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
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.