Data-graph repairs: the preferred approach

Repairing inconsistent knowledge bases is a task that has been assessed, with great advances over several decades, from within the knowledge representation and reasoning and the database theory communities. As information becomes more complex and interconnected, new types of repositories, representation languages and semantics are developed in order to be able to query and reason about it. Graph databases provide an effective way to represent relationships among data, and allow processing and querying these connections efficiently. In this work, we focus on the problem of computing preferred (subset and superset) repairs for graph databases with data values, using a notion of consistency based on a set of Reg-GXPath expressions as integrity constraints. Specifically, we study the problem of computing preferred repairs based on two different preference criteria, one based on weights and the other based on multisets, showing that in most cases it is possible to retain the same computational complexity as in the case where no preference criterion is available for exploitation.Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2206.0750

From Causes for Database Queries to Repairs and Model-Based Diagnosis and Back

In this work we establish and investigate connections between causes for query answers in databases, database repairs wrt. denial constraints, and consistency-based diagnosis. The first two are relatively new research areas in databases, and the third one is an established subject in knowledge representation. We show how to obtain database repairs from causes, and the other way around. Causality problems are formulated as diagnosis problems, and the diagnoses provide causes and their responsibilities. The vast body of research on database repairs can be applied to the newer problems of computing actual causes for query answers and their responsibilities. These connections, which are interesting per se, allow us, after a transition -inspired by consistency-based diagnosis- to computational problems on hitting sets and vertex covers in hypergraphs, to obtain several new algorithmic and complexity results for database causality.Comment: To appear in Theory of Computing Systems. By invitation to special issue with extended papers from ICDT 2015 (paper arXiv:1412.4311

Answer Sets for Consistent Query Answering in Inconsistent Databases

A relational database is inconsistent if it does not satisfy a given set of integrity constraints. Nevertheless, it is likely that most of the data in it is consistent with the constraints. In this paper we apply logic programming based on answer sets to the problem of retrieving consistent information from a possibly inconsistent database. Since consistent information persists from the original database to every of its minimal repairs, the approach is based on a specification of database repairs using disjunctive logic programs with exceptions, whose answer set semantics can be represented and computed by systems that implement stable model semantics. These programs allow us to declare persistence by defaults and repairing changes by exceptions. We concentrate mainly on logic programs for binary integrity constraints, among which we find most of the integrity constraints found in practice.Comment: 34 page

Priority-Based Conflict Resolution in Inconsistent Relational Databases

We study here the impact of priorities on conflict resolution in inconsistent relational databases. We extend the framework of repairs and consistent query answers. We propose a set of postulates that an extended framework should satisfy and consider two instantiations of the framework: (locally preferred) l-repairs and (globally preferred) g-repairs. We study the relationships between them and the impact each notion of repair has on the computational complexity of repair checking and consistent query answers

Coherent Integration of Databases by Abductive Logic Programming

We introduce an abductive method for a coherent integration of independent data-sources. The idea is to compute a list of data-facts that should be inserted to the amalgamated database or retracted from it in order to restore its consistency. This method is implemented by an abductive solver, called Asystem, that applies SLDNFA-resolution on a meta-theory that relates different, possibly contradicting, input databases. We also give a pure model-theoretic analysis of the possible ways to `recover' consistent data from an inconsistent database in terms of those models of the database that exhibit as minimal inconsistent information as reasonably possible. This allows us to characterize the `recovered databases' in terms of the `preferred' (i.e., most consistent) models of the theory. The outcome is an abductive-based application that is sound and complete with respect to a corresponding model-based, preferential semantics, and -- to the best of our knowledge -- is more expressive (thus more general) than any other implementation of coherent integration of databases