A SAT-based System for Consistent Query Answering

An inconsistent database is a database that violates one or more integrity constraints, such as functional dependencies. Consistent Query Answering is a rigorous and principled approach to the semantics of queries posed against inconsistent databases. The consistent answers to a query on an inconsistent database is the intersection of the answers to the query on every repair, i.e., on every consistent database that differs from the given inconsistent one in a minimal way. Computing the consistent answers of a fixed conjunctive query on a given inconsistent database can be a coNP-hard problem, even though every fixed conjunctive query is efficiently computable on a given consistent database. We designed, implemented, and evaluated CAvSAT, a SAT-based system for consistent query answering. CAvSAT leverages a set of natural reductions from the complement of consistent query answering to SAT and to Weighted MaxSAT. The system is capable of handling unions of conjunctive queries and arbitrary denial constraints, which include functional dependencies as a special case. We report results from experiments evaluating CAvSAT on both synthetic and real-world databases. These results provide evidence that a SAT-based approach can give rise to a comprehensive and scalable system for consistent query answering.Comment: 25 pages including appendix, to appear in the 22nd International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testin

Inconsistency-tolerant Query Answering in Ontology-based Data Access

Ontology-based data access (OBDA) is receiving great attention as a new paradigm for managing information systems through semantic technologies. According to this paradigm, a Description Logic ontology provides an abstract and formal representation of the domain of interest to the information system, and is used as a sophisticated schema for accessing the data and formulating queries over them. In this paper, we address the problem of dealing with inconsistencies in OBDA. Our general goal is both to study DL semantical frameworks that are inconsistency-tolerant, and to devise techniques for answering unions of conjunctive queries under such inconsistency-tolerant semantics. Our work is inspired by the approaches to consistent query answering in databases, which are based on the idea of living with inconsistencies in the database, but trying to obtain only consistent information during query answering, by relying on the notion of database repair. We first adapt the notion of database repair to our context, and show that, according to such a notion, inconsistency-tolerant query answering is intractable, even for very simple DLs. Therefore, we propose a different repair-based semantics, with the goal of reaching a good compromise between the expressive power of the semantics and the computational complexity of inconsistency-tolerant query answering. Indeed, we show that query answering under the new semantics is first-order rewritable in OBDA, even if the ontology is expressed in one of the most expressive members of the DL-Lite family

Detecting Ambiguity in Prioritized Database Repairing

In its traditional definition, a repair of an inconsistent database is a consistent database that differs from the inconsistent one in a "minimal way." Often, repairs are not equally legitimate, as it is desired to prefer one over another; for example, one fact is regarded more reliable than another, or a more recent fact should be preferred to an earlier one. Motivated by these considerations, researchers have introduced and investigated the framework of preferred repairs, in the context of denial constraints and subset repairs. There, a priority relation between facts is lifted towards a priority relation between consistent databases, and repairs are restricted to the ones that are optimal in the lifted sense. Three notions of lifting (and optimal repairs) have been proposed: Pareto, global, and completion. In this paper we investigate the complexity of deciding whether the priority relation suffices to clean the database unambiguously, or in other words, whether there is exactly one optimal repair. We show that the different lifting semantics entail highly different complexities. Under Pareto optimality, the problem is coNP-complete, in data complexity, for every set of functional dependencies (FDs), except for the tractable case of (equivalence to) one FD per relation. Under global optimality, one FD per relation is still tractable, but we establish Pi-2-p-completeness for a relation with two FDs. In contrast, under completion optimality the problem is solvable in polynomial time for every set of FDs. In fact, we present a polynomial-time algorithm for arbitrary conflict hypergraphs. We further show that under a general assumption of transitivity, this algorithm solves the problem even for global optimality. The algorithm is extremely simple, but its proof of correctness is quite intricate

A Dichotomy on the Complexity of Consistent Query Answering for Atoms with Simple Keys

We study the problem of consistent query answering under primary key violations. In this setting, the relations in a database violate the key constraints and we are interested in maximal subsets of the database that satisfy the constraints, which we call repairs. For a boolean query Q, the problem CERTAINTY(Q) asks whether every such repair satisfies the query or not; the problem is known to be always in coNP for conjunctive queries. However, there are queries for which it can be solved in polynomial time. It has been conjectured that there exists a dichotomy on the complexity of CERTAINTY(Q) for conjunctive queries: it is either in PTIME or coNP-complete. In this paper, we prove that the conjecture is indeed true for the case of conjunctive queries without self-joins, where each atom has as a key either a single attribute (simple key) or all attributes of the atom

On the Relationship between Consistent Query Answering and Constraint Satisfaction Problems

Recently, Fontaine has pointed out a connection between consistent query answering (CQA) and constraint satisfaction problems (CSP) [Fontaine, LICS 2013]. We investigate this connection more closely, identifying classes of CQA problems based on denial constraints and GAV constraints that correspond exactly to CSPs in the sense that a complexity classification of the CQA problems in each class is equivalent (up to FO-reductions) to classifying the complexity of all CSPs. We obtain these classes by admitting only monadic relations and only a single variable in denial constraints/GAVs and restricting queries to hypertree UCQs. We also observe that dropping the requirement of UCQs to be hypertrees corresponds to transitioning from CSP to its logical generalization MMSNP and identify a further relaxation that corresponds to transitioning from MMSNP to GMSNP (also know as MMSNP_2). Moreover, we use the CSP connection to carry over decidability of FO-rewritability and Datalog-rewritability to some of the identified classes of CQA problems