Threshold queries are an important class of queries that only require computing or counting answers up to a specified threshold value. To the best of our knowledge, threshold queries have been largely disregarded in the research literature, which is surprising considering how common they are in practice. In this paper, we present a deep theoretical analysis of threshold query evaluation and show that thresholds can be used to significantly improve the asymptotic bounds of state-of-the-art query evaluation algorithms. We also empirically show that threshold queries are significant in practice. In surprising contrast to conventional wisdom, we found important scenarios in real-world data sets in which users are interested in computing the results of queries up to a certain threshold, independent of a ranking function that orders the query results.

Threshold queries are an important class of queries that only require computing or counting answers up to a specified threshold value. To the best of our knowledge, threshold queries have been largely disregarded in the research literature, which is surprising considering how common they are in practice. In this paper, we present a deep theoretical analysis of threshold query evaluation and show that thresholds can be used to significantly improve the asymptotic bounds of state-of-the-art query evaluation algorithms. We also empirically show that threshold queries are significant in practice. In surprising contrast to conventional wisdom, we found important scenarios in real-world data sets in which users are interested in computing the results of queries up to a certain threshold, independent of a ranking function that orders the query results.

In a variety of reasoning tasks, one estimates the likelihood of events by means of volumes of sets they define. Such sets need to be measurable, which is usually achieved by putting bounds, sometimes ad hoc, on them. We address the question how unbounded or unmeasurable sets can be measured nonetheless. Intuitively, we want to know how likely a randomly chosen point is to be in a given set, even in the absence of a uniform distribution over the entire space. To address this, we follow a recently proposed approach of taking intersection of a set with balls of increasing radius, and defining the measure by means of the asymptotic behavior of the proportion of such balls taken by the set. We show that this approach works for every set definable in first-order logic with the usual arithmetic over the reals (addition, multiplication, exponentiation, etc.), and every uniform measure over the space, of which the usual Lebesgue measure (area, volume, etc.) is an example. In fact we establish a correspondence between the good asymptotic behavior and the finiteness of the VC dimension of definable families of sets. Towards computing the measure thus defined, we show how to avoid the asymptotics and characterize it via a specific subset of the unit sphere. Using definability of this set, and known techniques for sampling from the unit sphere, we give two algorithms for estimating our measure of unbounded unmeasurable sets, with deterministic and probabilistic guarantees, the latter being more efficient. Finally we show that a discrete analog of this measure exists and is similarly well-behaved.

The standard notion of query answering over incomplete database is that of certain answers, guaranteeing correctness regardless of how incomplete data is interpreted. In majority of real-life databases, relations have numerical columns and queries use arithmetic and comparisons. Even though the notion of certain answers still applies, we explain that it becomes much more problematic in situations when missing data occurs in numerical columns.

Our goal is to measure the likelihood of the satisfaction of numerical constraints in the absence of prior information. We study expressive constraints, involving arithmetic and complex numerical functions, and even quantification over numbers. Such problems arise in processing incomplete data, or analyzing conditions in programs without a priori bounds on variables. We show that for constraints on n variables, the proper way to define such a measure is as the limit of the part of the n-dimensional ball that consists of points satisfying the constraints, when the radius increases. We prove that the existence of such a limit is closely related to the notion of o-minimality from model theory. Thus, for constraints definable with the usual arithmetic and exponentiation, the likelihood is well defined, but adding trigonometric functions is problematic. We look at computing and approximating such likelihoods for order and linear constraints, and prove an impossibility result for approximating with multiplicative error. However, as the likelihood is a number between 0 and 1, an approximation scheme with additive error is acceptable, and we give it for arbitrary linear constraints.