Abstract
Since Peter Chen published the article Entity–Relationship Modeling in 1976, Entity-Relationship database has become a hot spot for research. With the advent of the big data, it appears that Entity-Relationship database is substituted for attribute reduction map structure. In the big data we have no evidence of the relationship but only of attributes and maps. In this paper we give an attribute representation of the relationship. In fact we assume that any entity can be in two different attributes (states) with two different values. One is the attribute that sends a message that we denote as e1 and the other is to receive the message that we denote as e2. The values of the attributes are the names of the entities. A relationship is a superposition ae1 + be2 of the two states. When we change the values of the states we change the database. When we change the two states in the same way we have isomorphism among database, and when we change the two states in different way we have isomorphism with distortion (homotopic transformation). Given a set of independent data base we can generate (compute) all the other data base in a dynamical way. In this way we can reduce the database that we must memorize. Because we are interested in the generation of the form (morphology) of database we denote this new model of computation as morphogenetic computing.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chen, P.: The entity-relationship model - toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 1(1), 9–36 (1976)
Mannila, H., Räihä, K.-J.: The Design of Relational Databases. Addison-Wesley, Wokingham (1992). ISBN 0201565234
Chen, P.P.: An algebra for a directional binary entity-relationship model. In: IEEE First International Conference on Data Engineering, Los Angeles, California, USA, April 1984)
Buckles, B., Petry, F.: A fuzzy representation of data for relational databases. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 7(3), 213–226 (1982)
Chen, P.P., Zvieli, A.: Entity-relationship modeling of fuzzy data. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Data Engineering, Los Angeles, pp. 320–327, February 1986
Shenoi, S., Melton, A.: Proximity relations in the fuzzy relational database model. Int. J. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 31(3), 285–296 (1989)
Yager, R.R.: Concept representation and database structures in fuzzy social relational networks. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man, Cybern. Part A 40(2), 413–419 (2010)
Torlone, R.: Conceptual Multidimensional Models, Multidimensional Databases: Problems and Solutions. IGI Global, Hershey (2003)
Malinowski, E., Zimányi, E.: Hierarchies in a multidimensional model: from conceptual modeling to logical representation. Data Knowl. Eng. 59(2), 348–377 (2006)
Resconi, G.: Conflict compensation, redundancy and similarity in databases federation. In: Nguyen, N.T. (ed.) TCCI XIV 2014. LNCS, vol. 8615, pp. 120–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Wymore, W.: Model-Based Systems Engineering. CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton (1993)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Mathematical Appendix
1.1 Morphogenetic as Isomorphis with Distortion or, Weak Equivalence or Homotopy in Database
To understand the previous morphogenetic computing, we show different examples of the particular transformations denoted as isomorphism with deformation or homology and so on.
In the geographic database, there are two principal data of the earth geography. The first is located on a sphere and the other is the projection of the geography information on a plane. Now we know that the two databases are related but we also know that they are not isomorphic because when we project one image from the sphere, the new image on the plane has a distortion. In fact, in Map Projection Distorts Reality (topological similarity) a sphere is not a developable solid, and transfering from 3D globe to 2D map must result in the loss of one or global characteristics. Figure 15 shows the earth grid and features projected from sphere to a plane surface. Figure 16 shows the distorted map of the earth by planar projection.
The distance is equidistance between sphere and plane projection. All the other elements are distorted. Given a path on the sphere, we project the initial point and the final point of the path into the plane. The path on the plane changes in a different way from one part of the sphere to another. The same path at the north pole has a little dimension but at the equator it is more or less the same on the sphere. We have no global transformation that changes paths from the sphere to the plane. We have only local transformation that changes point by point in the sphere. This is the gauge transformation due to the impossibility to have the curvature property of the sphere into the plane. When we move from the sphere to the plane, we lose properties because the plane has not curvature.
Formal Description of the Morphogenetic Computation
Morphogenetic computing is more than the abstract theory. In this part we make the formal morphogenetic computation on the dynamic relationships in database.
Given the relationship matrix R that reflects the from/to connection among entities.
Then general operators A and B are created. Now the isomorphism with deformation is given by the formal expression (A.1).
When A = B, we have (A.2).
In this case, the input graph and output graph are the same but names of the entities D change. So the morphogenetic result is an isomorphic database where the structure is the same but the names change.
When A ≠ B and B = A C we have (A.3).
This appears to be an isomorphism but with correction by C.
Example 1.
For relationship R1 shown Fig. 17, we have the representation (A.4).
Given the permutations
The inconsistent Fig. 18 shows the mixed names in one entity.
Particular case for the diagram
We have the coherent graph Fig. 19.
Multi-dimensional transformation is shown in Fig. 20.
The two dimensional reference space (e 11 , e 21 ) can be expanded in four dimensional space reference (e 11 , e 12 , e 21 , e 22 ). From the same entities D we have the first relationship structure, form or topology denoted R11.
Now with A and B we change the “out” state and “in” state and generate the new relationship R12. In Fig. 6, we have the principal relation R11 as the father of the all the other relations. The father generates two children, one is R12 and the other is R21. The children R12 and R21 join to generate R22. This is the morphogenetic process. Figure 6 is an aggregation of different databases with different states not only two of “out” and “in”. The building of the new meta database gives us the instrument to move dynamically from one database to another or to separate one big database into more simple database one connected with the other by homotopic transformation or isomorphic transformation with deformation.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Xu, X., Resconi, G., Xu, G. (2016). Dynamic Database by Inconsistency and Morphogenetic Computing. In: Nguyen, N.T., Kowalczyk, R. (eds) Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence XXII. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9655. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49619-0_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49619-0_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-49618-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-49619-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)