Comput., 197(1-2):90–121, 2005.
  9. Hippo: A system for computing consistent answers to a class of SQL queries. In EDBT, volume 2992 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 841–844. Springer, 2004.
  10. A sat-based system for consistent query answering. In SAT, volume 11628 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 117–135. Springer, 2019.
  11. Consistent answers of aggregation queries via SAT. In ICDE, pages 924–937. IEEE, 2022.
  12. LinCQA: Faster consistent query answering with linear time guarantees. Proc. ACM Manag. Data, 1(1):38:1–38:25, 2023.
  13. A simple algorithm for consistent query answering under primary keys. In ICDT, volume 255 of LIPIcs, pages 24:1–24:18. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2023.
  14. G. Fontaine. Why is it hard to obtain a dichotomy for consistent query answering? ACM Trans. Comput. Log., 16(1):7:1–7:24, 2015.
  15. The complexity of resilience and responsibility for self-join-free conjunctive queries. Proc. VLDB Endow., 9(3):180–191, 2015.
  16. New results for the complexity of resilience for binary conjunctive queries with self-joins. In PODS, pages 271–284. ACM, 2020.
  17. A. Fuxman and R. J. Miller. First-order query rewriting for inconsistent databases. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 73(4):610–635, 2007.
  18. L. M. Goldschlager. The monotone and planar circuit value problems are log space complete for P. SIGACT News, 9(2):25–29, July 1977.
  19. A logical framework for querying and repairing inconsistent databases. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., 15(6):1389–1408, 2003.
  20. M. Hannula and J. Wijsen. A dichotomy in consistent query answering for primary keys and unary foreign keys. In PODS, pages 437–449. ACM, 2022.
  21. Meta-analyses proved inconsistent in how missing data were handled across their included primary trials: A methodological survey. Clinical Epidemiology, 12:527–535, 2020.
  22. Inconsistency resolution in online databases. In ICDE, pages 1205–1208. IEEE Computer Society, 2010.
  23. P. G. Kolaitis and E. Pema. A dichotomy in the complexity of consistent query answering for queries with two atoms. Inf. Process. Lett., 112(3):77–85, 2012.
  24. Efficient querying of inconsistent databases with binary integer programming. Proc. VLDB Endow., 6(6):397–408, 2013.
  25. Consistent query answering for primary keys on path queries. In PODS, pages 215–232. ACM, 2021.
  26. P. Koutris and D. Suciu. A dichotomy on the complexity of consistent query answering for atoms with simple keys. In ICDT, pages 165–176. OpenProceedings.org, 2014.
  27. P. Koutris and J. Wijsen. The data complexity of consistent query answering for self-join-free conjunctive queries under primary key constraints. In PODS, pages 17–29. ACM, 2015.
  28. P. Koutris and J. Wijsen. Consistent query answering for self-join-free conjunctive queries under primary key constraints. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 42(2):9:1–9:45, 2017.
  29. P. Koutris and J. Wijsen. Consistent query answering for primary keys and conjunctive queries with negated atoms. In PODS, pages 209–224. ACM, 2018.
  30. P. Koutris and J. Wijsen. Consistent query answering for primary keys in logspace. In ICDT, volume 127 of LIPIcs, pages 23:1–23:19. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2019.
  31. P. Koutris and J. Wijsen. First-order rewritability in consistent query answering with respect to multiple keys. In PODS, pages 113–129. ACM, 2020.
  32. P. Koutris and J. Wijsen. Consistent query answering for primary keys in datalog. Theory Comput. Syst., 65(1):122–178, 2021.
  33. L. Libkin. Elements of Finite Model Theory. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series. Springer, 2004.
  34. C. Lutz and F. Wolter. On the relationship between consistent query answering and constraint satisfaction problems. In ICDT, volume 31 of LIPIcs, pages 363–379. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2015.
  35. Taming primary key violations to query large inconsistent data via ASP. Theory Pract. Log. Program., 15(4-5):696–710, 2015.
  36. The consistency extractor system: Answer set programs for consistent query answering in databases. Data Knowl. Eng., 69(6):545–572, 2010.
  37. D. Maslowski and J. Wijsen. A dichotomy in the complexity of counting database repairs. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 79(6):958–983, 2013.
  38. D. Maslowski and J. Wijsen. Counting database repairs that satisfy conjunctive queries with self-joins. In ICDT, pages 155–164. OpenProceedings.org, 2014.
  39. J. Wijsen. On the first-order expressibility of computing certain answers to conjunctive queries over uncertain databases. In PODS, pages 179–190. ACM, 2010.
  40. J. Wijsen. Certain conjunctive query answering in first-order logic. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 37(2):9:1–9:35, 2012.
  41. J. Wijsen. Foundations of query answering on inconsistent databases. SIGMOD Rec., 48(3):6–16, 2019.
Citations (10)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now