Advertisement

Relative constraints in ER data models

  • James B. Behm
  • Toby J. Teorey
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 823)

Abstract

Practical extensions to the Entity-Relationship (ER) model to support inter-entity constraints, referred to as relative constraints, are described and analyzed. Relative constraints are business model integrity constraints and rules captured in the business analysis. They specify existence and value relations among predicates. The constraints are specified in a proposed declarative language based on First Order Logic. They can then be translated into the relational algebra and SQL.

Keywords

First Order Logic Relational Algebra Horn Clause Business Rule Relative Constraint 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Ack90]
    Ackley, D., Carasik, R., Soon, T., Tyron, D., Tsou, E., Tsur, S., and Zaniolo, C., “Systems Analysis for Deductive Database Environments: an Enhanced Role for Aggregate Entities,” Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Lausanne, Oct. 8–10, 1990, pp. 129–142.Google Scholar
  2. [Bau89]
    Baumann, Peter., “Valences: A New Relationship Concept for the Entity-Relationship Model,” Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Toronto, Oct. 18–20, 1989, pp. 218–231.Google Scholar
  3. [Bor85]
    Borgida, Alexander., “Language Features for Flexible Handling of Exceptions in Information Systems,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 10, No. 4, December 1985, pp. 565–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [Caz8S]
    Cazin, J., Jacquart, R., and Michel, P., “An Extension of the Entity-Relationship Model using the First Order Logic,” Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Chicago, IEEE Computer Society Press, Silver Springs, Maryland, 1985, pp. 216–233.Google Scholar
  5. [Cer89]
    Ceri, S., Gottlob, G., and Tanca, L., “What You Always Wanted to Know About Datalog (And Never Dared to Ask)”, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 1, March 1989.Google Scholar
  6. [Che76]
    Chen, P.P., “The Entity-Relationship Model — Toward a Unified View of Data.”, ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol.1, No. 1, March 1976, pp. 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [Cod79]
    Codd, E.F., “Extending the Relational Database Model to Capture More Meaning,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 4, No. 4, Dec. 1979, pp. 397–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [Cod90]
    Codd, E.F., The Relational Model for Database Management-Version 2, Addison-Wesley Publishing, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. [Dav89]
    Davis, James P. and Bonnell, Ronald D., “Modeling Semantics with Concept Abstraction in the EARL Data Model”, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Entity Relationship Approach, Toronto, Oct. 18–20, 1989, pp. 102–117.Google Scholar
  10. [Hai89]
    Hainaut, J. “A Generic Entity-Relationship Model”, IFIP 1989, Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., E.D. Falkenberg and P. Lindgreen (Editors).Google Scholar
  11. [Jag88]
    Jagannathan, D., et. al., “SIM: A Database System Based on the Semantic Data Model”, ACM Publication 0-89791-268-3, 1988, pp. 46–55.Google Scholar
  12. [Kno92]
    KnowledgeWare ADW Analysis Workstation User's Guide, KnowledgeWare Incorporated, 1992 [To be published].Google Scholar
  13. [Laz89]
    Lazimy, Rafael., “E2R Model and Object-Oriented Representation For Data Management, Process Modeling, and Decision Support,” Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Toronto, October 18–20, 1989, pp. 136–156.Google Scholar
  14. [Mai86]
    Maier, D., Stein, J., Otis, A., Purdy, A., “Development of an Object-Oriented DBMS”, OOPSLA 1986 Proceedings, September 1986, pp.472–482.Google Scholar
  15. [Mal89]
    Malhotra, A., et. al., “An Entity-Relationship Programming Language,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 9, September 1989, pp. 1120–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [Ore85]
    Oren, Olc., “Integrity Constraints in the Conceptual Schema Language SYSDOC”, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Chicago, IEEE Computer Society Press, Silver Springs, Maryland, 1985, pp. 288–294.Google Scholar
  17. [Qia85]
    Qian, Xiaolei and Wiederhold, Gio, “Data Definition Facility of CRITIAS,” Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Chicago, IEEE Computer Society Press, Silver Springs, Maryland, 1985, pp. 46–55.Google Scholar
  18. [Roc90]
    Rochfeld, A., Morejon, J., and Negros, P., “Inter-Relationship Links in E-R Model”, Baumann, Peter., “Valences: A New Relationship Concept for the Entity-Relationship Model,” Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Lausanne, Oct. 8–10, 1990, pp. 143–156.Google Scholar
  19. [Sch89]
    Schunck, B., Laird, J.E., Durfee, E, “Course Notes: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence”, University of Michigan, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. [Shi81]
    Shipman, David, “The Functional Data Model and te Data Language DAPLEX,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 6, No. 1, March 1981, pp. 140–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [SQL]
    SQL Language Reference Manual, ORACLE, Version 5.1.Google Scholar
  22. [Su83]
    Su, S.Y.W. “SAM*: A Semantic Association Model for Corporate and Scientific-Statistical Databases,” Journal of Information Sciences 29, 1983, pp. 151–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [Su89]
    Su, S.Y.W., Krishnamurthy, V., and Lam,H. “An Object-Oriented Semantic Association Model OSAM*,” Artificial Intelligence Manufacturing Theory and Practice, S. Kumara et al (eds.), American Institute of Indus. Engr., 1989, Chap. 17, pp. 463–494.Google Scholar
  24. [Sud89]
    Sudkamp, N. and Kandzia, P., “Enforcement of Integrity Constraints in a Semantic Data Model,” CSL 88 — 2nd Workshop on Computer Science Logic Proceedings, 1989, pp. 313–328.Google Scholar
  25. [Teo86]
    Teorey, T.J., Yang, D., and Fry, J.P., “A Logical Design Methodology for Relational Databases Using the Extended Entity-Relationship Model,” ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 18, No. 2, 1986, pp. 197–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [Teo90]
    Teorey, T.J., Database Modeling and Design-The Entity-Relationship Approach, Morgan-Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1990.Google Scholar
  27. [Ull88]
    Ullman, J., Principles of Database and KnowledgeBase Systems-Volume 1, Computer Science Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  28. [Wei91]
    Wei, G. and Teorey, T.J., “The ORAC Model: A Unified View of Data Abstractions,” Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, San Mateo, California, USA, Oct. 23–25, 1991, pp. 31–58.Google Scholar
  29. [Win91]
    Winter, K.A., “Virtual Fact Names,” Private Communication, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • James B. Behm
    • 1
  • Toby J. Teorey
    • 2
  1. 1.KnowledgeWareUSA
  2. 2.University of MichiganUSA

Personalised recommendations