A basis for deductive database systems
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The main difference with the exposition in [63,61] is that the authors calculate pos(U) and neg(U) in one step instead of in two.
“The main difference with the exposition in [63,61] is that we calculate pos(U) and neg(U) in one step instead of in two.”
From Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters (1998) · cites this paper as [63]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters
Leuschel, M., & De Schreye, D. (1998) · The Journal of Logic Programming · doi:10.1016/s0743-1066(97)10012-7 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lloyd, J. W., & Topor, R. W.
- Corresponding author
- Lloyd, J.W.
- ORCID
- Lloyd, J.W.
- Venue
- The Journal of Logic Programming
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1985-07
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 93-109
- ISSN
- 0743-1066 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4210435783
- Cited by
- 91
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 12.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Journal of Logic Programming (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Database Systems and Queries
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, programming, and type systems
- Keywords
- deductive databases, integrity constraints, query processing, soundness, Prolog, closed-form expressions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
