Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

Balancing Expressiveness and Inexpressiveness in View Design

Published: 15 November 2021 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    We study the design of data publishing mechanisms that allow a collection of autonomous distributed data sources to collaborate to support queries. A common mechanism for data publishing is via views: functions that expose derived data to users, usually specified as declarative queries. Our autonomy assumption is that the views must be on individual sources, but with the intention of supporting integrated queries. In deciding what data to expose to users, two considerations must be balanced. The views must be sufficiently expressive to support queries that users want to ask—the utility of the publishing mechanism. But there may also be some expressiveness restrictions. Here, we consider two restrictions, a minimal information requirement, saying that the views should reveal as little as possible while supporting the utility query, and a non-disclosure requirement, formalizing the need to prevent external users from computing information that data owners do not want revealed. We investigate the problem of designing views that satisfy both expressiveness and inexpressiveness requirements, for views in a restricted information systems - query languages (conjunctive queries), and for arbitrary views.

    References

    [1]
    Serge Abiteboul, Richard Hull, and Victor Vianu. 1995. Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley.
    [2]
    Marcelo Arenas, Pablo Barceló, and Juan L. Reutter. 2011. Query Languages for Data Exchange: Beyond Unions of Conjunctive Queries. Theory Comput. Syst. 49, 2 (2011), 489–564.
    [3]
    Jean-François Baget, Fabien Garreau, Marie-Laure Mugnier, and Swan Rocher. 2014. Extending acyclicity notions for existential rules. In Proceedings of the ECAI.
    [4]
    Jean-François Baget, Marie-Laure Mugnier, Sebastian Rudolph, and Michaël Thomazo. 2011. Walking the complexity lines for generalized guarded existential rules. In Proceedings of the IJCAI.
    [5]
    Vince Bárány, Michael Benedikt, and Balder Ten Cate. 2018. Some model theory of guarded nengation. J. Symbol. Logic 83, 4 (2018), 1307–1344.
    [6]
    Johes Bater, Gregory Elliott, Craig Eggen, Satyender Goel, Abel N. Kho, and Jennie Rogers. 2017. SMCQL: Secure query processing for private data networks. In Proceedings of the VLDB.
    [7]
    Michael Benedikt, Pierre Bourhis, Louis Jachiet, and Michaël Thomazo. 2019. Reasoning about disclosure in data integration in the presence of source constraints. In Proceedings of the IJCAI.
    [8]
    Michael Benedikt, Pierre Bourhis, Balder ten Cate, and Gabriele Puppis. 2016. Querying visible and invisible information. In Proceedings of the LICS.
    [9]
    Michael Benedikt, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, and Egor V. Kostylev. 2018. Logical foundations of information disclosure in ontology-based data integration. Artif. Intell. 262 (2018), 52–95.
    [10]
    Michael Benedikt, Balder ten Cate, and Efi Tsamoura. 2016. Generating plans from proofs. In Proceedings of the TODS.
    [11]
    Piero A. Bonatti and Luigi Sauro. 2013. A confidentiality model for ontologies. In Proceedings of the ISWC.
    [12]
    Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, Maurizio Lenzerini, and Riccardo Rosati. 2012. View-based query answering in description logics: Semantics and complexity. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 78, 1 (2012), 26–46.
    [13]
    David Chaum, Claude Crépeau, and Ivan Damgard. 1988. Multiparty unconditionally secure protocols. In Proceedings of the STOC.
    [14]
    Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Ian Horrocks, Markus Krötzsch, Clemens Kupke, Despoina Magka, Boris Motik, and Zhe Wang. 2013. Acyclicity notions for existential rules and their application to query answering in ontologies. J. Artific. Intell. Res. 47 (2013), 741–808.
    [15]
    A. Deutsch, A. Nash, and J. Remmel. 2008. The chase revisited. In Proceedings of the PODS.
    [16]
    Cynthia Dwork. 2006. Differential privacy. In Proceedings of the ICALP.
    [17]
    Cynthia Dwork and Aaron Roth. 2014. The algorithmic foundations of differential privacy. Found. Trends Theor. Comput. Sci. 9, 3&4 (Aug. 2014), 211–407.
    [18]
    Ronald Fagin, Phokion G. Kolaitis, Renee J. Miller, and Lucian Popa. 2005. Data exchange: Semantics and query answering. Theor. Comput. Sci. 336, 1 (2005), 89–124.
    [19]
    Tomasz Gogacz and Jerzy Marcinkowski. 2015. The hunt for a red spider: Conjunctive query determinacy is undecidable. In Proceedings of the LICS.
    [20]
    Tomasz Gogacz and Jerzy Marcinkowski. 2016. Red spider meets a rainworm: Conjunctive query finite determinacy is undecidable. In Proceedings of the PODS.
    [21]
    Alon Y. Halevy. 2001. Answering queries using views: A survey. Very Large Data Base J. 10, 4 (2001), 270–294.
    [22]
    David S. Johnson and Anthony C. Klug. 1984. Testing containment of conjunctive queries under functional and inclusion dependencies. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 28, 1 (1984).
    [23]
    Paraschos Koutris, Prasang Upadhyaya, Magdalena Balazinska, Bill Howe, and Dan Suciu. 2015. Query-based data pricing. J. ACM 62, 5 (2015).
    [24]
    Chao Li, Daniel Yang Li, Gerome Miklau, and Dan Suciu. 2017. A theory of pricing private data. Commun. ACM 60, 12 (2017), 79–86.
    [25]
    D. Maier, A. O. Mendelzon, and Y. Sagiv. 1979. Testing implications of data dependencies. Trans. Database Syst. 4, 4 (1979), 455–469.
    [26]
    B. Marnette. 2009. Generalized schema-mappings: From termination to tractability. In Proceedings of the PODS.
    [27]
    Alan Nash and Alin Deutsch. 2007. Privacy in GLAV information integration. In Proceedings of the ICDT.
    [28]
    Alan Nash, Luc Segoufin, and Victor Vianu. 2010. Views and queries: Determinacy and rewriting. Trans. Database Syst. 35, 3 (2010).
    [29]
    A. Onet. 2013. The chase procedure and its applications in data exchange. In Proceedings of the DEIS. 1–37.

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2023)Mask–Mediator–Wrapper: A Revised Mediator–Wrapper Architecture for Heterogeneous Data Source IntegrationApplied Sciences10.3390/app1304247113:4(2471)Online publication date: 14-Feb-2023

    Index Terms

    1. Balancing Expressiveness and Inexpressiveness in View Design

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Transactions on Database Systems
      ACM Transactions on Database Systems  Volume 46, Issue 4
      December 2021
      169 pages
      ISSN:0362-5915
      EISSN:1557-4644
      DOI:10.1145/3492445
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 15 November 2021
      Accepted: 01 September 2021
      Revised: 01 May 2021
      Received: 01 July 2020
      Published in TODS Volume 46, Issue 4

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Views
      2. determinacy
      3. non-disclosure

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Refereed

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)53
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
      Reflects downloads up to 26 Jul 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2023)Mask–Mediator–Wrapper: A Revised Mediator–Wrapper Architecture for Heterogeneous Data Source IntegrationApplied Sciences10.3390/app1304247113:4(2471)Online publication date: 14-Feb-2023

      View Options

      Get Access

      Login options

      Full Access

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Full Text

      View this article in Full Text.

      Full Text

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format.

      HTML Format

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media