Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Linear logic for deductive databases

  • Regular Papers
  • Published:
New Generation Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper deals with deductive databases in linear logic. The semantics of queries, views, constraints, and (view) updates are defineddeclaratively in linear logic. In constrast to classical logic, we can formalise non-shared view, transition constraints, and (view) updates easily. Various proof search strategies are presented along with an algorithm for query evaluation from a bottom-up direction. An additional advantage is that the associated meaning of a given relation can be defined in terms of the validity of a legal update in a given relation. We also defined formally the update principles and showed the correctness of the update translation algorithms. In this approach, we provide virtual view updates along with real view updates, and view DELETIONs are special cases of view REPLACEMENTs. This permits three transactional view update operations (INSERTION, DELETION, REPLACEMENT) in comparison to only (INSERTION, DELETION) in most existing systems.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abiteboul, S. and Vianu, V., “Procedural Languages for Database Queries and Updates,”J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 41(2), pp. 181–229, 1990.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Andreoli, J. M. and Pareschi, R., “Linear Objects: Logical Processes with Built-In Inheritance,”New Generation Computing, 9, pp. 445–473, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Asperti, A., Ferrari, G. L. and Gorrieri, R., “Implicative Formulae in the ‘Proofs as Computations’ Analogy,” inPrinciples of Programming Languages (P. Hudak, ed.), ACM, pp. 59–71, 1990.

  4. Atzeni, P. and Torlone, R., “Updating Datalog Databases,” inNext Generation Information Systems Technology, Kiew, Soviet Union,LNCS 504, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 347–362, 1990.

  5. Codd, E. F., “Recent Investigations in Relational Data Base Systems,”Information Processing, 74, North-Holland Publishing Company, pp. 1017–1021, 1974.

  6. Date, C. J.,An Introduction to Database Systems (5th ed.), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Date, C. J. and McGoveran, D., “Updating Union, Intersection, and Difference Views,” inRelational Database Writings (C. J. Date, ed.), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, pp. 1991–1994, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fagin, R., Kuper, G. M., Ullman, J. D. and Vardi, M. Y., “Updating Logical Databases,” inAdvances in Computing Research, Vol. 3, JAI Press Inc., pp. 1–18, 1986.

  9. Fouqueré, C. and Vauzeilles, J., “Linear Logic and Exceptions,”Journal of Logic and Computation, 4 (6), pp. 859–875, 1994.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Galmiche, D. and Perrier, G., “Automated Deduction in Additive and Multiplicative Linear Logic,” inTver ’92, LNCS 620, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Galmiche, D. and Perrier, G., “On Proof Normalisation in Linear Logic,”Theoretical Computer Science, 135, 1994.

  12. Girard, J. Y., “Linear Logic,”Theoretical Computer Science, 50, pp. 1–102, 1987.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Girard, J. Y., “Logic and Exceptions: A Few Remarks,”Journal of Logic and Computation, 2(2), pp. 111–118, 1992.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Girard, J. Y., “Linear Logic: Its Syntax and Semantics,” inAdvances in Linear Logic (J. Y. Girard, Y. Lafont and L. Regnier, eds.), Cambridge University Press, 1995.

  15. Gehlot, V. and Gunter, C. A., “Normal Process Representatives,” inProceedings of Fifth Symposium on Logic in Compute Science, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, IEEE Computer Science Press, pp. 200–207, 1990.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Grant, J. and Minker, J., “Deductive Database Theories,”The Knowledge Engineering Review, 4, pp. 267–304, 1989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Guessoum, A. and Lloyd, J. W., “Updating knowledge bases,”New Generation Computing, 8(1), pp. 71–89, 1990.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Hoare, C. A. R.,Communicating Sequential Processes, Prentice-Hall, 1985.

  19. Hodas, J. S. and Miller, D., “Logic Programming in a Fragment of Intuitionistic Linear Logic,”Information and Computation, 110(2), pp. 327–365, 1994.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Kobayashi, N. and Yonezawa, A., “ACL: A Concurrent Linear Logic Programming Paradigm,” inProceedings of the International Symposium on Logic Programming (D. Miller, ed.), Vancouver, Canada, Oct. 1993, MIT Press, pp. 279–294, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kowalski, R., “Databases Updates in the Event Calculus,”The Journal of Logic Programming, 12, pp. 121–146, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lafont, Y., “Linear Logic Programming,” inWorkshop on Programming Logic, Göteborg, pp. 209–220, 1987.

  23. Lafont, Y., “The Linear Abstract Machine,”Theoretical Computer Science, 59, pp. 157–180, 1988. Some corrections inVolume 62, pp. 327–328, 1988.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Laurent, D., Luong, V. P. and Spyratos, N.,Database Updating Revisited, DOOD’93, Arizona, USA,LNCS 760, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lee, D. T. and Tsang, C. P., “Solving the Database Update Problem Using Linear Logic,” inProceedings of the 7th Australasian Database Conference (R. Topor, ed.), Melbourne, Australia, Jan. 29–30, 1996,Australian Computer Science Communications, 18(2), pp. 131–138, 1996.

  26. Lincoln, P., “Linear Logic,”ACM SIGACT Notices, 23(2), pp. 29–37, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lincoln, P., Mitchell, J., Scedrov, A. and Schankar, N., “Decision Problem for Propositional Linear Logic,”Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 56, pp. 239–311, 1992.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Lincoln, P. and Scedrov, A., “First Order Linear Logic without Modalities is NEXPTIME-Hard,”Theoretical Computer Science, 135, pp. 139–154, 1994.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Lincoln, P. and Shankar, N., “Proof Search in First-order Linear Logic and other cut-free sequent calculi,” inNinth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (S. Abramsky, ed.), Paris, France, pp. 282–291, 1994.

  30. Marti-Oliet, N. and Meseguer, J., “From Petri Nets to Linear Logic through Categories: A Survey,”Journal on Foundations of Computer Science, 2(4), pp. 297–399, 1991.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Manchanda, S. and Warren, D. S. A., “Logic-based Language for Database Updates,” inFoundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming (J. Minker, ed.), Morgan Kauffman, Los Altos, pp. 363–394, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Masseron, M., Tollu, C. and Vauzeilles, J., “Generating Plans in Linear Logic I: Actions and Proofs,”Theoretical Computer Science, 113(2), pp. 349–370, 1993.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. McGoveran, D. and Date, C. J. “A New Database Design Principle,” inRelational Database Writings, 1991–1994 (C. J. Date, ed.), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Miller, D., “A Multiple-Conclusion Meta-Logic,” inProceedings, Ninth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, Paris, France, Jul. 4–7, 1994. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 272–281, 1994, to appear inTheoretical Computer Science.

  35. Reiter, R., “On Specifying Database Updates,”The Journal of Logic Programming, 25(1), pp. 53–91, 1995.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Tammet, T., “Proof Search Strategies in Linear Logic,”Journal of Automated Reasoning, 12, pp. 273–304, 1994.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Teniente, E. and Olive, A., “The Events Method for View Updating,” inDeductive Databases, EDBT’92, LNCS 580, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Wagner, G., “A Database Needs Two Kinds of Negation,” inMFDBS 91, 3rd Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Database and Knowledge Base Systems, Germany, May 1991,LNCS 495, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Harland, J. and Pym, D., “On Resolution in Fragments of Classical Linear Logic,” inLogic Programming and Automated Reasoning (LPAR’92), A. Voronkov, ed., St. Petersburg, Jul. 1992,LNAI 624, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 30–41, 1992.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Dong-Tsan Lee

    Present address: Formosa Multimedia Corp., 232 Tai-Lin Street, 600, Chia-Yi, Taiwan

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Logic and AI Lab., Department of Computer Science, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Perth, Western Australia, Australia

    Dong-Tsan Lee & C. P. Tsang

Authors
  1. Dong-Tsan Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. P. Tsang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Dong-Tsan Lee, Ph.D.: He is a computer scientist in the Department of Computer Science at University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. He received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from the Department of Computer Science at National Chiao-Tung University, Taiwan, in 1983 and 1985, respectively, and earned the Ph.D. degree from the Department of Computer Science at University of Western Australia. His research interests include database and artificial intelligence, linear logic, and real-time software engineering.

Chin-Ping Tsang, Ph.D.: He is currently an associate professor in the Department of Computer Science at University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. He received the Ph.D. degree from the University of Western Australia. He was the head of the Department of Computer Science at the University of Western Australia from 1994 to 1997. His research interests include artificial intelligence, non-classicial logic and neural nets.

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, DT., Tsang, C.P. Linear logic for deductive databases. New Gener Comput 17, 201–228 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03037436

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03037436

Keywords

Search

Navigation