Cooperative Query Answering

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WIMS 2014, June 2-4Thessaloniki, Greece1 Optimized Backward Chaining Reasoning System for a Semantic Web Hui Shi, Kurt Maly, and Steven Zeil Contact:
Advertisements

1 541: Relational Calculus. 2 Relational Calculus  Comes in two flavours: Tuple relational calculus (TRC) and Domain relational calculus (DRC).  Calculus.
Efficient Query Evaluation on Probabilistic Databases
CMPT 354, Simon Fraser University, Fall 2008, Martin Ester 52 Database Systems I Relational Algebra.
ITCS 6010 Natural Language Understanding. Natural Language Processing What is it? Studies the problems inherent in the processing and manipulation of.
Rutgers University Relational Calculus 198:541 Rutgers University.
Cooperative Query Answering Based on a talk by Erick Martinez.
1 Relational Algebra and Calculus Chapter 4. 2 Relational Query Languages  Query languages: Allow manipulation and retrieval of data from a database.
RELATIONAL FAULT TOLERANT INTERFACE TO HETEROGENEOUS DISTRIBUTED DATABASES Prof. Osama Abulnaja Afraa Khalifah
1 Dept of Information and Communication Technology Creating Objects in Flexible Authorization Framework ¹ Dep. of Information and Communication Technology,
Slide 1 Propositional Definite Clause Logic: Syntax, Semantics and Bottom-up Proofs Jim Little UBC CS 322 – CSP October 20, 2014.
Introduction To PROLOG World view of imperative languages. World view of relational languages. A PROLOG program. Running a PROLOG program. A PROLOG.
1 Relational Algebra and Calculas Chapter 4, Part A.
Logical Agents Chapter 7. Outline Knowledge-based agents Logic in general Propositional (Boolean) logic Equivalence, validity, satisfiability.
User Profiling using Semantic Web Group members: Ashwin Somaiah Asha Stephen Charlie Sudharshan Reddy.
Issues in Ontology-based Information integration By Zhan Cui, Dean Jones and Paul O’Brien.
1 Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach, 6/e Chapter 15a: Product Metrics for Software Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach, 6/e Chapter.
Robust Estimation With Sampling and Approximate Pre-Aggregation Author: Christopher Jermaine Presented by: Bill Eberle.
Relaxing Queries Presented by Ashwin Joshi Kapil Patil Sapan Shah.
Database Management Systems, R. Ramakrishnan1 Relational Calculus Chapter 4, Part B.
Presented by Kyumars Sheykh Esmaili Description Logics for Data Bases (DLHB,Chapter 16) Semantic Web Seminar.
4 - Conditional Control Structures CHAPTER 4. Introduction A Program is usually not limited to a linear sequence of instructions. In real life, a programme.
Logical Agents. Outline Knowledge-based agents Logic in general - models and entailment Propositional (Boolean) logic Equivalence, validity, satisfiability.
Introduction to Parsing
-Systematic research begins with a problem -A gap in knowledge that one wishes to describe or explain -A felt difficulty that one wishes to solve -Often.
WP4 Models and Contents Quality Assessment
Relational Calculus Chapter 4, Section 4.3.
More NP-Complete and NP-hard Problems
Introduction To DBMS.
Programming Logic and Design Seventh Edition
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
University of Montpellier, France.
How to Research Lynn W Zimmerman, PhD.
Chapter 6 - Database Implementation and Use
SEMANTICS VS PRAGMATICS
Relational Calculus Chapter 4, Part B
The Propositional Calculus
CrowdDb.
EA C461 – Artificial Intelligence Logical Agent
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION :
Classroom test and Assessment
Requirements and Specifications
The Object-Oriented Thought Process Chapter 12
Machine Learning for Online Query Relaxation
James Blankenship March , 2018
Chapter 24 Testing Object-Oriented Applications
Lecture 16: Probabilistic Databases
Lecture 1: Multi-tier Architecture Overview
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Logic: Top-down proof procedure and Datalog
Artificial Intelligence
Chapter 19 Testing Object-Oriented Applications
Introduction to Parsing
Introduction to Parsing
Logic: Domain Modeling /Proofs + Computer Science cpsc322, Lecture 22
Automated Reasoning in Propositional Logic
Chapter 19 Testing Object-Oriented Applications
Relational Database Design
Object-Oriented Databases
Lecture # 7 System Requirements
Test-Driven Ontology Development in Protégé
COMPUTER NETWORKS PRESENTATION
Chapter 5 Architectural Design.
IB Math Studies Project
Relational Calculus Chapter 4, Part B 7/1/2019.
Implementation of Learning Systems
Version Space Machine Learning Fall 2018.
Relational Calculus Chapter 4, Part B
Presentation transcript:

Cooperative Query Answering Based on a talk by Erick Martinez

MOTIVATION: Responses to queries posed by a user of a database do not always contain the information required DB and information systems are often hard to use because they do not explicitly attempt to cooperate with their users. They answer literally the queries posed to them A user might need more information than requested, or might actually need different information An answer with extra or alternative information may be more useful and less misleading to a user

Cooperative Answer (CA) A CA should be a correct, non-misleading, and useful answer to a query.

Q0: “Which students are enrolled? A0: “joana, jacob, shakil, …“ A0: “X. student(X)“ Grice's maxims Maxim of Quality: a system should never give an answer which might mislead the user Maxim of Quantity: an answer should not be more informative, or more detailed, than necessary Maxim of Relation: an answer should be always relevant to the user who asked the question Maxim of Manner: an answer should not be ambiguous, leaving the user with choices to make about its meaning

Database Stonewalling Q1: "Who passed COSC6115 in the winter semester of 2001? A1: “No one“ Q2: "Who failed COSC6115 in the winter semester of 2001? A2: “No one“ Q3: "Who taught COSC6115 in the winter semester of 2001? A3: “No one" DB stonewall - will answer a yes/no question with a yes or no regardless of whether the answer is misleading.

QUERY / ANSWER SYSTEMS Natural language interfaces Databases (relational) Logic programming and deductive databases(*)

TECHNIQUES Evaluation of presuppositions in a query(*) Detection and correction of misconceptions in a query(*) Relaxation and generalization of queries and responses(*) Consideration of specific information about a user's state of mind Formulation of intensional answers

Presuppositions: TECHN I QUES Usually, asking a query not only presupposes the existence of all components of the query, but also presupposes an answer to the query itself. i.e. "Which employees own red cars?“ Q4:  emp(X), owns(X,Y), car(Y), red(Y). Two atoms in a query are joined if they share a variable. A query is connected if every two atoms in the query are connected. 2n - 2 sub-queries for a conjunctive query with n atoms (exp. cost)  Algorithm: Report the smallest sub-queries that fail, considering only connected sub-queries

Lattice of sub-queries: Presuppositions: Lattice of sub-queries: TECHN I QUES If a sub-query has no answers, the query cannot have any answers either (scalar implicature) Finding presuppositions (failed sub-queries) is independent of domain specific knowledge.

Misconceptions: TECHN I QUES Integrity constraints: Query: Answer: IC1:  professor(X), student(X). IC2:  enrolled_in(X, Y), not student(X). Query: "Which professor is enrolled in COSC6115?“ Q5:  professor(X), enrolled_in(X, COSC6115). Answer: “No one is both a professor and a student. Anyone who is enrolled in a class is a student. So no one is a professor and enrolled in class.“

… Relaxation: TECHN I QUES Original query: C6: travel(From, To)  serves_area(A, From), serves_area(B, To), flight(A,B) *. C6T: relax(flight(A,B) )  serves_area(A, From), serves_area(B, To), travel(From, To) . … Relaxation: TECHN I QUES Original query: Q6 :  flight(‘Dulles, ‘Orly’). Q6r :  relax (flight(‘Dulles, ‘Orly’)). Relaxing via reciprocal clause C6T : Q6r’ :  serves_area(‘Dulles, From), serves_area(‘Orly’, To), travel(From, To) . Resolving with taxonomy clause C6 : Q6r’’ :  serves_area(‘Dulles, From), serves_area(‘Orly’, To), serves_area(A, From), serves_area(B, To), flight(A, B) .

Generalization: TECHN I QUES C6T: relax(flight(A,B) )  serves_area(A, From), serves_area(B, To), travel(From, To) . Generalization: TECHN I QUES Relaxation is strictly a syntactic notion, a rewrite mechanism. Generalization is a semantic counterpart to relaxation. Literal answers to the relaxed query should include answers to the original query, plus some new neighbourhood answers with respect to the original query. After applying relaxation a new query is a generalization only if all the non-key atoms are satisfied whenever the key atom is satisfied. (conservative reciprocal clause) When all reciprocal clauses are conservative, resolution over a relaxed query will produce all the answers of the original query.

USER GOALS AND MODELS Types of knowledge about a user relevant to CA Interests and preferences Needs – user constraints (UC) Goals and intent

KEY POINTS: CA is mostly intended for DDB as a platform. For RDB, a deductive database interface should be implemented on top of any relational system. The system should support natural language input to some extent for some domains (the natural language translator generates a logical query) The system should produce natural language responses CA techniques, in particular relaxation, can useful for applications like Internet queries It is not evident that first order logic can serve as an adequate ontology for CA

The End

A CA SYSTEM (at U of Maryland) Uniform system: Defined and implemented through logic Uniform representation and support for all cooperative methods Portable General approach for RDB, DDB and logic programs Domain-independent Natural language interface Accept natural language queries Provide cohesive and coherent responses in natural language

Deductive Database Structure: EDB: prerequisite(‘MATH-300’, ‘MATH-350’). prerequisite(‘MATH-350’, ‘MATH-400’). teaches(smith, ‘MATH-400’). … IDB : teaches(X, Y)  teaches(X, Z) , prerequisite(Y, Z). IC :  enrolled_in(X, Y), not student(X).