Querying Incomplete Data with Logic Programs: ER Strikes Back

  • Andrea Calì
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4801)


Since Chen’s Entity-Relationship (ER) model, conceptual modelling has been playing a fundamental role in relational data design. In this paper we consider an extended ER model enriched with cardinality constraints, disjunction assertions, and is-a relations among both entities and relationships; we present a framework in which the data underlying an ER schema can be directly queried through the schema by using suitable predicates. In this setting, we consider the case of incomplete data, which is likely to happen, for instance, when data from different sources are integrated. We address the problem of providing correct answers to conjunctive queries by reasoning on the schema. Based on previous results about decidability of the problem, we provide a query answering algorithm based on rewriting the initial query into a recursive Datalog query, in which the information about the schema is encoded. We finally give some complexity results, and we show extensions to more general settings.


Logic Program Description Logic Function Symbol Cardinality Constraint Conjunctive Query 
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.
    Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., Vianu, V.: Foundations of Databases. Addison Wesley Publ. Co, London, UK (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arenas, M., Bertossi, L.E., Chomicki, J.: Consistent query answers in inconsistent databases. In: Proc. of PODS 1999, pp. 68–79 (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calì, A.: Query answering and optimisation in information integration. PhD thesis, Università di Roma “La Sapienza” (February 2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Calì, A.: Containment of conjunctive queries over conceptual schemata. In: Lee, M.L., Tan, K.-L., Wuwongse, V. (eds.) DASFAA 2006. LNCS, vol. 3882, pp. 270–284. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Calì, A., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: Accessing data integration systems through conceptual schemas. In: Kunii, H.S., Jajodia, S., Sølvberg, A. (eds.) ER 2001. LNCS, vol. 2224, Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Calì, A., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: Data integration under integrity constraints. Information Systems 29, 147–163 (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Calì, A., Lembo, D., Rosati, R.: On the decidability and complexity of query answering over inconsistent and incomplete databases. In: Proc. of PODS 2003, pp. 260–271 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Calì, A., Lembo, D., Rosati, R.: Query rewriting and answering under constraints in data integration systems. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2003, pp. 16–21 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: DL-Lite: Tractable description logics for ontologies. In: Proc. of AAAI 2005, pp. 602–607 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Data complexity of query answering in description logics. In: Proc. of the 10th Int. Conf. on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2006), pp. 260–270 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: On the decidability of query containment under constraints. In: Proc. of PODS’98, pp. 149–158 (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Edward, P.F.: Containment and minimization of positive conjunctive queries in OODB’s. In: Edward, P.F. (ed.) Proc. of PODS’92, pp. 202–211 (1992)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen, P.: The Entity-Relationship model: Toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans. on Database Systems 1(1), 9–36 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Codd, E.F.: A relational model of data for large shared data banks. Comm. of the ACM 13(6), 377–387 (1970)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dantsin, E., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Voronkov, A.: Complexity and expressive power of logic programming. ACM Computing Surveys 33(3), 374–425 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duschka, O.M., Genesereth, M.R.: Answering recursive queries using views. In: Oliver, M. (ed.) Proc. of PODS’97, pp. 109–116 (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hernández, M.A., Stolfo, S.J.: Real-world data is dirty: Data cleansing and the merge/purge problem. J. of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 2(1), 9–37 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    David, S., Johnson, D.S., Klug, A.C.: Testing containment of conjunctive queries under functional and inclusion dependencies. J. of Computer and System Sciences 28(1), 167–189 (1984)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kolaitis, P.G., Vardi, M.Y.: Conjunctive-query containment and constraint satisfaction. In: Phokion, G. (ed.) Proc. of PODS’98, pp. 205–213 (1998)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lembo, D.: Dealing with Inconsistency and Incompleteness in Data Integration. PhD thesis, Dip. di Inf. e Sist., Univ. di Roma “La Sapienza” (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lenzerini, M.: Data integration: A theoretical perspective. In: Proc. of PODS 2002, pp. 233–246 (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Maier, D., Mendelzon, A.O., Sagiv, Y.: Testing implications of data dependencies. ACM Trans. on Database Systems 4, 455–469 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maier, D., Sagiv, Y., Yannakakis, M.: On the complexity of testing implications of functional and join dependencies. J. of the ACM 28(4), 680–695 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Markowitz, V.M., Makowsky, J.A.: Identifying extended entity-relationship object structures in relational schemas. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 16(8), 777–790 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ortiz, M., Calvanese, D., Eiter, T.: Characterizing data complexity for conjunctive query answering in expressive description logics. In: Proc. of the 21st Nat. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2006) (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reiter, R.: On closed world data bases. In: Gallaire, H., Minker, J. (eds.) Logic and Databases, pp. 119–140. Plenum Publ.Co. (1978)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vardi, M.: Inferring multivalued dependencies from functional and join dependencies. Acta Informatica 19, 305–324 (1983)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Calì
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Computing Laboratory, University of Oxford, Wolfson Building, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QDUnited Kingdom
  2. 2.Faculty of Computer Science, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, piazza Domenicani 3, I-39100 BolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations