Improving the Deductive System DES with Persistence by Using SQL DBMS's

This work presents how persistent predicates have been included in the in-memory deductive system DES by relying on external SQL database management systems. We introduce how persistence is supported from a user-point of view and the possible applications the system opens up, as the deductive expressive power is projected to relational databases. Also, we describe how it is possible to intermix computations of the deductive engine and the external database, explaining its implementation and some optimizations. Finally, a performance analysis is undertaken, comparing the system with current relational database systems.Comment: In Proceedings PROLE 2014, arXiv:1501.0169

Cooperative answers in database systems

A major concern of researchers who seek to improve human-computer communication involves how to move beyond literal interpretations of queries to a level of responsiveness that takes the user's misconceptions, expectations, desires, and interests into consideration. At Maryland, we are investigating how to better meet a user's needs within the framework of the cooperative answering system of Gal and Minker. We have been exploring how to use semantic information about the database to formulate coherent and informative answers. The work has two main thrusts: (1) the construction of a logic formula which embodies the content of a cooperative answer; and (2) the presentation of the logic formula to the user in a natural language form. The information that is available in a deductive database system for building cooperative answers includes integrity constraints, user constraints, the search tree for answers to the query, and false presuppositions that are present in the query. The basic cooperative answering theory of Gal and Minker forms the foundation of a cooperative answering system that integrates the new construction and presentation methods. This paper provides an overview of the cooperative answering strategies used in the CARMIN cooperative answering system, an ongoing research effort at Maryland. Section 2 gives some useful background definitions. Section 3 describes techniques for collecting cooperative logical formulae. Section 4 discusses which natural language generation techniques are useful for presenting the logic formula in natural language text. Section 5 presents a diagram of the system

Deductive Optimization of Relational Data Storage

Optimizing the physical data storage and retrieval of data are two key database management problems. In this paper, we propose a language that can express a wide range of physical database layouts, going well beyond the row- and column-based methods that are widely used in database management systems. We use deductive synthesis to turn a high-level relational representation of a database query into a highly optimized low-level implementation which operates on a specialized layout of the dataset. We build a compiler for this language and conduct experiments using a popular database benchmark, which shows that the performance of these specialized queries is competitive with a state-of-the-art in memory compiled database system

Dura

The reactive event processing language, that is developed in the context of this project, has been called DEAL in previous documents. When we chose this name for our language it has not been used by other authors working in the same research area (complex event processing). However, in the meantime it appears in publications of other authors and because we have not used the name in publications yet we cannot claim that we were the first to use it. In order to avoid ambiguities and name conflicts in future publications we decided to rename our language to Dura which stands for “Declarative uniform reactive event processing language”. Therefore the title of this deliverable has been updated to “Dura – Concepts and Examples”