## Abstract

This paper is concerned with the use of general laws in data bases. It consists of two main parts respectively devoted to state laws and to transition laws. Some of the state laws are used as derivation rules while others are used as integrity rules. Integrity rules as well as derivation rules can be treated in many ways which are presented. For each such method, the actions to be undertaken when querying, adding, suppressing and updating information in the data base are studied. For transition laws, a formalism is proposed which enables them to be handled in the same way as integrity rules stemming from state laws. The self-consistency of transition laws is also discussed.

## Keywords

Data Base Transition Rule Elementary Information Explicit Information Derivation Rule
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.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- 1.Abrial, J. R. [1974] Data Semantics,
*Proceedings of Working Conference on Management of Data*, Cargese, France, April 1974, 1–59.Google Scholar - 2.Cadiou, J. M. [1976] On Semantic Issues in the Relational Model of Data, In
*Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science*(A. Mazurkiewiz, Ed.), Vol, 45, Springer-Verlag, 1976, 23–38.Google Scholar - 3.Chamberlin, D.D. et al.[1976] SEQUEL2: A Unified Approach to Data Definition, Manipulation, and Control,
*IBM Journal of Research and development**20*, 6 (Nov. 1976), 560–575.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 4.Chang, C. L. and Lee, R.C.T. [1973]
*Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving*, Computer Science and Applied Mathematics, Academic Press, Inc., New York (1973).MATHGoogle Scholar - 5.Date, C. J. [1975]
*An Introduction to Data Base Systems*, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1975.Google Scholar - 6.Demolombe, R. and Nicolas, J. M. [1976] Knowledge Representation and Evolutivity in Data Base Management Systems,
*T-Report CERT-LBD-76/5*, Toulouse, France (Nov. 1976).Google Scholar - 7.Demolombe, R. and Nicolas, J. M. [1977] Normal Form and Irreducible Relations. Atomic Relations: A New Proposal,
*T-Report CERT-LBD-77/2*, Toulouse, France (Oct. 1977).Google Scholar - 8.Eswaran, K. P. and Chamberlin, D. D. [1975] Functional Specifications of a Subsystem for Data Base Integrity,
*Proceedings of the Int. Conference on VLDB*, Framington, Mass., Sept. 1975, 48–68.Google Scholar - 9.Hammer, M. M. and McLeod, D. J. [1975] Semantic Integrity in a Relational Data Base System,
*Proceedings of the Int. Conference on VLDB*, Framington, Mass., Sept. 1975, 25–47.Google Scholar - 10.Hewitt, C. [1971] “PLANNER: A Language for Providing Theorem and Manipulating Models in Robots,” Ph.D. Thesis, M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass., Feb. 1971.Google Scholar
- 11.Kowalski, R. A. [1974] Logic for Problem Solving,
*Memo*.*75*, Department of Computational Logic, University of Edinburgh, (March 1974).Google Scholar - 12.Kowalski, R. A. [1976] Algorithm = Logic + Control, Imperial College, London, (Nov. 1976).Google Scholar
- 13.Minker, J. and VanderBrug, G. [1975] State Space Problem Resolution and Theorem Proving — Some Relationships,
*CACM*(Feb. 1975), 107–115.Google Scholar - 14.Nicolas, J. M. and Gallaire, H. [1978] Data Base: Theory vs. Interpretation, In
*Logic and Data Bases*(H. Gallaire and J. Minker, Eds,), Plenum Press, New York, 1978, 33–54.Google Scholar - 15.Stonebraker, M. [1974] High Level Integrity Assurance in Relational Data Base Management Systems,
*Mem. ERL-M473*; University of California, Berkeley, California, August 1974.Google Scholar - 16.Stonebraker, M. [1975] Implementation of Integrity Constraints and Views by Query Modification,
*Proceedings of the 1975 SIGMOD Conference*, San Jose, California, May 1975, 65–78.Google Scholar

## Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1978