Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal on Data Semantics 4/2020

23-11-2020 | Original Article

Declarative Semantics for P2P Data Management System

Authors: Luciano Caroprese, Ester Zumpano

Published in: Journal on Data Semantics | Issue 4/2020

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The paper presents a logic-based framework for modeling the interaction among peers. It is assumed that each peer consists of a database, a set of standard logic rules, a set of mapping rules allowing to import a maximal set of atoms not leading to inconsistency and a set of integrity constraints. The proposal relies on previous works in Calvanese et al. (in: PODS, 2004) and Caroprese et al. (in: FLAIRS, 2006) where a (declarative) semantics for P2P systems is defined. Under this semantics, only facts not making the local databases inconsistent can be imported—Weak Models. This mechanism leads to the concept of Maximal Weak Models that are weak models in which peers import maximal sets of facts not violating integrity constraints. Different extensions to the basic framework, that aim at introducing significant mechanisms of preferences among different scenarios in the case of conflicting information, can be provided. This paper presents the basic framework of Maximal Weak Models and two extensions: the Trusted Weak Model Semantics and the Dynamic Weak Model Semantics. The Trusted Weak Model Semantics stems from the observation that the framework proposed in Calvanese et al. (in: PODS, 2004) and Caroprese et al. (in: FLAIRS, 2006) does not provide any mechanism to set priorities among mapping rules, rules that “integrate” data of a source peer into the database of a target peer. Anyhow, while collecting data, it is quite natural for a source peer to associate different degrees of reliability to the portion of data provided by its neighbor peers. Therefore, this paper enhances the basic semantics by using priority levels among mapping rules in order to select the weak models containing a maximum number of mapping atoms according to their importance. We will call these weak models, Trusted Weak Models, and we will show they can be computed as stable models of a logic program with weak constraints. The Dynamic Weak Model Semantics further enhances the basic framework by introducing aggregates and different levels of preference criteria that are not rigid, i.e., fixed a priori at design time, but depends on the database instance. The extended framework allows to model concepts like “in the case of conflicting information, it is preferable to import data from the neighbor peer that can provide the maximum number of tuples” or “in the case of conflicting information, it is preferable to import data from the neighbor peer such that the sum of the values of an attribute is minimum” without selecting a priori preferred peers. We will call these weak models, Dynamic Weak Models, and we will show they can be computed as stable models of a logic program with a list of sets of priorities.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Footnotes
1
The special syntax used for a fact—its first part is the peer identifier—will be formally presented in Sect. 3.
 
2
The precise syntax and semantics of mapping rules will be formally defined in Sect. 3.
 
3
We use for the operator and both ‘, ’ and ‘\(\wedge \).’
 
4
Higher values for priority levels mark weak constraints of higher importance.
 
5
A program with a weak constraint \(\Leftarrow p(X)\) can be regarded as modeling a minimization problem whose objective function is the cardinality of p.
 
6
Whenever the reference to a peer predicate (resp. peer atom, peer literal, peer fact, peer rule, peer standard rule, peer integrity constraint, peer mapping rule ) is clear from the context, the term peer can be omitted.
 
7
A built-in atom is of the form \(\theta (X,Y)\), where X and Y are terms and \(\theta \in \{<,>,\le ,\ge ,=,\ne \}\). It is also denoted as \(X\ \theta \ Y\).
 
8
In fact, under stable model semantics a strong constraint of the form \(\leftarrow {\mathscr {B}}\) is actually a shorthand for \(p \leftarrow {\mathscr {B}}, \lnot p\).
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Abiteboul S, Hull R, Vianu V (1995) Foundations of databases. Addison-Wesley, BostonMATH Abiteboul S, Hull R, Vianu V (1995) Foundations of databases. Addison-Wesley, BostonMATH
2.
go back to reference Arenas M, Bertossi L, Chomicki J (1999) Consistent query answers in inconsistent databases. In: PODS, pp 68–79 Arenas M, Bertossi L, Chomicki J (1999) Consistent query answers in inconsistent databases. In: PODS, pp 68–79
3.
go back to reference Bertossi L, Bravo L (2004) Query answering in peer-to-peer data exchange systems. In: Extending database technology workshops Bertossi L, Bravo L (2004) Query answering in peer-to-peer data exchange systems. In: Extending database technology workshops
4.
go back to reference Bertossi L, Bravo L (2007) The semantics of consistency and trust in peer data exchange systems. In: LPAR, pp 107–122 Bertossi L, Bravo L (2007) The semantics of consistency and trust in peer data exchange systems. In: LPAR, pp 107–122
5.
go back to reference Bertossi L, Bravo L (2017) Consistency and trust in peer data exchange systems. TPLP 17(2):148–204MathSciNetMATH Bertossi L, Bravo L (2017) Consistency and trust in peer data exchange systems. TPLP 17(2):148–204MathSciNetMATH
6.
go back to reference Bikakis A, Antoniou G (2008) Distributed defeasible contextual reasoning in ambient computing. In: European conference on ambient intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 308–325. Bikakis A, Antoniou G (2008) Distributed defeasible contextual reasoning in ambient computing. In: European conference on ambient intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 308–325.
7.
8.
go back to reference Brewka G, Eiter T (2007) Equilibria in heterogeneous nonmonotonic multi-context systems. In: AAAI, pp 385–390 Brewka G, Eiter T (2007) Equilibria in heterogeneous nonmonotonic multi-context systems. In: AAAI, pp 385–390
9.
go back to reference Brewka G, Niemela I, Truszczynski M (2003) Answer set optimization. In: IJCAI, pp 867–872 Brewka G, Niemela I, Truszczynski M (2003) Answer set optimization. In: IJCAI, pp 867–872
10.
go back to reference Brewka G (2002) Logic programming with ordered disjunction. In: AAAI/IAAI, pp 100–105 Brewka G (2002) Logic programming with ordered disjunction. In: AAAI/IAAI, pp 100–105
11.
go back to reference Brewka G, Niemela I, Truszczynski M (2003) Answer set optimization. In: IJCAI Brewka G, Niemela I, Truszczynski M (2003) Answer set optimization. In: IJCAI
12.
go back to reference Buccafurri F, Leone N, Rullo P (2000) Enhancing disjunctive datalog by constraints. TKDE 12(5):845–860 Buccafurri F, Leone N, Rullo P (2000) Enhancing disjunctive datalog by constraints. TKDE 12(5):845–860
13.
go back to reference Calvanese D, De Giacomo G, Lembo D, Lenzerini M, Rosati R (2007) Inconsistency tolerance in P2P data integration: an epistemic logic approach. In: International Workshop on Database Programming Languages. Springer, Berlin, pp 90-105. Calvanese D, De Giacomo G, Lembo D, Lenzerini M, Rosati R (2007) Inconsistency tolerance in P2P data integration: an epistemic logic approach. In: International Workshop on Database Programming Languages. Springer, Berlin, pp 90-105.
14.
go back to reference Calvanese D, De Giacomo G, Lenzerini M, Rosati R (2004) Logical foundations of peer-to-peer data integration. In: PODS, pp 241–251 Calvanese D, De Giacomo G, Lenzerini M, Rosati R (2004) Logical foundations of peer-to-peer data integration. In: PODS, pp 241–251
15.
go back to reference Caroprese L, Greco S, Zumpano E (2006) A logic programming approach to querying and integrating P2P deductive databases. In: FLAIRS, pp 31–36 Caroprese L, Greco S, Zumpano E (2006) A logic programming approach to querying and integrating P2P deductive databases. In: FLAIRS, pp 31–36
16.
go back to reference Caroprese L, Molinaro C, Zumpano E (2006) Integrating and querying P2P deductive databases. In: IDEAS, pp 285–290 Caroprese L, Molinaro C, Zumpano E (2006) Integrating and querying P2P deductive databases. In: IDEAS, pp 285–290
17.
go back to reference Caroprese L, Zumpano E (2007) Consistent data integration in P2P deductive. In: SUM, pp 230–243 Caroprese L, Zumpano E (2007) Consistent data integration in P2P deductive. In: SUM, pp 230–243
18.
go back to reference Caroprese L, Zumpano E (2008) Modeling cooperation in P2P data management systems. In: ISMIS, pp 225–235 Caroprese L, Zumpano E (2008) Modeling cooperation in P2P data management systems. In: ISMIS, pp 225–235
19.
go back to reference Caroprese L, Zumpano E (2012) Handling preferences in P2P systems. In: FOIKS, pp 91–106 Caroprese L, Zumpano E (2012) Handling preferences in P2P systems. In: FOIKS, pp 91–106
20.
go back to reference Caroprese L, Zumpano E (2017) P2P Deductive databases: well founded semantics and distributed computation. In: ADBIS, pp 91–99 Caroprese L, Zumpano E (2017) P2P Deductive databases: well founded semantics and distributed computation. In: ADBIS, pp 91–99
21.
go back to reference Caroprese L, Zumpano E. P2P deductive databases: a system prototype. In: iiWAS 2017, pp 258–265 Caroprese L, Zumpano E. P2P deductive databases: a system prototype. In: iiWAS 2017, pp 258–265
22.
23.
go back to reference Delgrande JP, Schaub T, Tompits H (2000) Logic programs with compiled preferences. In: ECAI, pp 464–468 Delgrande JP, Schaub T, Tompits H (2000) Logic programs with compiled preferences. In: ECAI, pp 464–468
24.
go back to reference Delgrande JP, Schaub T, Tompits H (2003) A framework for compiling preferences in logic programs. TPLP 3(2):129–187MathSciNetMATH Delgrande JP, Schaub T, Tompits H (2003) A framework for compiling preferences in logic programs. TPLP 3(2):129–187MathSciNetMATH
25.
go back to reference Franconi E, Kuper GM, Lopatenko A, Zaihrayeu I (2004) Queries and updates in the coDB peer to peer database system. In: VLDB, pp 1277–1280 Franconi E, Kuper GM, Lopatenko A, Zaihrayeu I (2004) Queries and updates in the coDB peer to peer database system. In: VLDB, pp 1277–1280
26.
go back to reference Franconi E, Kuper GM, Lopatenko A, Zaihrayeu I (2003) A robust logical and computational characterisation of Peer-to-Peer database systems. In: DBISP2P, pp 64–76 Franconi E, Kuper GM, Lopatenko A, Zaihrayeu I (2003) A robust logical and computational characterisation of Peer-to-Peer database systems. In: DBISP2P, pp 64–76
27.
go back to reference Franconi E, Kuper GM, Lopatenko A, Zaihrayeu I (2004) A distributed algorithm for robust data sharing and updates in P2P database networks. In: EDBT Workshops, pp 446–455 Franconi E, Kuper GM, Lopatenko A, Zaihrayeu I (2004) A distributed algorithm for robust data sharing and updates in P2P database networks. In: EDBT Workshops, pp 446–455
28.
go back to reference Gelder AV (1989) The Alternating Fixpoint of Logic Programs with Negation. In: PODS, pp 1–10 Gelder AV (1989) The Alternating Fixpoint of Logic Programs with Negation. In: PODS, pp 1–10
29.
go back to reference Gelfond M, Lifschitz V (1988) The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming. In: ICLP/SLP, pp 1070–1080 Gelfond M, Lifschitz V (1988) The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming. In: ICLP/SLP, pp 1070–1080
30.
go back to reference Gelfond M, Son TC (1997) Reasoning with prioritized defaults. In: LPKR pp 164–223 Gelfond M, Son TC (1997) Reasoning with prioritized defaults. In: LPKR pp 164–223
31.
go back to reference Greco S (1999) Dynamic programming in datalog with aggregates. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 11(2):265–283CrossRef Greco S (1999) Dynamic programming in datalog with aggregates. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 11(2):265–283CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Greco S, Greco G, Zumpano E (2003) Repairing and querying inconsistent databases. TKDE 15(6):1389–1408MATH Greco S, Greco G, Zumpano E (2003) Repairing and querying inconsistent databases. TKDE 15(6):1389–1408MATH
33.
go back to reference Halevy AY, Zachary GI, Suciu D, Tatarinov I (2003) Schema mediation in peer data management systems. In: ICDE, pp 505–516 Halevy AY, Zachary GI, Suciu D, Tatarinov I (2003) Schema mediation in peer data management systems. In: ICDE, pp 505–516
34.
go back to reference Lenzerini M (2002) Data integration: a theoretical perspective. In: PODS, pp 233–246 Lenzerini M (2002) Data integration: a theoretical perspective. In: PODS, pp 233–246
35.
go back to reference Leone N, Pfeifer G, Faber W, Eiter T, Gottlob G, Perri S, Scarcello F (2006) The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 7(3):499–562MathSciNetCrossRef Leone N, Pfeifer G, Faber W, Eiter T, Gottlob G, Perri S, Scarcello F (2006) The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 7(3):499–562MathSciNetCrossRef
36.
37.
go back to reference Lonc L, Truszczynski M (2000) On the Problem of Computing the Well-Founded Semantics. In: International conference on computational logic. Springer, Berlin, pp 673-687 Lonc L, Truszczynski M (2000) On the Problem of Computing the Well-Founded Semantics. In: International conference on computational logic. Springer, Berlin, pp 673-687
38.
go back to reference Papadimitriou CH (1994) Computational complexity. Addison-Wesley, ISBN 978-0-201-53082-7, pp. I-XV, 1-523 Papadimitriou CH (1994) Computational complexity. Addison-Wesley, ISBN 978-0-201-53082-7, pp. I-XV, 1-523
39.
go back to reference Sakama C, Inoue K (2000) Prioritized logic programming and its application to commonsense reasoning. Artif Intell 123(1–2):185–222MathSciNetCrossRef Sakama C, Inoue K (2000) Prioritized logic programming and its application to commonsense reasoning. Artif Intell 123(1–2):185–222MathSciNetCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Sakama C, Inoue K (1996) Representing priorities in logic programs. In: JICSLP, pp 82–96 Sakama C, Inoue K (1996) Representing priorities in logic programs. In: JICSLP, pp 82–96
41.
go back to reference Schaub T, Wang K (2001) A comparative study of logic programs with preference. In: IJCAI, pp 597–602 Schaub T, Wang K (2001) A comparative study of logic programs with preference. In: IJCAI, pp 597–602
42.
go back to reference Syrjanen T, Niemela I (2001) The smodels system. In: LPNMR, pp 434–438 Syrjanen T, Niemela I (2001) The smodels system. In: LPNMR, pp 434–438
43.
go back to reference Wakaki T, Inoue K, Sakama C, Nitta K (2003) Computing preferred answer sets in answer set programming. In: LPAR conference, pp 259–273 Wakaki T, Inoue K, Sakama C, Nitta K (2003) Computing preferred answer sets in answer set programming. In: LPAR conference, pp 259–273
44.
go back to reference Wang K, Zhou L, Lin F (2000) Alternating Fixpoint Theory for Logic Programs with Priority. In: International conference on computational logic. Springer, Berlin, pp 164-178. Wang K, Zhou L, Lin F (2000) Alternating Fixpoint Theory for Logic Programs with Priority. In: International conference on computational logic. Springer, Berlin, pp 164-178.
45.
go back to reference Yang B, Garcia-Molina H (2003) Designing a super-peer network. In: ICDE Yang B, Garcia-Molina H (2003) Designing a super-peer network. In: ICDE
46.
go back to reference Zhang Y, Foo N (1997) Answer sets for prioritized logic programs. In: ILPS, pp 69–83 Zhang Y, Foo N (1997) Answer sets for prioritized logic programs. In: ILPS, pp 69–83
Metadata
Title
Declarative Semantics for P2P Data Management System
Authors
Luciano Caroprese
Ester Zumpano
Publication date
23-11-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Journal on Data Semantics / Issue 4/2020
Print ISSN: 1861-2032
Electronic ISSN: 1861-2040
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13740-020-00115-6

Premium Partner