Abstract
Event-Condition-Action languages are the commonly accepted paradigm to express and model the behavior of reactive systems. While numerous Event-Condition-Action languages have been proposed in the literature, differing e.g. on the expressivity of the language and on its operational behavior, existing Event-Condition-Action languages do not generally support the action component to be formulated as a transaction. In this paper, sustaining that it is important to execute transactions in reactive languages, we propose an Event-Condition-Transaction language, based on an extension of Transaction Logic. This extension, called Transaction Logic with Events (\(\mathcal {TR}^{ev}\)), combines reasoning about the execution of transactions with the ability to detect complex events. An important characteristic of \(\mathcal {TR}^{ev}\) is that it takes a choice function as a parameter of the theory, leaving open the behavioral decisions of the logic, and thereby allowing it to be suitable for a wide-spectrum of application scenarios like Semantic Web, multi-agent systems, databases, etc. We start by showing how \(\mathcal {TR}^{ev}\) can be used as an Event-Condition-Action language where actions are considered as transactions, and how to differently instantiate this choice function to achieve different operational behaviors. Then, based on a particular operational instantiation of the logic, we present a procedure that is sound and complete w.r.t. the semantics and that is able to execute \(\mathcal {TR}^{ev}\) programs.
A.S. Gomes and J.J. Alferes—This work was supported by project ERRO (PTDC/EIA-CCO/121823/2010).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
References
Adaikkalavan, R., Chakravarthy, S.: Snoopib: interval-based event specification and detection for active databases. Data Knowl. Eng. 59(1), 139–165 (2006)
Alferes, J.J., Banti, F., Brogi, A.: Evolving reactive logic program. Intelligenza Artificiale 5(1), 77–81 (2011)
Anicic, D., Fodor, P., Rudolph, S., Stojanovic, N.: EP-SPARQL: a unified language for event processing and stream reasoning. In: WWW 2011, pp. 635–644 (2011)
Anicic, D., Rudolph, S., Fodor, P., Stojanovic, N.: Stream reasoning and complex event processing in etalis. Seman. Web 3(4), 397–407 (2012)
Baral, C., Lobo, J., Trajcevski, G.: Formal characterizations of active databases: part II. In: Bry, F. (ed.) DOOD 1997. LNCS, vol. 1341, pp. 247–264. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Behrends, E., Fritzen, O., May, W., Schenk, F.: Embedding event algebras and process for ECA rules for the semantic web. Fundam. Inf. 82(3), 237–263 (2008)
Bertossi, L.E., Pinto, J., Valdivia, R.: Specifying active databases in the situation calculus. In: SCCC, pp. 32–39. IEEE Computer Society (1998)
Bonner, A.J., Kifer, M.: Transaction logic programming. In: ICLP, pp. 257–279 (1993)
Bonner, A.J., Kifer, M.: Results on reasoning about updates in transaction logic. In: Kifer, M., Voronkov, A., Freitag, B., Decker, H. (eds.) Dagstuhl Seminar 1997, DYNAMICS 1997, and ILPS-WS 1997. LNCS, vol. 1472, p. 166. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Bry, F., Eckert, M., Patranjan, P.-L.: Reactivity on the web: paradigms and applications of the language xchange. J. Web Eng. 5(1), 3–24 (2006)
Chomicki, J., Lobo, J., Naqvi, S.A.: Conflict resolution using logic programming. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 15(1), 244–249 (2003)
Costantini, S., Gasperis, G.D.: Complex reactivity with preferences in rule-based agents. In: RuleML, pp. 167–181 (2012)
Fodor, P., Kifer, M.: Tabling for transaction logic. In: ACMPPDP, pp. 199–208 (2010)
Gomes, A.S., Alferes, J.J.: Transaction Logic with (complex) events. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, On-line Supplement, 14 (2014)
Kowalski, R., Sadri, F.: A logic-based framework for reactive systems. In: Bikakis, A., Giurca, A. (eds.) RuleML 2012. LNCS, vol. 7438, pp. 1–15. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Lausen, G., Ludäscher, B., May, W.: On active deductive databases: the statelog approach. In: Kifer, M., Voronkov, A., Freitag, B., Decker, H. (eds.) Dagstuhl Seminar 1997, DYNAMICS 1997, and ILPS-WS 1997. LNCS, vol. 1472, p. 69. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Margara, A., Urbani, J., van Harmelen, F., Bal, H.E.: Streaming the web: Reasoning over dynamic data. J. Web Sem. 25, 24–44 (2014)
Müller, R., Greiner, U., Rahm, E.: AgentWork: a workflow system supporting rule-based workflow adaptation. Data Knowl. Eng. 51(2), 223–256 (2004)
Papamarkos, G., Poulovassilis, A., Wood, P.T.: Event-condition-action rules on RDF metadata in P2P environments. Comp. Netw. 50(10), 1513–1532 (2006)
Ren, Y., Pan,J.Z.: Optimising ontology stream reasoning with truth maintenance system. In: ACM CIKM, pp. 831–836 (2011)
Rinne, M., Törmä, S., Nuutila, E.: SPARQL-based applications for RDF-encoded sensor data. In: SSN, pp. 81–96 (2012)
Sheth, A.P., Henson, C.A., Sahoo, S.S.: Semantic sensor web. IEEE Internet Comput. 12(4), 78–83 (2008)
Wu, E., Diao, Y., Rizvi, S.: High-performance complex event processing over streams. In: SIGMOD Conference, pp. 407–418. ACM (2006)
Zaniolo, C.: Active database rules with transaction-conscious stable-model semantics. In: DOOD, pp. 55–72 (1995)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Gomes, A.S., Alferes, J.J. (2015). A Procedure for an Event-Condition-Transaction Language. In: ten Cate, B., Mileo, A. (eds) Web Reasoning and Rule Systems. RR 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9209. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22002-4_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22002-4_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22001-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22002-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)