Functional Dependency and Attribute Closure

A. Functional Dependency
• A functional dependency A->B in a relation holds if two tuples having same value of
attribute A also have same value for attribute B.
• For Example, in relation STUDENT shown in table 1, Functional Dependencies
STUD_NO->STUD_NAME, STUD_NO->STUD_PHONE hold
but
STUD_NAME->STUD_STATE do not hold
How to find functional dependencies for a relation?
Functional Dependencies in a relation are dependent on the domain of the relation. Consider the
STUDENT relation given in Table 1.

• We know that STUD_NO is unique for each student. So,

STUD_NO->STUD_NAME, STUD_NO->STUD_PHONE,
STUD_NO->STUD_STATE, STUD_NO->STUD_COUNTRY
and STUD_NO -> STUD_AGE all will be true.

• Similarly, STUD_STATE->STUD_COUNTRY will be true as if two records have same

STUD_STATE, they will have same STUD_COUNTRY as well.

• For relation STUDENT_COURSE, COURSE_NO->COURSE_NAME will be true as two

records with same COURSE_NO will have same COURSE_NAME.
Functional Dependency Set:

• Functional Dependency set or FD set of a relation is the set of all FDs present in the
relation.

• For Example, FD set for relation STUDENT shown in table 1 is:

{ STUD_NO->STUD_NAME, STUD_NO->STUD_PHONE, STUD_NO->STUD_STATE,

STUD_NO->STUD_COUNTRY, STUD_NO -> STUD_AGE, STUD_STATE->STUD_COUNTRY
}
Attribute Closure: Attribute closure of an attribute set can be defined as the set of attributes which can be
functionally determined from it.

How to find attribute closure of an attribute set?

To find attribute closure of an attribute set:

• Add elements of attribute set to the result set.

• Recursively add elements to the result set which can be functionally determined from the elements of the
result set.

Using FD set of table 1, attribute closure can be determined as:

(STUD_NO)+ = {STUD_NO, STUD_NAME, STUD_PHONE, STUD_STATE, STUD_COUNTRY,

STUD_AGE}
(STUD_STATE)+ = {STUD_STATE, STUD_COUNTRY}
How to find Candidate Keys and Super Keys using Attribute Closure?

• If attribute closure of an attribute set contains all attributes of relation, the attribute set will be super key of the
relation.
• If no subset of this attribute set can functionally determine all attributes of the relation, the set will be
candidate key as well.
• For Example, using FD set of table 1,
(STUD_NO, STUD_NAME)+ = {STUD_NO, STUD_NAME, STUD_PHONE, STUD_STATE,
STUD_COUNTRY, STUD_AGE}
(STUD_NO)+ = {STUD_NO, STUD_NAME, STUD_PHONE, STUD_STATE, STUD_COUNTRY,
STUD_AGE}

(STUD_NO, STUD_NAME)+ will be super key but not candidate key because its subset (STUD_NO)+ is
equal to all attributes of the relation. So, STUD_NO will be a candidate key.
Question: Consider the relation scheme R = {E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N} and the set of
functional dependencies {{E, F} -> {G}, {F} -> {I, J}, {E, H} -> {K, L}, K -> {M}, L -> {N}
on R. What is the key for R?
A. {E, F}
B. {E, F, H}
C. {E, F, H, K, L}
D. {E}

Answer: Finding attribute closure of all given options, we get:

{E,F}+ = {EFGIJ}
{E,F,H}+ = {EFHGIJKLMN}
{E,F,H,K,L}+ = {{EFHGIJKLMN}
{E}+ = {E}
{EFH}+ and {EFHKL}+ results in set of all attributes, but EFH is minimal. So it will be
candidate key. So correct option is (B).
How to check whether an FD can be derived from a given FD set?
To check whether an FD A->B can be derived from an FD set F,
1. Find (A)+ using FD set F.
2. If B is subset of (A)+, then A->B is true else not true.

Question: In a schema with attributes A, B, C, D and E following set of functional dependencies are given
{A -> B, A -> C, CD -> E, B -> D, E -> A}
Which of the following functional dependencies is NOT implied by the above set?
A. CD -> AC
B. BD -> CD
C. BC -> CD
D. AC -> BC
Answer: Using FD set given in question,
(CD)+ = {CDEAB} which means CD -> AC also holds true.
(BD)+ = {BD} which means BD -> CD can’t hold true. So this FD is no implied in FD set. So (B) is the required
option.
Others can be checked in the same way.
Prime and non-prime attributes

• Attributes which are parts of any candidate key of relation are called as prime attribute,
others are non-prime attributes.
• For Example, STUD_NO in STUDENT relation is prime attribute, others are non-prime
attribute.
 Cases of Functional dependencies
Fully Functional dependency (FFD)
• The set of attributes X will be fully functionally dependent on the set
of attributes Y if.
• X is functionally dependent on Y and
• X is not functionally dependent on any subset of Y
Trivial Functional Dependency
• A "dependent" in Trivial functional dependency is always a subset of
the "determinant".
• A functional dependency is said to be trivial if the attributes on its
right side are a subset of the attributes on its left side.
• If D is a subset of C, C→D is referred to as a Trivial Functional
Dependency.
• For example {Roll_No, S_ Name} →S_Name is a Trivial functional
dependency in this case because the dependant S_Name is a subset of the
determinant {Roll_No, S_Name}.
• { Roll_No } → { Roll_No }, { S_Name } → { S_Name } and { S_Age } → {
S_Age } are also Trivial.
Non-Trivial Functional Dependency
• It is the inverse of Trivial functional dependence. Formally, a
Dependent is a Non-Trivial functional dependency if it is not a subset
of the determinant.
• If D is not a subset of C, C→D is said to have a non-trivial functional
dependency. Non-trivial functional dependency is defined as a
functional dependency C→ D where C is a set of attributes and D is
also a set of attributes but not a subset of C.
• For example Roll_No→S_Name is a non-trivial functional dependency in this
case since S_Name(dependent) is not a subset of Roll_No (determinant).
• Similarly, {Roll_No, Name}→ Age are non-trivial functional dependencies.
Transitive Functional Dependency
• Transitive Dependency occurs when an indirect interaction results in
functional dependency. As a result, if C→ D and D ->Z are true, then
C ->Z is a transitive dependency.
• Transitive dependency causes deletion, update, and insertion errors in
the database and is regarded as poor database design.
 Armstrong’s Axioms in Functional Dependency in DBMS
Armstrong Axioms
• The term Armstrong Axioms, introduced by William W. Armstrong,
• that is used to test the logical implication of functional dependencies.
• If F is a set of functional dependencies then the closure of F, denoted as F+, is the set of all
functional dependencies logically implied by F.
• Armstrong’s Axioms are a set of rules, that when applied repeatedly, generates a closure of
functional dependencies.

Axioms
i. Axiom of Reflexivity: If A is a set of attributes and B is a subset of A, then A holds B. If B⊆A
then A→B. This property is trivial property.
ii. Axiom of Augmentation: If A→B holds and Y is the attribute set, then AY→BY also holds. That
is adding attributes to dependencies, does not change the basic dependencies. If A→B,
then AC→BC for any C.
iii. Axiom of Transitivity: Same as the transitive rule in algebra, if A→B holds and B→C holds,
then A→C also holds. A→B is called A functionally which determines B. If X→Y and Y→Z,
then X→Z.
 Armstrong’s Axioms in Functional Dependency in DBMS
Secondary Rules
These rules can be derived from the above axioms.

i. Union: If A→B holds and A→C holds, then A→BC holds. If X→Y and X→Z then X→YZ.

ii. Composition: If A→B and X→Y hold, then AX→BY holds.

iii. Decomposition: If A→BC holds then A→B and A→C hold. If X→YZ then X→Y and X→Z.

iv. Pseudo Transitivity: If A→B holds and BC→D holds, then AC→D holds.
If X→Y and YZ→W then XZ→W.

v. Self Determination: It is similar to the Axiom of Reflexivity, i.e. A→A for any A.

vi. Extensivity: Extensivity is a case of augmentation. If AC→A, and A→B, then AC→B.
Similarly, AC→ABC and ABC→BC. This leads to AC→BC.
 Armstrong’s Axioms in Functional Dependency in DBMS
Advantages of Using Armstrong’s Axioms in Functional Dependency

• They provide a systematic and efficient method for inferring additional functional dependencies from a given
set of functional dependencies, which can help to optimize database design.
• They can be used to identify redundant functional dependencies, which can help to eliminate unnecessary data
and improve database performance.
• They can be used to verify whether a set of functional dependencies is a minimal cover, which is a set of
dependencies that cannot be further reduced without losing information.

Disadvantages of Using Armstrong’s Axioms in Functional Dependency

• The process of using Armstrong’s axioms to infer additional functional dependencies can be computationally
expensive, especially for large databases with many tables and relationships.
• The axioms do not take into account the semantic meaning of data, and may not always accurately reflect the
relationships between data elements.
• The axioms can result in a large number of inferred functional dependencies, which can be difficult to manage
and maintain over time.