Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: Abstract   The standard way of ansring queries over incomplete databases is to compute  certain ansrs , defined as the intersection of query ansrs on all complete databases that the incomplete database represents. But is this universally accepted definition correct?  argue that this “one-size-fits-all” definition can often lead to counterintuitive or just plain wrong results, and propose an alternative framework for defining certain ansrs.  The idea of the framework is to move away from the standard, in the database literature, assumption that query results be given in the form of a database object, and to allow instead two alternative representations of ansrs: as objects defining all other ansrs, or as knowledge  can deduce with certainty about all such ansrs.  show that the latter is often easier to achieve than the former, that in general certain ansrs need not be defined as intersection, and may ll contain missing values in them.  also show that with a proper choice of semantics,  can often reduce computing certain ansrs – as either objects or knowledge – to standard query evaluation.  describe the framework in the most general way, applicable to a variety of data models, and test it on three concrete relational semantics of incompleteness: open, closed, and ak closed world.
['Leonid Libkin']
I am writing a research paper on a idea Certain Answers as Objects and Knowledge
[{"from": "human", "value": "I am writing a research paper on a idea Certain Answers as Objects and Knowledge"}, {"from": "gpt", "value": "Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: Abstract   The standard way of ansring queries over incomplete databases is to compute  certain ansrs , defined as the intersection of query ansrs on all complete databases that the incomplete database represents. But is this universally accepted definition correct?  argue that this \u201cone-size-fits-all\u201d definition can often lead to counterintuitive or just plain wrong results, and propose an alternative framework for defining certain ansrs.  The idea of the framework is to move away from the standard, in the database literature, assumption that query results be given in the form of a database object, and to allow instead two alternative representations of ansrs: as objects defining all other ansrs, or as knowledge  can deduce with certainty about all such ansrs.  show that the latter is often easier to achieve than the former, that in general certain ansrs need not be defined as intersection, and may ll contain missing values in them.  also show that with a proper choice of semantics,  can often reduce computing certain ansrs \u2013 as either objects or knowledge \u2013 to standard query evaluation.  describe the framework in the most general way, applicable to a variety of data models, and test it on three concrete relational semantics of incompleteness: open, closed, and ak closed world."}]