Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Temporal Dependencies

  • Jef WijsenEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_396


Static integrity constraints involve only the current database state. Temporal integrity constraints involve current, past, and future database states; they can be expressed by essentially unrestricted sentences in temporal logic. Certain syntactically restricted classes of temporal constraints have been studied in their own right for considerations of feasibility or practicality; they are usually called temporal dependencies. Most temporal dependencies proposed in the literature are dynamic versions of static functional dependencies.

Historical Background

Static dependencies (functional, multivalued, join, and other dependencies) have been investigated in depth since the early years of the relational model. Classical problems about dependencies concern logical implication and axiomatization. The study of a particular dependency class is often motivated by its practical importance in databases. This is undeniably the case for the notion of functional dependency (FD), which...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Baudinet M, Chomicki J, Wolper P. Constraint-generating dependencies. J Comput Syst Sci. 1999;59(1):94–115.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bidoit N, de Amo S. A first step towards implementing dynamic algebraic dependences. Theor Comput Sci. 1998;190(2):115–49.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chomicki J, Toman D. Temporal databases. In: Fisher M, Gabbay DM, Vila L, editors. Handbook of temporal reasoning in artificial intelligence. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science; 2005.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ginsburg S, Hull R. Order dependency in the relational model. Theor Comput Sci. 1983;26(1):149–95.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jensen CS, Snodgrass RT. Temporal specialization and generalization. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 1994;6(6):954–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jensen CS, Snodgrass RT, Soo MD. Extending existing dependency theory to temporal databases. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 1996;8(4):563–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vianu V. Dynamic functional dependencies and database aging. J ACM. 1987;34(1):28–59.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang XS, Bettini C, Brodsky A, Jajodia S. Logical design for temporal databases with multiple granularities. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1997;22(2):115–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wijsen J. Design of temporal relational databases based on dynamic and temporal functional dependencies. In: Clifford J, Tuzhilin A, editors. Temporal databases. Workshops in computing. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer; 1995. p. 61–76.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wijsen J. Reasoning about qualitative trends in databases. Inf Syst. 1998;23(7):463–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wijsen J. Temporal FDs on complex objects. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1999;24(1):127–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wijsen J. Trends in databases: Reasoning and mining. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 2001;13(3):426–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MonsMonsBelgium

Section editors and affiliations

  • Richard T. Snodgrass
    • 1
  • Christian S. Jensen
    • 2
  1. 1.University of ArizonaTucsonUSA
  2. 2.Aalborg UniversityAalborg ØstDenmark