Charting the Tractability Frontier of Certain Conjunctive Query Answering
Jef Wijsen

TL;DR
This paper explores the computational complexity of determining whether a Boolean conjunctive query holds across all repairs of an uncertain database, classifying attack graph cycles to delineate tractable and intractable cases.
Contribution
It introduces a cycle classification in attack graphs and characterizes the complexity boundary of CERTAINTY(q) for acyclic Boolean conjunctive queries without self-join.
Findings
CERTAINTY(q) is coNP-complete with strong cycles in attack graphs.
CERTAINTY(q) is in P when no strong cycle exists and all weak cycles are terminal.
Partial results are provided for cases with nonterminal cycles and no strong cycles.
Abstract
An uncertain database is defined as a relational database in which primary keys need not be satisfied. A repair (or possible world) of such database is obtained by selecting a maximal number of tuples without ever selecting two distinct tuples with the same primary key value. For a Boolean query q, the decision problem CERTAINTY(q) takes as input an uncertain database db and asks whether q is satisfied by every repair of db. Our main focus is on acyclic Boolean conjunctive queries without self-join. Previous work has introduced the notion of (directed) attack graph of such queries, and has proved that CERTAINTY(q) is first-order expressible if and only if the attack graph of q is acyclic. The current paper investigates the boundary between tractability and intractability of CERTAINTY(q). We first classify cycles in attack graphs as either weak or strong, and then prove among others the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsData Management and Algorithms · Advanced Database Systems and Queries · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
