Advertisement

Data dictionary design: a logic programming approach

  • Fiora Pirri
  • Clara Pizzuti
Invited Paper (2) Logical Aspects
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 645)

Abstract

Some steps of the design of a data dictionary with the use of a particular methodology are represented by means of logic rules augumented with integrity constraints defining illegal data design. The presence of concepts incompatible among them is easily revealed by asking for satisfiability of integrity constraints. Furthermore, it is possible to obtain the hypotheses explaining the presence of illegality by exploiting abductive reasoning. To this end a new proposal for the computation of such hypotheses, based on an suitable manipulation of minimal three-valued models of the logic program, is presented.

Keywords

data dictionary design entity-relationship model logic programs partial interpretations abduction explanations 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    K.R.Apt, H.A.Blair, A.Walker,“Towards a theory of declarative knowledge”, in J.Minker ed. Foundations of Deductive Database and Logic Programming, pp.89–148, 1988, Morgan-Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    C. Batini, G. Di Battista, G. Santucci “Representation Structures for Data Dictionaries”, Technical Report, 9, May, 1991, Università di Roma “'La Sapienza”.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    F. Bry, “Intensional Updates: Abduction via Deduction” D. Warren and P. Szeredi, eds, Logic Programming: Proc. 7th Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, pp.561–575, Cambridge, MA, 1990, MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    T. Bylander, D. Allemang, M.C. Tanner and J.R. Josephson, “Some Results Concerning the Computational Complexity of Abduction”, Proc. First Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Toronto, pp.44–54, 1989, Morgan-Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    P. M. Dung, “Negation as Hypotheses: an Abductive Foundation for Logic Programming”, Proc. 7th Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, pp. 3–17, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    K. Eshghi and R.A. Kowalski, “Abduction Compared with Negation by Failure”, Proc. 6th Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, pp. 234–254, 1989, MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    D.Gabbay, E.Laenens, D.Vermair “ Credoulous vs. skeptical semantics for ordered logic programs”,KR 91, pp.208–217, Morgan Kaufman, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    A.C. Kakas and P. Mancarella, “Generalized Stable Models: a Semantics for Abduction”, L.C. Aiello ed. Proc. ECAI 90, pp. 385–391, London, 1990, Pitman.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    A.C. Kakas and P. Mancarella, “On the Relation between Truth Maintenance and Abduction”, Proc. PRICAI 90, pp. 438–443, Nagoya, Japan, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    H.J. Levesque, “A knowledge-level account of abduction” Proc. IJCAI '89, pp.1061–1067, Detroit, MI, 1989, Morgan-Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    F. Pirri and C. Pizzuti, ‘Explaining Incompatibilities in Data Dictionary Design Through Abduction, DIS, Technical Report, 1992, Università di Roma “'La Sapienza”.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    R. Reiter and J. de Kleer, “Foundations of Assumption-Based Truth Maintenance Systems: Preliminary Report”, Proc. of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp.183–188, 1987, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    K. Satoh and N. Iwayama, “Computing Abduction by Using the TMS”, Proc. 7th Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, pp. 3–17, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    M. Shanahan, “Prediction is Deduction but Explanation is Abduction”, Proc. of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1990, pp. 1055–1060, Boston, Ma.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    B. Selman and H.J. Levesque, “Abductive and Default Reasoning: A Computational Core”, Proc. of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 343–348, 1990, Boston, Ma.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fiora Pirri
    • 1
  • Clara Pizzuti
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Informatica e SistemisticaUniversità di Roma “La Sapienza”RomaItalia
  2. 2.CRAIRendeItalia

Personalised recommendations