Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

By giving the query (lives-near ?person (Hacker Alyssa P)) Alyssa P. Hacker is able to find people who live near her, with whom she can ride to work. On the other hand, when she tries to find all pairs of people who live near each other by querying (lives-near ?person-1 ?person-2) she notices that each pair of people who live near each other is listed twice; for example, (lives-near (Hacker Alyssa P) (Fect Cy D)) (lives-near (Fect Cy D) (Hacker Alyssa P)) Why does this happen? Is there a way to find a list of people who live near each other, in which each pair appears only once? Explain.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Symmetric relationships cause pairs to appear twice. Use alphabetical order filtering to list each pair once.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding the Problem

The problem arises when querying all pairs of people who live near each other. Each pair is listed twice, representing the mutual relationship: if Person A lives near Person B, then Person B lives near Person A.
02

Observing Symmetric Relationships

The relationship 'lives-near' is symmetric by nature. In the example, (lives-near (Hacker Alyssa P) (Fect Cy D)) and (lives-near (Fect Cy D) (Hacker Alyssa P)) are both true, so each pair appears twice.
03

Target Solution - Use Conditional Query Logic

To ensure each pair appears only once, modify the querying logic to impose an order or condition. For instance, query so that ?person-1 comes before ?person-2 alphabetically or numerically.
04

Query Modification Example

Modify the original query to include a condition: (lives-near ?person-1 ?person-2) with a clause that ?person-1 is less than ?person-2 in some order (lexicographic usually), e.g., (string<? ?person-1 ?person-2).
05

Implementing the Solution

With the condition (string<? ?person-1 ?person-2), a result will only be included if the first person comes before the second in alphabetical order, thus removing duplicate pairs.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Conditional Query Logic
Conditional Query Logic is a powerful tool used to shape the results of a query. By specifying conditions, you can filter out unwanted data. In the context of solving our "lives-near" problem, conditional query logic can help us avoid double-listing mutual pairs of people.

To achieve this, you set a condition in your query that imposes a certain order on the pair of people you are listing. For instance, ensure that the first person mentioned, ?person-1, must be "less than" ?person-2 according to some predefined order, such as alphabetical.

This method effectively eliminates redundancy by enforcing that only one version of each symmetric pair appears in the results. Without such conditions, every pair is checked twice: once in each possible order. Implementing these logic conditions can streamline your data processing and result in clearer, more relevant outcomes.
Duplicate Elimination
Duplicate Elimination is the process of removing repetitive entries from a dataset. In database queries, especially when dealing with symmetric relationships, duplication is common.

When you query for all pairs of people who live near each other, each pair is listed twice because if Person A lives near Person B, then Person B also lives near Person A. Both these entries return as separate results.

To effectively eliminate these duplicates, you can incorporate rules that ensure each pair of results is returned only once. By using logic conditions, such as those described for Conditional Query Logic, restrictions like alphabetical order can prevent mirrored duplicates from appearing. This approach not only cleans up your results but also optimizes them by reducing processed data and simplifying analysis.
Lexicographical Order
Lexicographical order refers to the way items are ordered in dictionaries. It's a straight-forward, alphabetical arrangement of strings, similar to how dictionary entries are sorted.

In our scenario, utilizing lexicographical order in queries helps manage symmetric relationships efficiently. By enforcing that the first person's name is "less than" the second when sorting alphabetically, you remove any mirrored results. This means if "Alyssa P" and "Cy D" are compared, "Alyssa P" will always come before "Cy D" due to alphabetical precedence.

This ordering serves as a clear criterion for conditionally processing data. It ensures a uniform approach to handling pair data, reducing clutter and providing more intuitive results. Implementing lexicographical order as a condition in queries helps maintain organized, non-redundant datasets.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Notice that we cannot tell whether the metacircular evaluator evaluates operands from left to right or from right to left. Its evaluation order is inherited from the underlying Lisp: If the arguments to cons in list-of-values are evaluated from left to right, then list-of-values will evaluate operands from left to right; and if the arguments to cons are evaluated from right to left, then list-of-values will evaluate operands from right to left. Write a version of list-of-values that evaluates operands from left to right regardless of the order of evaluation in the underlying Lisp. Also write a version of list-of-values that evaluates operands from right to left.

Louis Reasoner plans to reorder the cond clauses in eval so that the clause for procedure applications appears before the clause for assignments. He argues that this will make the interpreter more efficient: Since programs usually contain more applications than assignments, definitions, and so on, his modified eval will usually check fewer clauses than the original eval before identifying the type of an expression.

Let* is similar to let, except that the bindings of the let variables are performed sequentially from left to right, and each binding is made in an environment in which all of the preceding bindings are visible. For example \(\left.\left.\left.\begin{array}{l}\left(1 \text { et* }\left(\left(\begin{array}{ll}x & 3\end{array}\right)\right.\right. \\ (y(+x & 2)) \\ (z & (+x & y & 5\end{array}\right)\right)\right) } \\\\{(* x \text { z) })} \end{array}\) returns 39 . Explain how a let* expression can be rewritten as a set of nested let expressions, and write a procedure let*->nested-lets that performs this transformation. If we have already implemented let (exercise 4.6) and we want to extend the evaluator to handle let*, is it sufficient to add a clause to eval whose action is (eval (let*->nested-lets exp) env) or must we explicitly expand let* in terms of non-derived expressions?

Ben Bitdiddle has missed one meeting too many. Fearing that his habit of forgetting meetings could cost him his job, Ben decides to do something about it. He adds all the weekly meetings of the firm to the Microshaft data base by asserting the following: (meeting accounting (Monday 9am)) (meeting administration (Monday 10am)) (meeting computer (Wednesday 3pm)) (meeting administration (Friday 1pm)) Each of the above assertions is for a meeting of an entire division. Ben also adds an entry for the company-wide meeting that spans all the divisions. All of the company's employees attend this meeting. (meeting whole-company (Wednesday \(4 \mathrm{pm}\) )) a. On Friday morning, Ben wants to query the data base for all the meetings that occur that day. What query should he use? b. Alyssa P. Hacker is unimpressed. She thinks it would be much more useful to be able to ask for her meetings by specif ying her name. So she designs a rule that says that a person's meetings include all whole-company meetings plus all meetings of that person's division. Fill in the body of Alyssa's rule. (rule (meeting-time ?person ?day-and-time) \(\langle\) rule-body \(\rangle\) ) c. Alyssa arrives at work on Wednesday morning and wonders what meetings she has to attend that day. Having defined the above rule, what query should she make to find this out?

Solve the following "Liars" puzzle (from Phillips 1934): Five schoolgirls sat for an examination. Their parents-so they thoughtshowed an undue degree of interest in the result. They therefore agreed that, in writing home about the examination, each girl should make one true statement and one untrue one. The following are the relevant passages from their letters: \- Betty: "Kitty was second in the examination. I was only third." \- Ethel: "You'll be glad to hear that I was on top. Joan was second." \- Joan: "I was third, and poor old Ethel was bottom." \- Kitty: "I came out second. Mary was only fourth." \- Mary: "I was fourth. Top place was taken by Betty." What in fact was the order in which the five girls were placed?

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Computer Science Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free