DDDBDisjunctive Deductive Data Base
DDDBDetector Descriptor Data Base
DDDBDevelop-Don't Destroy Brooklyn (New York; est. 2004)
DDDBDum Doobie Doobie Band
DDDBDrag Device Data Base
Copyright 1988-2018 AcronymFinder.com, All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
Answering queries in DDDBs has been studied by a number of individuals, as described in Minker (1996).
This effort is one of the few that have implemented DDDBs. Loveland, Reed, and Wilson (1993) introduced a relevancy-detection algorithm to be used with SATCHMO, developed by Manthey and Bry (1988), for automated theorem proving.
The development of model-theoretic, fixpoint, and proof procedures placed the semantics of DDDBs on a firm foundation.
Fernandez and Minker (1995) present a new fixpoint characterization of the minimal models of disjunctive and stratified DDDBs. They prove that by applying the operator iteratively, in the limit, it constructs the perfect model semantics (Przymusinski 1988) of stratified DDDBs.
Four alternative semantics were developed for nonstratifiable normal DDDBs at approximately the same time: (1) Ross (1989), the strong WFS; (2) Baral, Lobo, and Minker (1990), the generalized disjunctive WFS (GDWFS); and (3, 4) two semantics by Przymusinski, an extension of the stable model semantics (Przymusinski 1990) for normal disjunctive databases and the stationary semantics (Przymusinski 1990).
Efforts have been developed both for DDBs and DDDBs by Kautz and Selman (1992) and Selman and Kautz (1996), who developed lower and upper bounds for Horn (datalog) databases and compilation methods; Cadoli (1993), who developed computational and semantic approximations; and del Val (1995), who developed techniques for approximating and compiling databases.
Hence, DDDBs can be used to compute answers to queries in such theories.
Another area to which DDDBs have contributed is the null-value problem.
There are several significant contributions of DDDBs: