Journal of Automated Reasoning

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 171–197 | Cite as

Model theoretic approach to view updates in deductive databases

  • José Alberto Fernández
  • John Grant
  • Jack Minker


The view update problem for deductive databases has been defined as the problem of accomplishing the update of an intensional predicate by modifying appropriately the extensional database. A previous paper by Grant, Horty, Lobo, and Minker developed algorithms for the insertion and the deletion of an intensional predicate in certain important classes of stratified disjunctive deductive databases. This paper introduces a model theoretic approach which encompasses a wide class of Herbrand semantics, including the perfect model and stable model semantics, for disjunctive databases including negation. This generalizes the earlier results: now the intensional database may contain disjunctive and denial rules, and the database may be required to satisfy integrity constraints. As in the previous paper, the algorithms are proved to be correct and best according to the criterion of causing minimal change to the database, where the first priority is to minimize deletions.

Key words

deductive database view update model theoretic approach 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Clark, K. L.: Negation as failure, in H.Gallaire and J.Minker (eds), Logic and Data Bases, Plenum Press, New York, 1978, pp. 293–322.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fernández, José Alberto: Disjunctive deductive databases, PhD thesis, University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science, College Park, 1994.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fernández, J. A., Khandakar, Z. A., and Minker, J.: A tractable class of disjunctive deductive databases, in Proc. Workshop on Deductive Databases, Joint Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming (JICSLP'92), Washington, DC, Nov. 1992.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fernández, José Alberto, Lobo, Jorge, Minker, Jack, and Subrahmanian, V. S.: Disjunctive LP + integrity constraints = stable model semantics, Ann. Math. Artificial Intelligence, 8(3–4) (1993), 449–474.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fagin, R., Ullman, J. D., and Vardi, M. Y.: On the semantics of updates in databases, in Proc. 7th ACM SIGACT/SIGMOD Symp. Principles of Database Systems, 1983, pp. 352–365.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grant, J., Horty, J., Lobo, J., and Minker, J.: View updates in stratified disjunctive databases, J. Automated Reasoning 11 (1993), 249–267.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming, in R. A. Kowalski and K. A. Bowen (eds), Proc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, Seattle, Washington, 15–19 August 1988, pp. 1070–1080.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gelfond, M., and Lifschitz, V.: Logic programs with classical negation, in D. H. D. Warren and P. Szeredi (eds), Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Jerusalem, Israel, June 1990, The MIT Press, pp. 579–597.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kowalski, R. A.: Logic for data description, in H.Gallaire and J.Minker (eds), Logic and Data Bases, Plenum Press, New York, 1978, pp. 77–102.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Minker, J.: On indefinite databases and the closed world assumption, in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 138, Springer-Verlag, 1982, pp. 292–308.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Minker, Jack and Ruiz, Carolina: Semantics for disjunctive logic programs with explicit and default negation, Fundamenta Informaticae 20(3/4) (1994), 145–192, Anniversary Issue edited by H. Rasiowa.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Przymusinski, T. C.: On the declarative semantics of deductive databases and logic programming, in J.Minker (ed.), Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, Chapter 5, Morgan Kaufmann, Washington, DC, 1988, pp. 193–216.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pearce, P. and Wagner, G.: Logic programming with strong negation, in P. Schroeder-Heister (ed.), Proc. Int. Workshop on Extensions of Logic Programming, Tübingen, FRG, Dec. 1989, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag, pp. 311–326.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reiter, R.: Towards a logical reconstruction of relational database theory, in M. L.Brodie, J. L.Mylopoulos and J. W.Schmit (eds), On Conceptual Modelling, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1984, pp. 163–189.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reiter, R.: What should a database know? in Proc. 7th Int. Conf. Logic Programming, Jerusalem, 1990, Abstract of Invited Talk, p. 765.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • José Alberto Fernández
    • 1
  • John Grant
    • 3
  • Jack Minker
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.Bull HN Information Systems Inc.PhoenizUSA
  3. 3.Department of Computer and Information SciencesTowson State UniversityTowsonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  5. 5.Institute for Advanced Computer StudiesUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations