Evolving objects in temporal information systems

  • Alessandro ArtaleEmail author
  • Christine Parent
  • Stefano Spaccapietra


This paper presents a semantic foundation of temporal conceptual models used to design temporal information systems. We consider a modelling language able to express both timestamping and evolution constraints. We conduct a deeper investigation of evolution constraints, eventually devising a model-theoretic semantics for a full-fledged model with both timestamping and evolution constraints. The proposed formalization is meant both to clarify the meaning of the various temporal constructors that appeared in the literature and to give a rigorous definition, in the context of temporal information systems, to notions like satisfiability, subsumption and logical implication. Furthermore, we show how to express temporal constraints using a subset of first-order temporal logic, i.e., \(\mathcal{DLR}{_{\mathcal{US}}}\) the description logic \(\mathcal{DLR}\) extended with the temporal operators Since and Until. We show how \(\mathcal{DLR}{_{\mathcal{US}}}\) is able to capture the various modelling constraints in a succinct way and to perform automated reasoning on temporal conceptual models.


Temporal data models Description logics 

Mathematics Subject Classifications (2000)

68P15 68T30 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ahmad, B.: Modeling bi-temporal databases. Master’s thesis, UMIST Department of Computation, UK (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Artale, A.: Reasoning on temporal conceptual schemas with dynamic constraints. In: 11th Int. Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME04). Also in Proc. of the 2004 Int. Workshop on Description Logics (DL’04). IEEE Computer Society (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Artale, A., Franconi, E.: Temporal ER modeling with description logics. In: Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Conceptual Modeling (ER’99). Springer, Berlin (1999, November)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Artale, A., Franconi, E., Mandreoli, F.: Description logics for modelling dynamic information. In: Chomicki, J., van der Meyden, R., Saake, G. (eds.) Logics for Emerging Applications of Databases. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Artale, A., Franconi, E., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: A temporal description logic for reasoning about conceptual schemas and queries. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th Joint European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA-02), vol. 2424 of LNAI, pp. 98–110. Springer, Berlin (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Artale, A., Lutz, C., Toman, D.: A description logic of change. In: Int. Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-07). Hyderabad, India (2007 Jan)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G.: Reasoning on UML class diagrams. Artif. Intell. 168(1–2), 70–118 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: On the decidability of query containment under constraints. In: Proc. of the 17th ACM SIGACT SIGMOD SIGART Sym. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS’98), pp. 149–158 (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Calvanese, D., Lenzerini, M., Nardi, D.: Description logics for conceptual data modeling. In: Chomicki, J., Saake, G. (eds.) Logics for Databases and Information Systems. Kluwer (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Calvanese, D., Lenzerini, M., Nardi, D.: Unifying class-based representation formalisms. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 11, 199–240 (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chomicki, J., Toman, D.: Temporal logic in information systems. In: Chomicki, J., Saake, G. (eds.) Logics for Databases and Information Systems, Chapter 1, pp. 31–70. Kluwer, Boston (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pacheco e Silva, M.A.: Dynamic integrity constraints definition and enforcement in databases: a classification framework. In: Proc. of the IFIP TC11 Working Group 11.5, First Working Conf. on Integrity and Internal Control in Information Systems, pp. 65–87. Chapman & Hall, Ltd., London, UK (1997)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Elmasri, R., Weeldreyer, J.A., Hevner A.R.: The category concept: an extension to the entity-relationship model. Data Knowl. Eng. 1(1), 75–116 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Etzion, O., Gal, A., Segev, A.: Extended update functionality in temporal databases. In: Etzion, O., Jajodia, S., Sripada, S. (eds.) Temporal Databases – Research and Practice. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 56–95. Springer, Berlin (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Finger, M., McBrien, P.: Temporal conceptual-level databases. In: Gabbay, D., Reynolds, M., Finger, M. (eds.) Temporal Logics – Mathematical Foundations and Computational Aspects, pp. 409–435. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gabbay, D., Kurucz, A., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Many-dimensional modal logics: theory and applications. Studies in Logic. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gottlob, G., Schrefl, M., Röck, B.: Extending object-oriented systems with roles. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 14(3), 268–296 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gregersen, H., Jensen, J.S.: Conceptual modeling of time-varying information. Technical Report TimeCenter TR-35, Aalborg University, Denmark (1998)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gregersen, H., Jensen, J.S.: Temporal entity-relationship models – a survey. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 11(3), 464–497 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gupta, R., Hall, G.: An abstraction mechanism for modeling generation. In: Proc. of ICDE’92, pp. 650–658 (1992)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hall, G., Gupta, R.: Modeling transition. In: Proc. of ICDE’91, pp. 540–549 (1991)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hodkinson, I., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Decidable fragments of first-order temporal logics. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 106, 85–134 (2000)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., van Harmelen, F.: From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: the making of a web ontology language. J. Web Semantics 1(1), 7–26 (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jensen, C.S., Clifford, J., Gadia, S.K., Hayes, P., Jajodia, S., et al.: The consensus glossary of temporal database concepts. In: Etzion, O., Jajodia, S., Sripada, S. (eds.) Temporal Databases – Research and Practice, pp. 367–405. Springer, Berlin (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jensen, C.S., Snodgrass, R.T.: Temporal data management. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 111(1), 36–44 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jensen, C.S., Soo, M., Snodgrass, R.T.: Unifying temporal data models via a conceptual model. Inf. Syst. 9(7), 513–547 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kambayashi, Y., Peng, Z.: Object deputy model and its applications. In: Proc. of the 4th Int. Conf. on Database Systems for Advanced Applications (DASFAA), pp. 1–15. World Scientific Press (1995)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Li, Q., Dong, G.: A framework for object migration in object-oriented databases. Data Knowl. Eng. 13(3), 221–242 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li, Q., Lochovsky, F.H.: Adome: an advanced object modeling environment. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 10(2), 255–276 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McBrien, P., Seltveit, A.H., Wangler, B.: An entity-relationship model extended to describe historical information. In: Proc. of CISMOD’92, pp. 244–260. Bangalore, India (1992)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mendelzon, A.O., Milo, T., Waller, E.: Object migration. In: Proc. of the 13th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS94), pp. 232–242. ACM, New York, NY, USA (1994)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Odberg, E.: Category classes: flexible classification and evolution in object-oriented databases. In: Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. on Advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE94), LNCS 881, pp. 406–420, Secaucus, NJ, USA. Springer, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Papazoglou, M.P., Kramer, B.J., Bouguettaya, A.: On the representation of objects with polymorphic shape and behaviour. In: Int. Conf. on Conceptual Modeling/the Entity Relationship Approach, LNCS 881, pp. 223–240 (1994)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Parent, C., Spaccapietra, S., Zimanyi, E.: The MurMur project: modeling and querying multi-representation spatio-temporal databases. Inf. Syst. 31(8), 733–769 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pernici, B.: Objects with roles. In: Proc. of the ACM SIGOIS and IEEE CS TC-OA Conference on Office Information Systems, Cambridge, Massachussetts, USA, pp. 205–215. ACM, New York, NY, USA (1990)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Spaccapietra, S., Parent, C., Zimanyi, E.: Modeling time from a conceptual perspective. In: International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM98) (1998)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Spaccapietra, S., Parent, C., Zimanyi, E.: Conceptual Modeling for Traditional and Spatio-Temporal Applications – The MADS Approach. Springer, Berlin (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Su, J.: Dynamic constraints and object migration. Theor. Comp. Sci. 184(1–2), 195–236 (1997)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Theodoulidis, C., Loucopoulos, P., Wangler, B.: A conceptual modelling formalism for temporal database applications. Inf. Syst. 16(3), 401–416 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wikipedia: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Temporal Databases."/>

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessandro Artale
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christine Parent
    • 2
  • Stefano Spaccapietra
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculty of Computer ScienceFree University of Bolzano, IBolzanoItaly
  2. 2.HEC/ISIUniversité de Lausanne, CHLausanneSwitzerland
  3. 3.Database LaboratoryEcole Polytechnique Fédérale Lausanne, CHLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations