The role of abduction in database view updating

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.

[1]  Letizia Tanca,et al.  Logic Programming and Databases , 1990, Surveys in Computer Science.

[2]  Nicolas Spyratos,et al.  Update semantics of relational views , 1981, TODS.

[3]  Shamim A. Naqvi,et al.  Semantics of Updates in Logic Programming , 1987, DBPL.

[4]  Gabriel M. Kuper,et al.  Updating Logical Databases , 1986, Adv. Comput. Res..

[5]  Norman Y. Foo,et al.  Updating Knowledge Bases with Disjunctive Information , 1996, AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 1.

[6]  Marianne Winslett,et al.  A model-based approach to updating databases with incomplete information , 1988, TODS.

[7]  Carlo Zaniolo,et al.  Database relations with null values , 1982, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[8]  David Poole,et al.  Explanation and prediction: an architecture for default and abductive reasoning , 1989, Comput. Intell..

[9]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  Abductive and Default Reasoning: A Computational Core , 1990, AAAI.

[10]  Keith L. Clark,et al.  Negation as Failure , 1987, Logic and Data Bases.

[11]  Serge Abiteboul,et al.  Update Semantics for Incomplete Databases , 1985, VLDB.

[12]  David Chan,et al.  Constructive Negation Based on the Completed Database , 1988, ICLP/SLP.

[13]  Marianne Winslett.  Sometimes Updates Are Circumscription , 1989, IJCAI.

[14]  François Bry,et al.  Intensional Updates: Abduction via Deduction , 1990, ICLP.

[15]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  On Integrity Constraints , 1988, TARK.

[16]  Klaus Estenfeld.  6th International Conference on Logic Programming , 1989, Künstliche Intell..

[17]  Umeshwar Dayal,et al.  On the correct translation of update operations on relational views , 1982, TODS.

[18]  Mukesh Dalal,et al.  Investigations into a Theory of Knowledge Base Revision , 1988, AAAI.

[19]  Luigi Portinale,et al.  Focussing Abductive Diagnosis , 1991, AI Commun..

[20]  Pietro Torasso,et al.  On the Relationship between Abduction and Deduction , 1991, J. Log. Comput..

[21]  Krzysztof R. Apt,et al.  Logic Programming , 1990, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics.

[22]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  Database Updates through Abduction , 1990, VLDB.

[23]  Antoni Olivé,et al.  The Events Method for View Updating in Deductive Databases , 1992, EDBT.

[24]  Serge Abiteboul,et al.  Updates, A New Frontier , 1988, ICDT.

[25]  Francesca Rossi,et al.  Contributions to the View Update Problem , 1989, ICLP.

[26]  Philip T. Cox,et al.  General Diagnosis by Abductive Inference , 1987, SLP.

[27]  David Poole,et al.  A methodology for using a default and abductive reasoning system , 1989, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[28]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  On the semantics of updates in databases , 1983, PODS.

[29]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  Generalized Stable Models: A Semantics for Abduction , 1990, ECAI.

[30]  Robert A. Kowalski,et al.  Abduction Compared with Negation by Failure , 1989, ICLP.