On Reasoning about Structural Equality in XML: A Description Logic Approach

  • David Toman
  • Grant Weddell
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2572)


We define a boolean complete description logic dialect called DLFD reg that can be used to reason about structural equality in semistructured ordered data in the presence of document type definitions. This application depends on the novel ability of DLFD reg to express functional dependencies over sets of possibly infinite feature paths defined by regular languages. We also present a decision procedure for the associated logical implication problem. The procedure underlies a mapping of such problems to satisfiability problems of Datalog n, s and in turn to the Ackermann case of the decision problem.


Structural Equality Decision Procedure Description Logic Regular Language Concept Description 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Wilhelm Ackermann. Solvable Cases of the Decision Problem. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. North-Holland, 1954.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marcelo Arenas, Wenfei Fan, and Leonid Libkin. On Verifying Consistency of XML Specifications. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pages 259–270, 2002.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marcelo Arenas and Leonid Libkin. Normal Form for XML Documents. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pages 85–96, 2002.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marainne Baudinet, Jan Chomicki, and Pierre Wolper. Constraint-Generating Dependencies. In International Conference on Database Theory, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Boag, D. Chamberlin, D. Florescu, J. Robie, J. Simeon, and M. Stefanescu. XQuery 1.0: An XML Query Language. Technical report, W3C, 2001.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Egon Börger, Erich Grädel, and Yuri Gurevich. The Classical Decision Problem. Perspectives in Mathematical Logic. Springer-Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alexander Borgida and Grant E. Weddell. Adding uniqueness constraints to description logics. In International Conference on Deductive and Object Oriented Databases, DOOD, pages 85–102, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Peter Buneman, Susan B. Davidson, Wenfei Fan, Carmem S. Hara, and Wang Chiew Tan. Keys for XML. In World Wide Web, pages 201–210, 2001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, and Maurizio Lenzerini. Representing and Reasoning on XML Documents: A Description Logic Approach. Journal of Logic and Computation, 9(1):295–318, 1999.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, and Maurizio Lenzerini. Identification Constraints and Functional Dependencies in Description Logics. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 155–160, 2001.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, Maurizio Lenzerini, Daniele Nardi, and Riccardo Rosati. Description Logic Framework for Information Integration. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’98), pages 2–13, 1998.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jan Chomicki. Functional Deductive Databases: Query Processing in the Presence of Limited Function Symbols. PhD thesis, Rutgers University, 1990. Laboratory for Computer Science Research LCSR-TR-142.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jan Chomicki and Tomasz Imieliński. Finite Representation of Infinite Query Answers. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 18(2):181–223, June 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thomas Eiter, Wolfgang Faber, Nicola Leone, and Gerald Pfeifer. Declarative Problem-solving using the dlv System. In Jack Minker, editor, Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thomas Eiter, Georg Gottlob, and Heikki Mannila. Disjunctive Datalog. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 22(3):364–418, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thomas Eiter, Nicola Leone, Cristinel Mateis, Gerald Pfeifer, and Francesco Scarcello. The KR System dlv: Progress Report, Comparisons and Benchmarks. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR’98, pages 406–417, 1998.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wenfei Fan and Leonid Libkin. On XML integrity constraints in the presence of DTDs. In Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, 2001.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martin Fürer. Alternation and the Ackermann Case of the Decision Problem. L’Enseignement Math., 27:137–162, 1981.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    John E. Hopcroft and Jeffrey D. Ullman. Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation. Addison-Wesley, 1979.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ian Horrocks, Ulrike Sattler, and Stephan Tobies. Practical Reasoning for Expressive Description Logics. In Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning, LPAR’99, pages 161–180, 1999.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Minoru Ito and Grant Weddell. Implication Problems for Functional Constraints on Databases Supporting Complex Objects. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 49(3):726–768, 1994.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    David Janin and Igor Walukiewicz. Automata for the μ-calculus and related results. In Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, pages 552–562, 1995.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vitaliy L. Khizder, David Toman, and Grant Weddell. Reasoning about Duplicate Elimination with Description Logic. In Rules and and Objects in Databases, DOOD 2000 (part of Computational Logic 2000), pages 1017–1032, 2000.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vitaliy L. Khizder, David Toman, and Grant E. Weddell. On Decidability and Complexity of Description Logics with Uniqueness Constraints. In International Conference on Database Theory ICDT’01, pages 54–67, 2001.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Donald E. Knuth. The Art of Computer Programming: Sorting and Searching, volume 3. Addison-Welsley (2ed), 1998.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nicola Leone, Pasquale Rullo, and Francesco Scarcello. Disjunctive stable models: Unfounded sets, fixpoint semantics, and computation. Information and Computation, 135(2):69–112, 1997.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    John W. Lloyd. Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag, 1987.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jorge Lobo, Jack Minker, and Arcot Rajasekar. Foundations of Disjunctive Logic Programming. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Alberto O. Mendelzon and Peter T. Wood. Functional Dependencies in Horn Clause Queries. TODS, 16(1):31–55, 1991.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Manfred Schmidt-Schauß and Gert Smolka. Attributive Concept Descriptions with Complements. Artificial Intelligence, 48(1):1–26, 1991.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    David E. Simmen, Eugene J. Shekita, and Timothy Malkemus. Fundamental Techniques for Order Optimization. In Proceedings of the 1996 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pages 57–67, 1996.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    David Toman and Grant E. Weddell. On Attributes, Roles, and Dependencies in Description Logics and the Ackermann Case of the Decision Problem. In Proceedings of Description Logics, CEUR-WS, vol.49, pages 76–85, 2001.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Grant E. Weddell. Reasoning about Functional Dependencies Generalized for Semantic Data Models. TODS, 17(1):32–64, 1992.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Toman
    • 1
  • Grant Weddell
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of WaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations