Querying with Intrinsic Preferences

  • Jan Chomicki
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2287)


The handling of user preferences is becoming an increasingly important issue in present-day information systems. Among others, preferences are used for information filtering and extraction to reduce the volume of data presented to the user. They are also used to keep track of user profiles and formulate policies to improve and automate decision making. We propose a logical framework for formulating preferences and its embedding into relational query languages. The framework is simple, and entirely neutral with respect to the properties of preferences. It makes it possible to formulate different kinds of preferences and to use preferences in querying databases. We demonstrate the usefulness of the framework through numerous examples.


Preference Relation Transitive Closure Integrity Constraint Relational Algebra Strict Partial Order 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. Abiteboul, R. Hull, and V. Vianu. Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Agrawal and E.L. Wimmers. A Framework for Expressing and Combining Preferences. In ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pages 297–306, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Börzsönyi, D. Kossmann, and K. Stocker. The Skyline Operator. In IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering, pages 421–430, 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Boutilier, R. I. Brafman, H. H. Hoos, and D. Poole. Reasoning with Conditional Ceteris Paribus Preference Statements. In Symposium on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Brewka and T. Eiter. Preferred Answer Sets for Extended Logic Programs. Artificial Intelligence, 109(1–2):297–356, 1999.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. P. Delgrande, T. Schaub, and H. Tompits. Logic Programs with Compiled Preferences. In European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2000.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Fishburn. Preference Structures and their Numerical Representations. Theoretical Computer Science, 217:359–383, 1999.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    P.C. Fishburn. Utility Theory for Decision Making. Wiley & Sons, 1970.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    F. Giannotti, S. Greco, D. Sacca, and C. Zaniolo. Programming with Nondeterminism in Deductive Databases. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 19(3–4), 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. Govindarajan, B. Jayaraman, and S. Mantha. Preference Logic Programming. In International Conference on Logic Programming, pages 731–745, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. Govindarajan, B. Jayaraman, and S. Mantha. Preference Queries in Deductive Databases. New Generation Computing, pages 57–86, 2001.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Guo, W. Sun, and M.A. Weiss. Solving Satisfiability and Implication Problems in Database Systems. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 21(2):270–293, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. O. Hansson. Preference Logic. In D. Gabbay, editor, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, volume 8. 2001.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    V. Hristidis, N. Koudas, and Y. Papakonstantinou. PREFER: A System for the Efficient Execution of Multiparametric Ranked Queries. In ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pages 259–270, 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R.G. Hughes. Rationality and Intransitive Preferences. Analysis, 40:132–134, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. C. Kanellakis, G. M. Kuper, and P. Z. Revesz. Constraint Query Languages. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 51(1):26–52, August 1995.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. Kiessling, S. Fischer, S. Holland, and T. Ehm. Design and Implementation of COSIMA-A Smart and Speaking E-sales Assistant. In International Workshop on Advanced Issues of E-Commerce and Web-Based Information Systems, 2001.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Lacroix and P. Lavency. Preferences: Putting More Knowledge Into Queries. In International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pages 217–225, 1987.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    S. M. Mantha. First-Order Preference Theories and their Applications. PhD thesis, University of Utah, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    P. Z. Revesz. A Closed-Form Evaluation for Datalog Queries with Integer (Gap)-Order Constraints. Theoretical Computer Science, 116:117–149, 1993.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    C. Sakama and K. Inoue. Prioritized Logic Programming and its Application to Commonsense Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 123:185–222, 2000.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    S-W. Tan and J. Pearl. Specification and Evaluation of Preferences under Uncertainty. In International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1994.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    G. H. von Wright. The Logic of Preference. Edinburgh University Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    M. P. Wellman and J. Doyle. Preferential Semantics for Goals. In National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 698–703, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Chomicki
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity at BuffaloBuffalo

Personalised recommendations