Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Efficient processing of declarative rule-based languages for Databases

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Processing Declarative Knowledge (PDK 1991)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 567))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 205 Accesses

Abstract

In recent years, Deductive Databases have progressed from a subject of theoretical interest to an emerging technology area of significant commercial potential. The two main catalysts for progress have been a demand for advanced database applications and a rapid maturation of the enabling technology. Thus, Deductive Databases have now progressed beyond their initial Prolog-oriented beginnings and produced logic-based language, architectures and systems that support a declarative expression of knowledge through rules and their efficient processing on large databases. In this paper, we review the key concepts behind deductive databases, including language constructs, semantics issues, implementation techniques, architectures and prototypes. Then, we discuss key application areas driving the development of this technology, and current research directions in systems and theory.

This work was done at MCC, Austin, Texas.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackley, D., et al. “System Analysis for Deductive Database Environments: an Enhanced role for Aggregate Entities,” Procs. 9th Int. Conference on Entity-Relationship Approach, Lausanne, CH, Oct. 8–10, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chimenti, D. et al., “The LDL System Prototype,” IEEE Journal on Data and Knowledge Engineering, March 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hopper, D.E., “Rattling SABRE—New Ways to Compete on Information,” Harvard Business Review, May–June 1990, pp. 118–125.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ceri, S., G. Gottlob and L. Tanca, “Logic Programming and Deductive Databases,” Springer-Verlag, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  5. “The Rapid Prototyping Conundrum”, DATAMATION, June 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Forgy, C. L., Rete: a Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object Patttern Match Problem, Artificial Intelligence 19 (1), pp. 17–37, 1982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gane, C. “Rapid System Development,” Prentice Hall, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ganguly, S., S. Greco and C. Zaniolo, “Minimum and Maximum Predicates in Logic Programming,” Proc. 10th, ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 154–164, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gelfond, M., and Lifschitz, V., “The stable model semantics for logic programming”, Proc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp. 1070–1080, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Giannotti, F., D. Pedreschi, Saccà, D., and Zaniolo, C., “Non-Determinism in Deductive Databases,” MCC Technical Report, STP-LD-003-91.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gallaire, H., J. Minker and J.M. Nicolas,” Logic and Databases: a Deductive Approach,” Computer Surveys, Vol. 16, No. 2, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kellogg, C., “A Practical Amalgam of Knowledge and Data Base Technology” Proc. of AAAI Conference, Pittsburg, Pa., 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kiernan, G., C. de Maindreville, and E. Simon “Making Deductive Database a Practical Technology: a step forward,” Proc. 1990 ACM-SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, pp. 237–246.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Krishnamurthy, S. Naqvi and Zaniolo, ”Database Transactions in LDL”, Proc. Logic Programming North American Conference, pp. 795–830, MIT Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kunifji S., H. Yokota, “Prolog and Relational Databases for 5th Generation Computer Systems,” in Advances in Logic and Databases, Vol. 2, (Gallaire, Minker and Nicolas eds.), Plenum, New York, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Krishnamurthy, R., and Naqvi, S.A., “Non Deterministic Choice in Datalog”, Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on Data and Knowledge Bases, Morgan Kaufmann Pub., Los Altos, pp. 416–424, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Morris, K. et al. ”YAWN! (Yet Another Window on NAIL!), Data Engineering, Vol.10, No. 4, pp. 28–44, Dec. 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Moss, C., “Cut and Paste—defining the Impure Primitives of Prolog”, Proc. Third Int. Conference on Logic Programming, London, July 1986, pp. 686–694.

    Google Scholar 

  19. S. A. Naqvi, S. Tsur “A Logical Language for Data and Knowledge Bases”, W. H. Freeman, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Phipps, G., M.A., Derr and K. A. Ross, “Glue-Nail: a Deductive Database System,” Proc. 1991 ACM-SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, pp. 308–317 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Przymusinski, T.C., “On the Declarative and Procedural Semantics of Deductive Databases and Logic Programs”, in Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, (Minker, J. ed.), Morgan Kaufman, Los Altos, 1987, pp. 193–216.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Saccà, D., and Zaniolo C., “Stable models and non determinism in logic programs with negation”, Proc. 9th, ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 205–218, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Schmidt, H. et al “Combining Deduction by Certainty with the Power of Magic” Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Deductive and 0–0 Databases, Dec. 4–6, 1989, Kyoto, Japan.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Tsur S., “Deductive Databases in Action,” ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT Symp. on Principles of Database Systems, Denver, Colorado, pp. 142–153, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Tsur S., “Data Dredging,” Data Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 4, IEEE Computer Society, Dec. 90.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ullman, J.D., “Database and Knowledge-Based Systems, Vols. I and II, Computer Science Press, Rockville, Md., 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ullman, J. and C. Zaniolo, “Deductive Databases, Achievements and Future Directions,” SIGMOD Record, pp. 77–83, Vol. 19, No. 4, ACM Press, Dec. 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Van Gelder, A., Ross, K., Schlipf, J.S., “Unfounded Sets and Well-Founded Semantics for General Logic Programs”, ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT Symp. on Principles of Database Systems, March 1988, pp. 221–230.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wahl, D., “Bill of Materials in Relational Databases-an analysis of current research and its applications to manufacturing databases,” DEC Report 22/2/91.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Warren, D.H.D., “An Abstract Prolog Instruction Set,” Tech. Note 309, AI Center, Computer Science and Technology Div., SRI, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Zaniolo, C. “Object Identity and Inheritance in Deductive Databases: an Evolutionary Approach,” Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Deductive and 0–0 Databases, Dec. 4–6, 1989, Kyoto, Japan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, 90024, Los Angeles, CA

    Carlo Zaniolo

Authors
  1. Carlo Zaniolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Harold Boley Michael M. Richter

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Zaniolo, C. (1991). Efficient processing of declarative rule-based languages for Databases. In: Boley, H., Richter, M.M. (eds) Processing Declarative Knowledge. PDK 1991. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 567. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0013517

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0013517

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-55033-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46667-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation