Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Unified Semantics for Active and Deductive Databases

  • Conference paper
Rules in Database Systems

Part of the book series: Workshops in Computing ((WORKSHOPS COMP.))

Abstract

These two rule-oriented paradigms of databases have been the focus of extensive research and are now coming of age in the commercial DBMS world. However, the systems developed so far support well only one of the two paradigms—thus limiting the effectiveness of such systems in many applications that require complete integration of both kinds of rules. In this paper, we discuss the technical problems that make such an integration difficult, and trace their roots to a lack of a unified underlying semantics. Then, we review recent advances in the semantics of non-monotonic logic and show that they can be used to unify the foundations of active databases and deductive databases. Finally, we outline the design a new rule language for databases that integrates a deductive system with a trigger-based DBMS.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. S. Abiteboul and V. Vianu. Datalog extensions for database queries and updates. Journal of Corny, and System Sc., 43(1):62–124, August 1991.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Apt, K., and J.M. Pugin, “Maintenance of stratified databases viewed as a belief revision system”, ACM PODS, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bry, F., Intensional updates: abduction via deduction, in: Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Jerusalem, 561–575, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. Ceri and J. Widom. Deriving production rules for constraint maintenance. Sixteenth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Brisbane, pages 566–577, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chimenti, D. et al., “The LDL System Prototype,” IEEE Journal on Data and Knowledge Engineering, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 76–90, March 1990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fagin, R.., Kuper, G., D. Ullman and M.Y. Vardi, “Updating logical databases”, Advances in Comp.Res., vol.3, 1–18, JAI Press Inc., 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Harel, D., “Dynamic logic”, in Handbook of Philosophical Logic, (Gabbay and Guenther, eds.), D.Reidel Publishers, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  8. N.H. Gehani and H.V. Jagadish. Ode as an active database: Constraints and triggers. Seventeenth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Barcelona, pages 327–336, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  9. M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. The stable model semantics of logic programming. Proceedings of the Fifth Intern. Conference on Logic Programming, pages 1070–1080, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Ganguly, S. Greco, and C. Zaniolo. Minimum and Maximum Predicates in Logic Programming. Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 154–113, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  11. F. Giannotti, D. Pedreschi, D. Saccà, and C. Zaniolo. Nondeterminism in deductive databases. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  12. A.Van Gelder, K.A. Ross, and J.S. Schlipf. The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. Journal of ACM, 38(3):620–650, 1991.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Katzuno, H. and A.O. Mendelzon, Propositional knowledgebase revision and minimal change, Artificial Intelligence, 52, 263–294, 1991.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. P.G. Kolaitis and C.H. Papadimitriou, Why not negation by fixpoint?, JCSS, 43(1), 125–144, 1991.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Krishnamurthy, R., Naqvi, S. and C. Zaniolo, “Database Updates and Transactions in LDL”, Procs. of 1989 North American Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V., “Representing Actions in Extended Logic Programming,” Proc. Joint Int. Conf-Symp on Logic Programming, 1992, MIT Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lifschitz, V. “Formal Theories of Action” in:F.M. Brown, ed. The Frame Problem in Artificial Intelligence, Proc. 1987 Workshop, Morgan Kaufman, Los Altos, CA, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lloyd, J.W., Foundations of Logic Programming, Springer Verlag, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Manchanda, S. and D.S. Warren, “Towards a logical theory of database view updates”, Int.Worksh. on Foundations of Deductive databases and Logic Programming, J. Minker ed., Aug. 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. McCarty and U. Dayal. The architecture of an active database management system. In ACM SIGMOD International Conf on Management of Data, pages 215–224, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  21. M. Morgenstern. Active databases as a paradigm for enhanced computing environments. In Ninth International Conf. on Very Large Data Bases, Florence, pages 34–42, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  22. L. Palopoli and R. Torlone. Specifying the dynamics of complex object databases. In 4th Int. Workshop on Foundations of Models and Languages for Data and Objects — Modeling Database Dynamics, pp. 143–160. Springer-Verlag, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Phipps, G., M.A., Derr and K. A. Ross, “Glue-Nail: a Deductive Database System,” Proc. 1991 ACM-SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, pp. 308–317 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Przymusinski, T.C. “Every logic program has a natural stratification and an iterated fixed point model”, in PODS 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  25. S. A. Naqvi, S. Tsur “A Logical Language for Data and Knowledge Bases”, W. H. Freeman, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ramakrishan, R., Srivastava, D. and Sudarshan, S., “CORAL: A Deductive Database Programming Language,” Proc. VLDB’92 Int. Conf, pp. 238–250, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Reiter, R., “On Formalizing Database Updates: Preliminary Report,” in, Advances in Database Technology-EDBT′92, (Pirotte, Delobel, Gottlob, eds.), Springer Verlag, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  28. M.L. Stonebraker, A. Jhingran, J. Goh, and S. Potamianos. On rules, procedure, caching and views in data base systems. In ACM SIGMOD International Conf. on Management of Data, pages 281–290, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  29. van Emden M.H. and R.A. Kowalski, “The Semantics of Predicate Logic as a Programming Language,” J.ACM 23, 4 (Oct. 76), 67–75.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Warren, D.S., Database Updates in Pure Prolog, Proc. Int. Conf on Fifth Generation Computer Systems, 244–253, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  31. J. Widom and S. Finkelstein. Set-Oriented production rules in relational database systems. In ACM SIGMOD International Conf on Management of Data, pages 259–270, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  32. M. Winslett, “A model-theoretic approach to updating logical databases”, ACM PODS, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Zaniolo, C., Intelligent Databases: Old Challenges and New Opportunities, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 1, 271–292 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Zaniolo, C., N. Ami, K. Ong, “Negation and Aggregates in Recursive Rules: the LDL++ Approach”, Proc. 3rd Int. Conference on Deductive and O-O DBs, DOOD-93, Phoenix, AZ, Dec 6–8, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science Department, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA

    Carlo Zaniolo

Authors
  1. Carlo Zaniolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computing and Electrical Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Riccarton, Edinburgh, EH 14 4AS, Scotland

    Norman W. Paton BSc, PhD  & M. Howard Williams BSc, PhD, FRSA, FBCS, CEng  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1994 British Computer Society

About this paper

Cite this paper

Zaniolo, C. (1994). A Unified Semantics for Active and Deductive Databases. In: Paton, N.W., Williams, M.H. (eds) Rules in Database Systems. Workshops in Computing. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3225-7_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3225-7_16

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-19846-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-3225-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation