Classical algorithms for query optimization presuppose the absence of inconsistencies or uncertainties in the database and exploit only valid semantic knowledge provided, e.g., by integrity constraints. Data inconsistency or uncertainty, however, is a widespread critical issue in ordinary databases: total integrity is often, in fact, an unrealistic assumption and violations to integrity constraints may be introduced in several ways. In this report we present an approach for semantic query optimization that, differently from the traditional ones, relies on not necessarily valid semantic knowledge, e.g., provided by violated or soft integrity constraints, or induced by applying data mining techniques. Query optimization that leverages invalid semantic knowledge cannot guarantee the semantic equivalence between the original user's query and its rewriting: thus a query optimized by our approach yields approximate answers that can be provided to the users whenever fast but possibly partial responses are required. Also, we evaluate the impact of use of invalid semantic knowledge in the rewriting of a query by computing a measure of the quality of the answer returned to the user, and we rely on the recent theory of Belief Logic Programming to deal with the presence of possible correlation in the semantic knowledge used in the rewriting.
For instance, @cite_0 introduces the model of belief databases, where the tuples of a (relational) database are annotated by users' beliefs, which express their agreement or disagreement on the reliability of the data. Beliefs do not measure uncertainty of knowledge, but provide a qualitative evaluation of the presence of conflicts in the information contained in the database: thus, they are taken into account for query answering, but they are not exploited to optimize a query or to provide approximate results.
@cite_0
2145515910 1518484552 1500821679 2052388228 2074622901 2159481891 128781889 2535582266 2027344326 2125194189 2159296364 2138204945 1990391007 2787097606 2062180302 1963853643 1551374365 2952155763 2125791539 2104411075
We propose a database model that allows users to annotate data with belief statements. Our motivation comes from scientific database applications where a community of users is working together to assemble, revise, and curate a shared data repository. As the community accumulates knowledge and the database content evolves over time, it may contain conflicting information and members can disagree on the information it should store. For example, Alice may believe that a tuple should be in the database, whereas Bob disagrees. He may also insert the reason why he thinks Alice believes the tuple should be in the database, and explain what he thinks the correct tuple should be instead. We propose a formal model for Belief Databases that interprets users' annotations as belief statements. These annotations can refer both to the base data and to other annotations. We give a formal semantics based on a fragment of multi-agent epistemic logic and define a query language over belief databases. We then prove a key technical result, stating that every belief database can be encoded as a canonical Kripke structure. We use this structure to describe a relational representation of belief databases, and give an algorithm for translating queries over the belief database into standard relational queries. Finally, we report early experimental results with our prototype implementation on synthetic data. This paper considers the problem of knowledge inference on large-scale imperfect repositories with incomplete coverage by means of embedding entities and relations at the first attempt. We propose IIKE (Imperfect and Incomplete Knowledge Embedding), a probabilistic model which measures the probability of each belief, i.e. @math , in large-scale knowledge bases such as NELL and Freebase, and our objective is to learn a better low-dimensional vector representation for each entity ( @math and @math ) and relation ( @math ) in the process of minimizing the loss of fitting the corresponding confidence given by machine learning (NELL) or crowdsouring (Freebase), so that we can use @math to assess the plausibility of a belief when conducting inference. We use subsets of those inexact knowledge bases to train our model and test the performances of link prediction and triplet classification on ground truth beliefs, respectively. The results of extensive experiments show that IIKE achieves significant improvement compared with the baseline and state-of-the-art approaches. We propose an extended relational database model which can model both uncertainty and imprecision in data. This model is based on Dempster-Shafer theory which has become popular in AI as an uncertainty reasoning tool. The definitions of Be1 and Pls functions in Dempster-Shafer theory are extended to compute the beliefs of various comparisons (e.g., equality, less than, etc.) between two basic probability assignments. Based on these new definitions of Be1 and Pls functions and the Boolean combinations of Be1 and Pls values for two events, five relational operators such as Select, Cartesian Product, Join, Projection Intersect, and Union are defined. In data publishing, the owner delegates the role of satisfying user queries to a third-party publisher. As the publisher may be untrusted or susceptible to attacks, it could produce incorrect query results. In this paper, we introduce a scheme for users to verify that their query results are complete (i.e., no qualifying tuples are omitted) and authentic (i.e., all the result values originated from the owner). The scheme supports range selection on key and non-key attributes, project as well as join queries on relational databases. Moreover, the proposed scheme complies with access control policies, is computationally secure, and can be implemented efficiently. Abstract This paper deals with relational databases which are extended in the sense that fuzzily known values are allowed for attributes. Precise as well as partial (imprecise, uncertain) knowledge concerning the value of the attributes are represented by means of [0,1]-valued possibility distributions in Zadeh's sense. Thus, we have to manipulate ordinary relations on Cartesian products of sets of fuzzy subsets rather than fuzzy relations. Besides, vague queries whose contents are also represented by possibility distributions can be taken into account. The basic operations of relational algebra, union, intersection, Cartesian product, projection, and selection are extended in order to deal with partial information and vague queries. Approximate equalities and inequalities modeled by fuzzy relations can also be taken into account in the selection operation. Then, the main features of a query language based on the extended relational algebra are presented. An illustrative example is provided. This approach, which enables a very general treatment of relational databases with fuzzy attribute values, makes an extensive use of dual possibility and necessity measures. Identity uncertainty is a pervasive problem in real-world data analysis. It arises whenever objects are not labeled with unique identifiers or when those identifiers may not be perceived perfectly. In such cases, two observations may or may not correspond to the same object. In this paper, we consider the problem in the context of citation matching—the problem of deciding which citations correspond to the same publication. Our approach is based on the use of a relational probability model to define a generative model for the domain, including models of author and title corruption and a probabilistic citation grammar. Identity uncertainty is handled by extending standard models to incorporate probabilities over the possible mappings between terms in the language and objects in the domain. Inference is based on Markov chain Monte Carlo, augmented with specific methods for generating efficient proposals when the domain contains many objects. Results on several citation data sets show that the method outperforms current algorithms for citation matching. The declarative, relational nature of the model also means that our algorithm can determine object characteristics such as author names by combining multiple citations of multiple papers. This paper is concerned with protection of information in relational databases from disclosure to properly identified users. It is assumed that the only means of access to the database is through a relational query language. The objective of the paper is to formalize the notion of protection. We first describe the information content of the database by a set of propositions and their truth values. The objects to be protected are (the truth values of) certain propositions that have been declared confidential. A query violates a protected proposition if its answer modifies the knowledge of tHe user about (the truth value of) this proposition. Following this approach, we propose a model for evaluating protection systems. In this model a protection system is characterized by the type of queries it takes as its input, the type of data it can protect, the means of protection against queries (e.g. rejection or modification) and the type of protection it provides (e.g., total protection, partial protection, protection against user's inference). Some examples of the use of the model as a tool for analysis are given. We investigate the impact of uncertainty on relational data -base schema design. Uncertainty is modeled qualitatively by assigning to tuples a degree of possibility with which they occur, and assigning to functional dependencies a degree of certainty which says to which tuples they apply. A design theory is developed for possibilistic functional dependencies, including efficient axiomatic and algorithmic characterizations of their implication problem. Naturally, the possibility degrees of tuples result in a scale of different degrees of data redundancy. Scaled versions of the classical syntactic Boyce-Codd and Third Normal Forms are established and semantically justified in terms of avoiding data redundancy of different degrees. Classical decomposition and synthesis techniques are scaled as well. Therefore, possibilistic functional dependencies do not just enable designers to control the levels of data integrity and losslessness targeted but also to balance the classical trade-off between query and update efficiency. Extensive experiments confirm the efficiency of our framework and provide original insight into relational schema design. We present a preliminary pilot study of belief annotation and automatic tagging. Our objective is to explore semantic meaning beyond surface propositions. We aim to model people's cognitive states, namely their beliefs as expressed through linguistic means. We model the strength of their beliefs and their (the human) degree of commitment to their utterance. We explore only the perspective of the author of a text. We classify predicates into one of three possibilities: committed belief, non committed belief, or not applicable. We proceed to manually annotate data to that end, then we build a supervised framework to test the feasibility of automatically predicting these belief states. Even though the data is relatively small, we show that automatic prediction of a belief class is a feasible task. Using syntactic features, we are able to obtain significant improvements over a simple baseline of 23 F-measure absolute points. The best performing automatic tagging condition is where we use POS tag, word type feature AlphaNumeric, and shallow syntactic chunk information CHUNK. Our best overall performance is 53.97 F-measure. The dynamics of belief and knowledge is one of the major components of any autonomous system that should be able to incorporate new pieces of information. In order to apply the rationality result of belief dynamics theory to various practical problems, it should be generalized in two respects: first it should allow a certain part of belief to be declared as immutable; and second, the belief state need not be deductively closed. Such a generalization of belief dynamics, referred to as base dynamics, is presented in this paper, along with the concept of a generalized revision algorithm for knowledge bases (Horn or Horn logic with stratified negation). We show that knowledge base dynamics has an interesting connection with kernel change via hitting set and abduction. In this paper, we show how techniques from disjunctive logic programming can be used for efficient (deductive) database updates. The key idea is to transform the given database together with the update request into a disjunctive (datalog) logic program and apply disjunctive techniques (such as minimal model reasoning) to solve the original update problem. The approach extends and integrates standard techniques for efficient query answering and integrity checking. The generation of a hitting set is carried out through a hyper tableaux calculus and magic set that is focused on the goal of minimality. We consider a set of views stating possibly conflicting facts. Negative facts in the views may come, e.g., from functional dependencies in the underlying database schema. We want to predict the truth values of the facts. Beyond simple methods such as voting (typically rather accurate), we explore techniques based on "corroboration", i.e., taking into account trust in the views. We introduce three fixpoint algorithms corresponding to different levels of complexity of an underlying probabilistic model. They all estimate both truth values of facts and trust in the views. We present experimental studies on synthetic and real-world data. This analysis illustrates how and in which context these methods improve corroboration results over baseline methods. We believe that corroboration can serve in a wide range of applications such as source selection in the semantic Web, data quality assessment or semantic annotation cleaning in social networks. This work sets the bases for a wide range of techniques for solving these more complex problems. A number of text mining and information extraction projects such as Text Runner and NELL seek to automatically build knowledge bases from the rapidly growing amount of information on the web. In order to scale to the size of the web, these projects often employ ad hoc heuristics to reason about uncertain and contradictory information rather than reasoning jointly about all candidate facts. In this paper, we present a Markov logic-based system for cleaning an extracted knowledge base. This allows a scalable system such as NELL to take advantage of joint probabilistic inference, or, conversely, allows Markov logic to be applied to a web scale problem. Our system uses only the ontological constraints and confidence values of the original system, along with human-labeled data if available. The labeled data can be used to calibrate the confidence scores from the original system or learn the effectiveness of individual extraction patterns. To achieve scalability, we introduce a neighborhood grounding method that only instantiates the part of the network most relevant to the given query. This allows us to partition the knowledge cleaning task into tractable pieces that can be solved individually. In experiments on NELL's knowledge base, we evaluate several variants of our approach and find that they improve both F1 and area under the precision-recall curve. ABSTRACT This paper concerns the semantics of Codd's relational model of data. Formulated are precise conditions that should be satisfied in a semantically meaningful extension of the usual relational operators, such as projection, selection, union, and join, from operators on relations to operators on tables with “null values” of various kinds allowed. These conditions require that the system be safe in the sense that no incorrect conclusion is derivable by using a specified subset Ω of the relational operators; and that it be complete in the sense that all valid conclusions expressible by relational expressions using operators in Ω are in fact derivable in this system. Two such systems of practical interest are shown. The first, based on the usual Codd's null values, supports projection and selection. The second, based on many different (“marked”) null values or variables allowed to appear in a table, is shown to correctly support projection, positive selection (with no negation occurring in the selection condition), union, and renaming of attributes, which allows for processing arbitrary conjunctive queries. A very desirable property enjoyed by this system is that all relational operators on tables are performed in exactly the same way as in the case of the usual relations. A third system, mainly of theoretical interest, supporting projection, selection, union, join, and renaming, is also discussed. Under a so-called closed world assumption, it can also handle the operator of difference. It is based on a device called a conditional table and is crucial to the proof of the correctness of the second system. All systems considered allow for relational expressions containing arbitrarily many different relation symbols, and no form of the universal relation assumption is required. Categories and Subject Descriptors: H.2.3 [Database Management]: Languages— query languages; H.2.4 [Database Management]: Systems— query processing General Terms: Theory In real-world applications, knowledge bases consisting of all the available information for a specific domain, along with the current state of affairs, will typically contain contradictory data, coming from different sources, as well as data with varying degrees of uncertainty attached. An important aspect of the effort associated with maintaining such knowledge bases is deciding what information is no longer useful; pieces of information may be outdated; may come from sources that have recently been discovered to be of low quality; or abundant evidence may be available that contradicts them. In this paper, we propose a probabilistic structured argumentation framework that arises from the extension of Presumptive Defeasible Logic Programming (PreDeLP) with probabilistic models, and argue that this formalism is capable of addressing these basic issues. The formalism is capable of handling contradictory and uncertain data, and we study non-prioritized belief revision over probabilistic PreDeLP programs that can help with knowledge-base maintenance. For belief revision, we propose a set of rationality postulates -- based on well-known ones developed for classical knowledge bases -- that characterize how these belief revision operations should behave, and study classes of operators along with theoretical relationships with the proposed postulates, including representation theorems stating the equivalence between classes of operators and their associated postulates. We then demonstrate how our framework can be used to address the attribution problem in cyber security cyber warfare. This article deals with the computation of consistent answers to queries on relational databases that violate primary key constraints. A repair of such inconsistent database is obtained by selecting a maximal number of tuples from each relation without ever selecting two distinct tuples that agree on the primary key. We are interested in the following problem: Given a Boolean conjunctive query q, compute a Boolean first-order (FO) query @j such that for every database db, @j evaluates to true on db if and only if q evaluates to true on every repair of db. Such @j is called a consistent FO rewriting of q. We use novel techniques to characterize classes of queries that have a consistent FO rewriting. In this way, we are able to extend previously known classes and discover new ones. Finally, we use an Ehrenfeucht-Fraisse game to show the non-existence of a consistent FO rewriting for @[email protected]?y(R([email protected]?,y)@?R([email protected]?,c)), where c is a constant and the first coordinate of R is the primary key. Due to numerous applications producing noisy data, e.g., sensor data, experimental data, data from uncurated sources, information extraction, etc., there has been a surge of interest in the development of probabilistic databases. Most probabilistic database models proposed to date, however, fail to meet the challenges of real-world applications on two counts: (1) they often restrict the kinds of uncertainty that the user can represent; and (2) the query processing algorithms often cannot scale up to the needs of the application. In this work, we define a probabilistic database model, PrDB, that uses graphical models, a state-of-the-art probabilistic modeling technique developed within the statistics and machine learning community, to model uncertain data. We show how this results in a rich, complex yet compact probabilistic database model, which can capture the commonly occurring uncertainty models (tuple uncertainty, attribute uncertainty), more complex models (correlated tuples and attributes) and allows compact representation (shared and schema-level correlations). In addition, we show how query evaluation in PrDB translates into inference in an appropriately augmented graphical model. This allows us to easily use any of a myriad of exact and approximate inference algorithms developed within the graphical modeling community. While probabilistic inference provides a generic approach to solving queries, we show how the use of shared correlations, together with a novel inference algorithm that we developed based on bisimulation, can speed query processing significantly. We present a comprehensive experimental evaluation of the proposed techniques and show that even with a few shared correlations, significant speedups are possible. We consider the problem of answering queries from databases that may be incomplete. A database is incomplete if some tuples may be missing from some relations, and only a part of each relation is known to be complete. This problem arises in several contexts. For example, systems that provide access to multiple heterogeneous information sources often encounter incomplete sources. The question we address is to determine whether the answer to a specific given query is complete even when the database is incomplete. We present a novel sound and complete algorithm for the answer-completeness problem by relating it to the problem of independence of queries from updates. We also show an important case of the independence problem (and therefore ofthe answer-completeness problem) that can be decided in polynomial time, whereas the best known algorithm for this case is exponential. This case involves updates that are described using a conjunction of comparison predicates. We also describe an algorithm that determines whether the answer to the query is complete in the current state of the database. Finally, we show that our ‘treatment extends naturally to partiallyincorrect databases. Permission to copy without fee all or part of this material is granted provided that the copies aTe not made OT distributed for direct commercial advantage, the VLDB copyright notice and the title of the publication and its date appear, and notice is given that copying is by permission of the Very Large Data Base Endowment. To copy otherwise, OT to republish, requirea a fee and or special permission from the Endowment. Proceedings of the 22nd VLDB Conference Mumbai(Bombay), India, 1996 Knowledge base (KB) completion adds new facts to a KB by making inferences from existing facts, for example by inferring with high likelihood nationality(X,Y) from bornIn(X,Y). Most previous methods infer simple one-hop relational synonyms like this, or use as evidence a multi-hop relational path treated as an atomic feature, like bornIn(X,Z) -> containedIn(Z,Y). This paper presents an approach that reasons about conjunctions of multi-hop relations non-atomically, composing the implications of a path using a recursive neural network (RNN) that takes as inputs vector embeddings of the binary relation in the path. Not only does this allow us to generalize to paths unseen at training time, but also, with a single high-capacity RNN, to predict new relation types not seen when the compositional model was trained (zero-shot learning). We assemble a new dataset of over 52M relational triples, and show that our method improves over a traditional classifier by 11 , and a method leveraging pre-trained embeddings by 7 . It is often desirable to represent in a database, entities whose properties cannot be deterministically classified. The authors develop a data model that includes probabilities associated with the values of the attributes. The notion of missing probabilities is introduced for partially specified probability distributions. This model offers a richer descriptive language allowing the database to more accurately reflect the uncertain real world. Probabilistic analogs to the basic relational operators are defined and their correctness is studied. A set of operators that have no counterpart in conventional relational systems is presented. > Distant supervision algorithms learn information extraction models given only large readily available databases and text collections. Most previous work has used heuristics for generating labeled data, for example assuming that facts not contained in the database are not mentioned in the text, and facts in the database must be mentioned at least once. In this paper, we propose a new latent-variable approach that models missing data. This provides a natural way to incorporate side information, for instance modeling the intuition that text will often mention rare entities which are likely to be missing in the database. Despite the added complexity introduced by reasoning about missing data, we demonstrate that a carefully designed local search approach to inference is very accurate and scales to large datasets. Experiments demonstrate improved performance for binary and unary relation extraction when compared to learning with heuristic labels, including on average a 27 increase in area under the precision recall curve in the binary case.