Semantic information connected with data

  • Marie Duží
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 646)


Informational capability of an attribute set is defined as the set of generated propositions. General data structures (comprising the set construct, tuple construct, functional as well as relational view) are compared for their informational capability using the definability relation. Relations of distinguishing capability (<dc) and comparison based on cardinality (≤bc) are defined on the set of attributes and examined with respect to the informational capability. Equivalent transformation of a database schema is defined and we prove that the general object-function schema can be equivalently transformed into a schema containing only unary (flat) attributes.


Database Schema Consistency Constraint Equivalent Transformation Analytical Constraint Natural Language Expression 
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. [BARE81]
    H.P.Barendregt: The Lambda-Calculus. North Holland, 1981.Google Scholar
  2. [BBGO78]
    C.Beeri, P.A.Bernstein, N.Goodman: A sophisticate's introduction to database normalization theory. Proc. VLDB 1978, pp.113–124.Google Scholar
  3. [CARN52]
    R.Carnap, Y.Bar-Hillel: An Outline of the Theory of Semantic Information. Technical Report No. 247, MIT Research Laboratory in Electronics, 1952.Google Scholar
  4. [CHUR40]
    A. Church: A Formulation of the Simple Theory of Types. J. Symb. Logic, 5,1,1940, pp. 337–387Google Scholar
  5. [DKMS86]
    M.Duží, F.Krejčí, P.Materna, Z.Staníček: HIT Method of Database Design. Research Report Technical University of Brno, Prague 1986.Google Scholar
  6. [DUMA90]
    M.Duží, P.Materna: Attributes: Distinguishing Capability versus Informational Capability. Computers and Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 9, 1990, 2, pp. 169–185.Google Scholar
  7. [DUZI89]
    M.Duží: Applying HIT approach in an application system design. Proc. KNVVT WG-25, 1989, pp. 113–127.Google Scholar
  8. [DUZI91]
    M.Duží: Logic & Data Semantics. Dissertation, Ins. of Philosophy, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague 1991.Google Scholar
  9. [HALE81]
    M.Hammer, D.McLeod; Database Description with SDM: A Semantic database model. ACM Trans. Database Systems, 6 (1981), pp. 351–386.Google Scholar
  10. [HUKI87]
    R. Hull, R. King: Semantic database modelling: Survey, applications and research issues. ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 13, 1987, pp. 202–260.Google Scholar
  11. [HULL86]
    R.Hull: Relative information capacity of simple relational database schemata. SIAM J. Comput, 15,3,1986, pp. 856–886.Google Scholar
  12. [HUY091]
    R.Hull, M.Yoshikawa: On the equivalence of database restructurings involving object identifiers. Submitted for PODS'91.Google Scholar
  13. [HUYA84]
    R.Hull, Ch.K.Yap: The Format Model: A theory of database organization. J. of the Association for Comp. Machinery, 31,3, 1984, pp. 518–537.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. [KILE85]
    R.King, D.McLeod: A Database design methodology and tool for information systems. ACM Trans. on Office Information Systems, 3 (1985), pp. 2–21.Google Scholar
  15. [KLUG80]
    A.Klug: Entity-relationship views over uninterpreted enterprise schemas. Entity-Relationship Approach to Systems Analysis and Design, P.P.Chen, ed., North-Holland, Amsterodam, 1980, pp. 52–72.Google Scholar
  16. [LIEN80]
    Y.E.Lien: On the semantics of the entity-relationship model. Entity-Relationship Approach to Systems Analysis and Design, P.P.Chen, ed., North-Holland, Amsterodam, 1980, pp. 131–146.Google Scholar
  17. [LTKA81]
    T.W.Ling, F.W.Tompa, T.Kameda: An improved third normal form for relational databases. ACM Trans. Database Systems, 6 (1981), pp. 329–346.Google Scholar
  18. [MMSU80]
    D.Maier, A.O.Mendelzon, F.Sadri, J.D.Ullman: Adequacy of decomposition of relational databases. J.Comp. Systems Sci., 21 (1980), pp. 368–379.Google Scholar
  19. [MSHS90]
    M.H.Scholl, H.-J.Schek: A Relational Object Model. Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Database Theory ICDT'90, Paris, Dec. 1990.Google Scholar
  20. [TICH80]
    P. Tichý: The Logic of Temporal Discourse. Linguistic and Philosophy, 3, 1980, pp. 343–369.Google Scholar
  21. [TICH88]
    P. Tichý: The Foundations of Fiege's Logic. de Gruyter, Berlin-New York, 1988.Google Scholar
  22. [ULLM88]
    J.D. Ullman: Principles of Database and Knowledge Base Systems. Computer Science Press, Inc., 1988.Google Scholar
  23. [VIAN87]
    V.Vianu: Dynamic Functional Dependences and Database Aging. J. of the Association for Comp. Machinery, 34,1, 1987, pp. 28–59.Google Scholar
  24. [YWHO82]
    S.B.Yao, V.Waddle, B.C.Housel: View modelling and integration using the functional data model. IEEE Trans. Soft. Eng., SE-8, 6 (1982), pp. 533–544.Google Scholar
  25. [ZLAT86]
    J. Zlatuska: Data Bases and the Lambda Calculus. Proc. IFIP'86 World Computer Congress, Dublin, 1986, pp. 97–104.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marie Duží
    • 1
  1. 1.Charles University Computer CentrePrague 1Czechoslovakia

Personalised recommendations