Upload
alvin-warren
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A DICHOTOMY ON THE COMPLEXITY OF CONSISTENT QUERY ANSWERING FOR ATOMS WITH SIMPLE KEYS
Paris KoutrisDan Suciu
University of Washington
REPAIRS
• An uncertain instance I for a schema with key constraints• A repair r of I is a subinstance of I that satisfies the key
constraints and is maximal
2
R(x, y)
(a1, b1)
(a1, b2)
(a2, b2)
(a3, b3)
(a3, b4)
(a4, b4)
(a1, b1)
(a2, b2)
(a3, b4)
(a4, b4)
(a1, b1)
(a2, b2)
(a3, b3)
(a4, b4)
(a1, b2)
(a2, b2)
(a3, b4)
(a4, b4)
(a1, b2)
(a2, b2)
(a3, b3)
(a4, b4)
The 4 possible repairs
CONSISTENT QUERY ANSWERING
• If Q is boolean, we say that I is certain for Q, I |= Q, if for every repair r of I, Q(r) is true
3
R(x, y)
(a1, b1)
(a1, b2)
(a2, b2)
(a3, b3)
(a3, b4)
(a4, b4)
S(y, z)
(b1, c1)
(b2, c1)
(b2, c2)
(b3, c3)
• Q() = R(x, y), S(y, z)• I |= Q
PROBLEM STATEMENT
CERTAINTY(Q): Given as input an instance I, does I |= Q when Q is a boolean CQ?
• In general, CERTAINTY(Q) is in coNP– Q1 = R(x, y), S(y, z) : expressible as a first-order query
– Q2 = R(x, y), S(z, y) : coNP-complete
– Q3 = R(x, y), S(y, x) : PTIME but not first-order expressible
4
Conjecture For every boolean conjunctive query Q, CERTAINTY(Q) is either in PTIME or coNP-complete
PROGRESS SO FAR
• [Wijsen, 2010]– Syntactic characterization of FO-expressible acyclic CQs w/o self-
joins• [Kolaitis and Pema, 2012]
– A trichotomy for CQs with 2 atoms and no self-joins• [Wijsen, 2010 & 2013]
– PTIME algorithm for cyclic queries: Ck = R1(x1,x2), …, Rk(xk, x1)
– Further classification of acyclic CQs w/o self-joins
5
OUR CONTRIBUTION
A dichotomy for CQs w/o self-joins where atoms have either • Simple keys : R(x, y, z)• Keys that consist of all attributes: S(x, y, z)
6
Theorem For every boolean CQ Q w/o self-joins where for each atom the key consists of either one attribute or all attributes, there exists a dichotomy of CERTAINTY(Q) into PTIME and coNP-complete
OUTLINE
1. The Dichotomy Condition
2. Frugal Repairs & Representable Answers
3. Strongly Connected Graphs
7
THE QUERY GRAPH
• We equivalently study boolean CQs consisting only of binary relations where one attribute is the key: R(x, y)
• Relations can be consistent (Rc) or inconsistent (Ri)
Query Graph: a directed edge (u, v) for each atom R(u,v)
8
Q = Ri(x, y), Si(z, w), Tc(y, w)
y w
x
S
T
R
zG[Q]
source node uR
end node vR
DEFINITIONS
• x+,R : set of nodes reachable from node x once we remove the edge R (through a directed path)
• R ~ S [source-equivalent]: source nodes uR, uS are in the same SCC
• [R]: the equivalence class of R w.r.t ~
9
y R
z
xT
S v
w
u• x+,R = {x, v, w}• R ~ T and [R] = {R, T}V
U
COUPLED EDGES
coupled+(R) = edges in [R] + any inconsistent edge S s.t. the source node uS is connected to the end node vR through a (undirected) path that does not intersect with uR
+,R
10
y = vR
R
z
x = uR
T
S v
w
u = uV
coupled+(R): • contains R,T: [R] = {R, T}• contains V: path from y (= vR )
to u (= uV)• does not contain U
V
U
The set uR+,R
SPLITTABLE GRAPHS
• Two inconsistent edges R, S are coupled if – S in coupled+(R) & R in coupled+(S)
• A graph G[Q] is:– unsplittable if it contains a pair of coupled edges that are not
source-equivalent.– splittable otherwise
11
y R
z
xT
S v
w
u
V
U
coupled+(R) = {R, T, V}coupled+(T) = {R, T, V}coupled+(V) = {V}coupled+(U) = {U,V,R,T}
Only R,T are coupled
SPLITTABLE!
THE DICHOTOMY CONDITION
12
y R
z
xT
S v
w
u
V
U
Dichotomy Theorem • If G[Q] is splittable, CERTAINTY(Q) is in PTIME• If G[Q] is unsplittable, CERTAINTY(Q) is coNP-
complete
Splittable, so in PTIME
EXAMPLES
13
PTIME
R(x, y), S(y, z)
coNP-complete
R(x, y), S(y, z), Tc(x, z)
x
y
zx
y
z
PTIME
R(x, y), S(y, z), Uc(z, y)
x
y
z
coNP-complete
R(x, y), S(z, y), Uc(y, z)
x
y
z
OUTLINE
1. The Dichotomy Condition
2. Frugal Repairs & Representable Answers
3. Strongly Connected Graphs
14
FRUGAL REPAIRS (1)
15
Definition A repair r of an instance I is frugal for a boolean query Q if for any other repair r’ of I, Qf(r’) is not strictly contained in Qf(r)
R(x, y)
(a1, b1)
(a1, b2)
(a2, b3)
(a3, b4)
(a4, b4)
S(y, x)
(b1, a1)
(b3, a2)
(b4, a3)
(b4, a4)
repair r1 = { R(a1, b1), R(a2, b3), R(a3, b4), R(a4, b4) S(b1, a1), S(b3, a2), S(b4, a3) }Qf(r1) = { (a1, b1), (a2, b3), (a3, b4) }
repair r2 = { R(a1, b2), R(a2, b3), R(a3, b4), R(a4, b4) S(b1, a1), S(b3, a2), S(b4, a3) }Qf(r2) = { (a2, b3), (a3, b4) }
not frugal
frugal
Qf = all body variables to the head (full query)
R(x, y)
(a1, b1)
(a1, b2)
(a2, b3)
(a3, b4)
(a4, b4)
S(y, x)
(b1, a1)
(b3, a2)
(b4, a3)
(b4, a4)
FRUGAL REPAIRS (2)
16
• I |= Q if and only if every frugal repair satisfies Q• We lose no generality if we study only frugal repairs!
Only two frugal repairs:• Qf(r2) = {(a2, b3), (a3, b4)}• Qf(r3) = {(a2, b3), (a4, b4)}
OR-SETS
17
• Efficiently represent all answer sets of frugal repairs• We use or-sets: <1, 2, 3> means 1 or 2 or 3
– A = < {1, 3}, {1, 4}, {2, 3}, {2, 4} > – We can “compress” A as B = {<1, 2>, <3, 4>}– [Libkin and Wong, ‘93] “decompression” α operator: α(B) = A
• The or-set of answer sets for frugal repairs of I for Q:– MQ(I) = < {(a2, b3), (a3, b4)}, {(a2, b3), (a4, b4)} >
• Compressed form (set of or-sets):– AQ(I) = { < (a2, b3) >, < (a3, b4), (a4, b4) > }
REPRESENTABILITY (1)
18
• An or-set-of-sets S is representable if there exists a set-of-or-sets S0 (compression) such that:– α(S0) = S
– For any distinct or-sets A, B in S0, the tuples in A and B use distinct constants in all coordinates
• The compression of a representable set with active domain of size n has size polynomial in n
< {(a2, b3), (a3, b4)}, {(a2, b3), (a4, b4)} >
{< (a2, b3) >, <(a3, b4), (a4, b4) >}
< {(a2, b3), (a3, b4)}, {(a2, b2), (a4, b4)} >
compression not representable
REPRESENTABILITY (2)
19
• I |= Q iff the compression AQ(I) is not empty
• If we can compute AQ(I) in polynomial time, deciding whether I |= Q is in PTIME
Theorem If G[Q] is a strongly connected graph, MQ(I) is representable and its compression can be computed in polynomial time in the size of I
OUTLINE
1. The Dichotomy Condition
2. Frugal Repairs & Representable Answers
3. Strongly Connected Graphs
20
CYCLES
21
• Ck= R1(x1, x2), R2(x2, x3)…, Rk(xk, x1)
• The purified instance contains a collection of disjoint SCCs
• ALGORITHM FrugalC– Find the SCCs that contain no directed
cycle of length > k– For each such SCC i, create an or-set Ai
that contains all cycles of length k– Output ACk(I) = {A1, A2, …}
R(x, y)
(a1, b1)
(a2, b2)
(a2, b3)
S(y, z)
(b1, c1)
(b2, c2)
(b3, c2)
T(z, x)
(c1, a1)
(c2, a2)
a1
b1 c1
a2
b2 c2
b3
AC3(I) = {<(a1, b1, c1)>, <(a2, b2, c2), (a2, b3, c2)>}
GENERAL CASE: SCCS (1)
22
• Recursively split a SCC G into a SCC G’ and a directed path P that intersects G’ only at its start and end node
• The set AG’(I) can be recursively computed
x
y
R S
T
tU
V
Graph G’
The path P = y -- > t -- > z
AG’(I) = {<(a1, b1, c1)>, <(a2, b2, c2), (a2, b3, c2)>}
A1 A2
z
GENERAL CASE: SCCS (2)
23
AG’(I) = {<(a1, b1, c1)>, <(a2, b2, c2), (a2, b3, c2)>}
A1 A2
B(a, b)
(A1, [a1b1c1])
(A2, [a2b2c2])
(A2, [a2b3c2])
B1c (b, y)
([a1b1c1], b1)
([a2b2c2], b2)
([a2b3c2], b3)
B2c (b, z)
([a1b1c1], c1)
([a2b2c2], c2)
([a2b3c2], c2)
B0c (z, b)
(c1, A1)
(c2, A2)
Any value belongs in a unique or-set
a
y tU
Vb
B
B1c
z
B2c
B0c
Replacement of G’
A cycle C = a -> b -> y -> t -> z -> a + a chord B2 that is a consistent relation
REST OF THE PROOF
24
• PTIME algorithm for splittable graphs– Find a separator in G[Q] (always exists if a graph is splittable)– The separator splits G[Q] into cases with fewer inconsistent edges,
which are solved recursively– Base case: all edges are consistent (check whether Q(I) is true)
• coNP-hardness– Reduction from the Monotone-3SAT problem
CONLUSIONS
25
• Significant progress towards proving the dichotomy for the complexity of Certain Query Answering for Conjunctive Queries
• Settle the dichotomy (or trichotomy) even for queries with self-joins!
Thank you !
26