Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
167 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 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 Existential Rules with Closed Predicates (2401.05743v2)

Published 11 Jan 2024 in cs.AI

Abstract: Consistent Query Answering (CQA) is an inconsistency-tolerant approach to data access in knowledge bases and databases. The goal of CQA is to provide meaningful (consistent) answers to queries even in the presence of inconsistent information, e.g. a database whose data conflict with meta-data (typically the database integrity constraints). The semantics of CQA is based on the notion of repair, that is, a consistent version of the initial, inconsistent database that is obtained through minimal modifications. We study CQA in databases with data dependencies expressed by existential rules. More specifically, we focus on the broad class of disjunctive embedded dependencies with inequalities (DEDs), which extend both tuple-generating dependencies and equality-generated dependencies. We first focus on the case when the database predicates are closed, i.e. the database is assumed to have complete knowledge about such predicates, thus no tuple addition is possible to repair the database. In such a scenario, we provide a detailed analysis of the data complexity of CQA and associated tasks (repair checking) under different semantics (AR and IAR) and for different classes of existential rules. In particular, we consider the classes of acyclic, linear, full, sticky and guarded DEDs, and their combinations.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (30)
  1. Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley.
  2. Repair checking in inconsistent databases: algorithms and complexity.  In Fagin, R. (Ed.), Database Theory - ICDT 2009, 12th International Conference, St. Petersburg, Russia, March 23-25, 2009, Proceedings, Vol. 361 of ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, pp. 31–41. ACM.
  3. Polynomial rewritings from expressive description logics with closed predicates to variants of datalog.  Artif. Intell., 280, 103220.
  4. Enhancing existential rules by closed-world variables.  In Proceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2018, p. 1676–1682. AAAI Press.
  5. Consistent query answers in inconsistent databases.  In Proceedings of the Eighteenth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 1999, p. 68–79, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  6. Complexity of Repair Checking and Consistent Query Answering.  In Martens, W.,  & Zeume, T. (Eds.), 19th International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT 2016), Vol. 48 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pp. 21:1–21:18, Dagstuhl, Germany. Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik.
  7. On rules with existential variables: Walking the decidability line.  Artif. Intell., 175(9-10), 1620–1654.
  8. Bertossi, L. E. (2019). Database repairs and consistent query answering: Origins and further developments.  In Suciu, D., Skritek, S., & Koch, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 2019, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 30 - July 5, 2019, pp. 48–58. ACM.
  9. Bienvenu, M. (2012). On the complexity of consistent query answering in the presence of simple ontologies.  In Hoffmann, J.,  & Selman, B. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, July 22-26, 2012, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. AAAI Press.
  10. Computing and explaining query answers over inconsistent dl-lite knowledge bases.  J. Artif. Intell. Res., 64, 563–644.
  11. Mixed-world reasoning with existential rules under active-domain semantics.  In Proceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2019, p. 1558–1565. AAAI Press.
  12. Preference-based inconsistency-tolerant query answering under existential rules.  Artif. Intell., 312, 103772.
  13. A general datalog-based framework for tractable query answering over ontologies.  J. Web Semant., 14, 57–83.
  14. Towards more expressive ontology languages: The query answering problem.  Artif. Intell., 193, 87–128.
  15. Minimal-change integrity maintenance using tuple deletions.  Inf. Comput., 197(1-2), 90–121.
  16. Deutsch, A. (2018). FOL modeling of integrity constraints (dependencies).  In Liu, L.,  & Özsu, M. T. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Database Systems, Second Edition. Springer.
  17. XML queries and constraints, containment and reformulation.  Theor. Comput. Sci., 336(1), 57–87.
  18. Query rewriting for existential rules with compiled preorder.  In Yang, Q.,  & Wooldridge, M. J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2015, Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 25-31, 2015, pp. 3106–3112. AAAI Press.
  19. Sound, complete and minimal ucq-rewriting for existential rules.  Semantic Web, 6(5), 451–475.
  20. Revisiting controlled query evaluation in description logics.  In Proceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2019, p. 1786–1792. AAAI Press.
  21. Inconsistency-tolerant query answering for existential rules.  Artif. Intell., 307(C).
  22. Complexity of approximate query answering under inconsistency in datalog±.  In Proceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2018, p. 1921–1927. AAAI Press.
  23. From classical to consistent query answering under existential rules.  Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 29(1).
  24. Inconsistency handling in datalog+/- ontologies.  In Raedt, L. D., Bessiere, C., Dubois, D., Doherty, P., Frasconi, P., Heintz, F., & Lucas, P. J. F. (Eds.), ECAI 2012 - 20th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Including Prestigious Applications of Artificial Intelligence (PAIS-2012) System Demonstrations Track, Montpellier, France, August 27-31 , 2012, Vol. 242 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pp. 558–563. IOS Press.
  25. The data complexity of ontology-mediated queries with closed predicates.  Log. Methods Comput. Sci., 15(3).
  26. Ontology-based data access with closed predicates is inherently intractable (sometimes).  In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2013, p. 1024–1030. AAAI Press.
  27. Rosati, R. (2011). On the complexity of dealing with inconsistency in description logic ontologies.  In Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence - Volume Volume Two, IJCAI 2011, p. 1057–1062. AAAI Press.
  28. Consistent query answers in the presence of universal constraints.  Information Systems, 35(1), 1–22.
  29. On the data complexity of consistent query answering.  In Deutsch, A. (Ed.), 15th International Conference on Database Theory, ICDT 2012, Berlin, Germany, March 26-29, 2012, pp. 22–33. ACM.
  30. Wijsen, J. (2005). Database repairing using updates.  ACM Trans. Database Syst., 30(3), 722–768.

Summary

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

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

Tweets