relative information capacity of simple relational database schemata paper by: richard hull...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata
Paper by: Richard HullPresented by: Jose Picado
![Page 2: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline
• Problem: Data relativism and information capacity– Definition– Examples– Importance
• Hierarchy of dominance measures• Basic results• Discussion
![Page 3: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Data relativism
• Represent the same data in different ways
![Page 4: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Data relativism
• Represent the same data in different ways• Represent the same data under different
schemas
![Page 5: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Data relativism
• Represent the same data in different ways• Represent the same data under different
schemas
Person
name sex spouseSchema 1
Example taken from: Kosky, Anhony. Transforming Databases with Recursive Data Structures, 1996.
![Page 6: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Data relativism
• Represent the same data in different ways• Represent the same data under different
schemas
Person
name sex spouse
Female
name
Male
name
Marriage
husband wife
Schema 1
Schema 2
Example taken from: Kosky, Anhony. Transforming Databases with Recursive Data Sturctures, 1996.
![Page 7: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Relative information capacity
• Expressiveness of a schema• Different schemas representing same data
may have different information capacity
![Page 8: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Relative information capacity
• Expressiveness of a schema• Different schemas representing same data
may have different information capacity
Person
name sex spouse
Female
name
Male
name
Marriage
husband wife
Schema 1
Schema 2
Example taken from: Kosky, Anthony. Transforming Databases with Recursive Data Structures, 1996.
![Page 9: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Relative information capacity
• Expressiveness of a schema• Different schemas representing same data
may have different information capacity
Person
name sex spouse
Female
name
Male
name
Marriage
husband wife
Schema 1:• Does not require that the
spouse attribute of a man goes to a woman.
• Does not require that for each spouse attribute in one direction there is a corresponding spouse attribute in another direction.
Example taken from: Kosky, Anthony. Transforming Databases with Recursive Data Structures, 1996.
![Page 10: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Relative information capacity
• Expressiveness of a schema• Different schemas representing same data
may have different information capacity
Person
name sex spouse
Female
name
Male
name
Marriage
husband wife
Schema 2:• Allows unmarried people to
be represented in the database.
Example taken from: Kosky, Anthony. Transforming Databases with Recursive Data Structures, 1996.
![Page 11: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Relative information capacity
• Possible solution: – Transform existing schema to new schema by
structural manipulations
Person
name sex spouse
Female
name
Male
name
Marriage
husband wife
transformation
![Page 12: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Relative information capacity
• Possible solution: – Transform existing schema to new schema by
structural manipulations– Information capacity preserving?
Person
name sex spouse
Female
name
Male
name
Marriage
husband wife
transformation
![Page 13: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Importance
• Schema evolution– None of the information stored in the initial
database is lost
Person
name sex spouse
Female
name
Male
name
Marriage
husband wife
![Page 14: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Importance• Data integration– All information in one of the component
databases is reflected in the integrated database
City
name state
State
name capital
City
name isCapital country
Country
name language currency
City
name place
Country
name language currency capital
State
name capital
Example taken from: Kosky, Anthony. Transforming Databases with Recursive Data Structures, 1996.
![Page 15: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Importance
• Database normalization theory• User view construction• Schema simplification• Translation between data models
![Page 16: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Hull’s paper
• Introduces theoretical tools for studying measures of relative information capacity– Theoretical frameworks at the time were complex– There was no clear definition about the concept– Hull introduced nice ways of comparing schemata
and their information capacity• Defines a hierarchy of measures to compare
information capacity of schemata
![Page 17: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Hull’s paper
• Gives some basic results concerning the previous measures
• Considers only non-keyed relations
Person
id name
Person
id name
123 John
123 Mary
123 John
123 Mary
Non-keyed Keyed
Instances:
Relations:
![Page 18: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Definitions
• Schema P is a set of relations• Relations composed of attributes, which may
be of different basic types• Basic types are domain designators (have a
fixed domain of possible values)• I(P) is the instances of P, usually infinite
Person
id name
111 John
222 Mary123 Anne
234 Joe
aaa Jack
bbb Ted
Schema P Instances I(P)
…
![Page 19: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Transformation
• P and Q are relational schemata• A transformation from P to Q is a map
![Page 20: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Transformation
• P and Q are relational schemata• A transformation from P to Q is a map
PPerson
id nameBirth
id date
![Page 21: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Transformation
• P and Q are relational schemata• A transformation from P to Q is a map
P
QPersonInfo
id name bdate
Person
id nameBirth
id date
![Page 22: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Transformation
• P and Q are relational schemata• A transformation from P to Q is a map
P
QPersonInfo
id name bdate
Person
id nameBirth
id date
PersonInfo(x,y,z) :- Person(x,y), Birth(x,z).
![Page 23: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Dominance
• P and Q are relational schemata
• Q dominates P via if the composition of followed by is the identity on P
![Page 24: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Dominance
Person
name sex spouse
Female
name
Male
name
Marriage
husband wife
P
Q
![Page 25: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Dominance
1. Take instances of P: I(P)
Person
John male Mary
Mary female John
Anne female Joe
Joe male Anne
![Page 26: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Dominance
2. Apply to I(P) Male(x) :- Person(x,y,z), y=“male”.Female(x) :- Person(x,y,z), y=“female”.Marriage(x,y) :- Person(x,u,y), Person(y,v,x), u=“male”, v=“female”
Male
John
Joe
Female
Mary
Anne
Marriage
John Mary
Joe Anne
Person
John male Mary
Mary female John
Anne female Joe
Joe male Anne
![Page 27: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Dominance
3. Apply to (I(P))
Person(x,”male”,z) :- Male(x), Marriage(x,z).Person(x,”female”,z) :- Female(x), Marriage(x,z).
Male
John
Joe
Female
Mary
Anne
Marriage
John Mary
Joe Anne
Person
John male Mary
Mary female John
Anne female Joe
Joe male Anne
![Page 28: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
( (I(P)))
Dominance
4. Compare I(P) and ( (I(P)))
Person
John male Mary
Mary female John
Anne female Joe
Joe male Anne
Person
John male Mary
Mary female John
Anne female Joe
Joe male Anne
I(P)
![Page 29: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Dominance
• P and Q are relational schemata
• Q dominates P via if the composition of followed by is the identity on P
Q has at least as much capacity for storing information as P
Information structured according to P can be restructured to “fit” into Q, and restructured again to “fit” into P
![Page 30: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Equivalence
• P and Q are equivalent (xxx) if they have equivalent information capacity
• P and Q are equivalent if – Q dominates P (xxx) and – P dominates Q (xxx)
![Page 31: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Information dominance measures
1. Calculous dominance2. Generic dominance3. Internal dominance4. Absolute dominance
More restrictive
Less restrictive
![Page 32: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Types of equivalency
1. P and Q are equivalent (calc)2. P and Q are equivalent (gen)3. P and Q are equivalent (int)4. P and Q are equivalent (abs)
More restrictive
Less restrictive
![Page 33: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Level 1: Calculous dominance
• Only allow transformations to be relational calculus expressions
• Relational calculus:– First order logic or predicate calculus– Predicates: atom,
– Each query Q(x1, …, xn) is a predicate P
![Page 34: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Level 1: Calculous dominance
• Only allow transformations to be relational calculus expressions
• are relational calculus expressions
• Q dominates P calculously
![Page 35: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Level 2: Generic dominance
• Only allow transformations that treat domain elements as “essentially uninterpreted objects”
• Treat all elements as equals except some set of constants
• Property of all query languages, such as SQL and Datalog
![Page 36: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Level 2: Generic dominance
• Only allow transformations that treat domain elements as “essentially uninterpreted objects”
• treat all elements as equals
• Q dominates P generically
![Page 37: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Level 3: Internal dominance
• Only allow transformations that do not invent any data
• Invent data: numerical computations or string manipulations
player goals games player performance
performance = goals/games
![Page 38: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Level 3: Internal dominance
• Only allow transformations that do not invent any data
• do not invent data• Q dominates P internally
![Page 39: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Level 4: Absolute dominance
• Some set of values • : instances of P that contain only values
in Y, where• : cardinality of instances of P containing
only values in Y• If then
Q dominates P absolutely• Easy to compute: based on counting of
instances, instead of transformations
![Page 40: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Basic results
• Q dominates P calculously
Q dominates P generically
Q dominates P internally
Q dominates P absolutely
![Page 41: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Basic results
• Sometimes absolute and internal dominance hold, but generic and calculous dominance don’t
A A
B B
A B
Q
PQ dominates P (abs, int)• and transformation (int)
does not invent data
Q does not dominate P (gen, calc)• There is no transformation (gen, calc) that
takes instances of P to Q and then back to P
![Page 42: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Basic results
• Absolute dominance useful for verifying calculous (not) dominance
A B
A C
A B C
Q
P• Q dominates P calculously
Q dominates P absolutely
• P does not dominate Q absolutelyP does not dominates Q
calculously*under certain constraints
![Page 43: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Basic results
• Dominance is preserved by re-namings of basic types (homomorphism)– h(P): homomorphism of P– If Q dominates P then
h(Q) dominates h(P)for any measure of dominance (calc, gen, int, abs)
![Page 44: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Basic results
• Calculous dominance does not accurately measure the presence of “semantic correspondence”
![Page 45: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Basic results
• Calculous dominance does not accurately measure the presence of “semantic correspondence”
name position goalsname goals minutes S1R1
NAME NUMBER NUMBER NAME NAME NUMBER
title publisher pagestitle pages edition S2R2P
![Page 46: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Basic results
• Calculous dominance does not accurately measure the presence of “semantic correspondence”
NAME NAME NUMBER NUMBERT
P
Q
name position goalsname goals minutes S1R1
NAME NUMBER NUMBER NAME NAME NUMBER
title publisher pagestitle pages edition S2R2
![Page 47: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Basic results
• Calculous dominance does not accurately measure the presence of “semantic correspondence”
NAME NAME NUMBER NUMBERT
P
Q
Q dominates P (calc), but there is not semantic mapping from P to Q
name position goalsname goals minutes S1R1
NAME NUMBER NUMBER NAME NAME NUMBER
title publisher pagestitle pages edition S2R2
![Page 48: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Basic results
• If only non-keyed relational schemata with only one basic type, then all types of dominance are equivalent
Theorem: Let P and Q be non-keyed relational schemata over a single basic type B. Then the following are equivalent:a. Q dominates P (calc)b. Q dominates P (gen)c. Q dominates P (int)d. Q dominates P (abs)
![Page 49: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Basic results
• With any reasonable measure of relative information capacity, two non-keyed relational schemata are equivalent iff they are identical
• In the relational model (non-keyed), there is essentially at most one way to represent a given data set
![Page 50: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Discussion
• Strong points:– ???
![Page 51: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Discussion
• Strong points:1. Provides a theory to study relative information
capacity
![Page 52: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Discussion
• Strong points:1. Provides a theory to study relative information
capacity2. Data relativism is important as it arises in many
areas
![Page 53: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Discussion
• Strong points:1. Provides a theory to study relative information
capacity2. Data relativism is important as it arises in many
areas3. Defines a hierarchy of dominance measures
![Page 54: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Discussion
• Strong points:1. Provides a theory to study relative information
capacity2. Data relativism is important as it arises in many
areas3. Defines a hierarchy of dominance measures4. Gives important results about the relational
model
![Page 55: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Discussion
• Weak points:– ???
![Page 56: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Discussion
• Weak points:1. Does not support dependencies/constraints• Hierarchy of dominance measures• Basic results
![Page 57: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Discussion
• Functional dependency (FD):Given attributes in relation R, the functional dependency means that all tuples in R that agree on attributes must also agree on .
id name address
123 John 21 Kings St.
234 Mary 31 Kings St.
![Page 58: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Discussion
• Multivalued dependency (MVD):For MVD , if two tuples of R agree on all the attributes of X, then their components in Y may be swapped, and the result will be two tuples that are also in the relation.
course book lecturer
Machine Learning
Pattern Recognition
John
Artificial Intelligence
AIMA Mary
![Page 59: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Discussion
• Inclusion dependency (IND):For , for any tuple t1 in R1, there must exist a tuple t2 in R2, such that
id title
111 Pattern Recognition
222 AIMA
bookid customer
111 John
222 Mary
Book
Order
![Page 60: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Discussion
• Weak points:1. Does not support dependencies/constraints• Hierarchy of dominance measures• Basic results
Dependencies change the final result of the paper
![Page 61: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Discussion
• Weak points:1. Does not support dependencies/constraints• Hierarchy of dominance measures• Basic results
2. Open questions: • Absolute dominance implies internal dominance?• Generic dominance implies calculous dominance?• Is there a measure for “semantic correspondence”?
![Page 62: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Thank you
![Page 63: Relative Information Capacity of Simple Relational Database Schemata Paper by: Richard Hull Presented by: Jose Picado](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062620/5519ffa35503462e378b489a/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Quiz
• What are the four formal measures of relative information capacity defined by Hull? Write them in order from most restrictive to less restrictive.