
We study the interaction of views, queries, and background knowledge in the form of existential rules. The motivating questions concern monotonic determinacy of a query using views w.r.t. rules, which refers to the ability to recover the query answer from the views via a monotone function. We study the decidability of monotonic determinacy, and compare with variations that require the “recovery function” to be in a well-known monotone query language, such as conjunctive queries or Datalog. Surprisingly, we find that even in the presence of basic existential rules, the borderline between well-behaved and badly-behaved answerability differs radically from the unconstrained case. In order to understand this boundary, we require new results concerning entailment problems involving views and rules.
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Databases, Databases (cs.DB)
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Databases, Databases (cs.DB)
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
