Normalization
Question 1 |
A cell in R holds a set instead of an atomic value.
| |
R has a nontrivial functional dependency X-->A, where X is not a superkey and A is a non-prime attribute and X is not a proper subset of any key.
| |
R has a nontrivial functional dependency X-->A, where X is not a superkey and A is a non-prime attribute and X is a proper subset of some key.
| |
R has a nontrivial functional dependency X-->A, where X is not a superkey and A is a prime attribute.
|
FDs:
AB → C
BC → A
(BD)+ = BD ✖
(ABD)+ = ABDC ✔
(CBD)+ = CBDA ✔
Candidate keys = {ABD, CBD}
• The relation R is in 3NF, as there are no transitive dependencies.
• The relation R is not in BCNF, because the left side of both the FD’s are not Super keys.
• In R, BC → A is a non-trivial FD and in which BC is not a Super key and A is a prime attribute.
Question 2 |
Consider the following four relational schemas. For each schema, all non-trivial functional dependencies are listed. The underlined attributes are the respective primary keys.
Schema I: Registration(rollno, courses) Field ‘courses’ is a set-valued attribute containing the set of courses a student has registered for. Non-trivial functional dependency rollno → courses Schema II: Registration (rollno, coursid, email) Non-trivial functional dependencies: rollno, courseid → email email → rollno Schema III: Registration (rollno, courseid, marks, grade) Non-trivial functional dependencies: rollno, courseid, → marks, grade marks → grade Schema IV: Registration (rollno, courseid, credit) Non-trivial functional dependencies: rollno, courseid → credit courseid → credit
Which one of the relational schemas above is in 3NF but not in BCNF?
Schema I | |
Schema II | |
Schema III | |
Schema IV |
Registration (rollno, courses) rollno → courses
For the given schema Registration ‘rollno’ is a primary key.
Left-side of the functional dependency is a superkey so, Registration is in BCNF.
Schema II:
Registrstion (rollno, courseid, email)
rollno, courseid → email
email → rollno
From the given schema the candidate key is (rollno + courseid).
There is no part of the key in the left hand of the FD’s so, it is in 2NF.
In the FD email→rollno, email is non-prime attribute but rollno is a prime attribute.
So, it is not a transitive dependency.
No transitive dependencies so, the schema is in 3NF.
But in the second FD email→rollno, email is not a superkey.
So, it is violating BCNF.
Hence, the schema Registration is in 3NF but not in BCNF.
Schema III:
Registration (rollno, courseid, marks, grade)
rollno, courseid → marks, grade
marks → grade
For the schema the candidate key is (rollno + courseid).
There are no part of the keys are determining non-prime attributes.
So, the schema is in 2NF.
In the FD marks → grade, both the attributes marks and grade are non-prime.
So, it is a transitive dependency.
The FD is violating 3NF.
The schema Registration is in 2NF but not in 3NF.
Schema IV:
Registration (rollno, courseid, credit)
rollno, courseid → credit
courseid → credit
The candidate key is (rollno + courseid).
In the FD, courseid → credit, courseid is part of the key (prime attribute) and credit is non-prime.
So, it is a partial dependency.
The schema is violating 2NF.
Question 3 |
Which of the following is NOT a superkey in a relational schema with attributes V, W, X, Y, Z and primary key VY?
VXYZ | |
VWXZ | |
VWXY | |
VWXYZ |
Any superset of “VY” is a super key. So, option (B) does not contain “Y”.
Question 4 |
A database of research articles in a journal uses the following schema.
-
(VOLUME, NUMBER, STARTPAGE, ENDPAGE, TITLE, YEAR, PRICE)
The primary key is (VOLUME, NUMBER, STARTPAGE, ENDPAGE) and the following functional dependencies exist in the schema.
-
(VOLUME, NUMBER, STARTPAGE, ENDPAGE) → TITLE
(VOLUME, NUMBER) → YEAR
(VOLUME, NUMBER, STARTPAGE, ENDPAGE) → PRICE
The database is redesigned to use the following schemas.
-
(VOLUME, NUMBER, STARTPAGE, ENDPAGE, TITLE, PRICE)
(VOLUME, NUMBER, YEAR)
Which is the weakest normal form that the new database satisfies, but the old one does not?
1NF | |
2NF | |
3NF | |
BCNF |
V – VOLUME
N – NUMBER
S – STARTPAGE
E – ENDPAGE
T – TITLE
Y – YEAR
P – PRICE
Primary key: (V, N, S, E)
FD set:
(V, N, S, E) → T
(V, N) → Y
(V, N, S, E) → P
In (V, N) → Y; V, N is a part of the key and Y is non-prime attribute.
So, it is a partial dependency.
Now, the schema “Journal” is in 1NF but not in 2NF.
The database is redesigned as follows:

Both R1 and R2 are in BCNF.
Therefore, 2NF is the weakest normal form that the new database satisfies, but the old one does not.
Question 5 |
S1: Every table with two single-valued attributes is in 1NF, 2NF, 3NF and BCNF. S2: AB->C, D->E, E->C is a minimal cover for the set of functional dependencies AB->C, D->E, AB->E, E->C.Which one of the following is CORRECT?
S1 is TRUE and S2 is FALSE. | |
Both S1 and S2 are TRUE. | |
S1 is FALSE and S2 is TRUE. | |
Both S1 and S2 are FALSE. |
If we can prove the relation is in BCNF then by default it would be in 1NF, 2NF, 3NF also.
Let R(AB) be a two attribute relation, then
If {A→B} exists then BCNF since {A}+ = AB = R
If {B→A} exists then BCNF since {B}+ = AB = R
If {A→B, B→A} exists then BCNF since A and B both are Super Key now.
If {No non-trivial Functional Dependency} then default BCNF.
Hence it’s proved that a Relation with two single-valued attributes is in BCNF hence it’s also in 1NF, 2NF, 3NF.
S2: False
The canonical cover for the given FD set is {AB→C, D→E, AB→E, E→C}. As we can see AB→E is not covered in minimal cover since {AB}+ = ABC in the given cover {AB→C, D→E, E→C}
Question 6 |
3 | |
4 | |
5 | |
6 |
Now D+ = {D}.
Hence we have to add A,B,C,E,F,G,H to D and check which of them are Candidate keys of size 2.
AD+ = {ABCDEFGH}
BD+ = {ABCDEFGH}
ED+ = {ABCDEFGH}
FD+ = {ABCDEFGH}
But CD+, GD+ and HD+ does not give all the attributes hence CD, GD and HD are not candidate keys.
Hence no. of candidate keys are 4: AD, BD, ED, FD.
Question 7 |
in 1NF, but not in 2NF. | |
in 2NF, but not in 3NF. | |
in 3NF, but not in BCNF. | |
in BCNF. |
Now D+ = {D}.
Hence we have to add A,B,C,E,F,G,H to D and check which of them are Candidate keys of size 2.
AD+ = {ABCDEFGH}
BD+ = {ABCDEFGH}
ED+ = {ABCDEFGH}
FD+= {ABCDEFGH}
But CD+, GD+ and HD+ does not give all the attributes hence CD, GD and HD are not candidate keys.
Here Candidate keys are AD, BD, ED and FD.
A → BC, B → CFH and F → EG etc are partial dependencies.
So given relation is in 1NF, but not in 2NF.
Question 8 |
Every relation in 3NF is also in BCNF | |
A relation R is in 3NF if every non-prime attribute of R is fully functionally dependent on every key of R | |
Every relation in BCNF is also in 3NF | |
No relation can be in both BCNF and 3NF |
Question 9 |
The schema is in BCNF | |
The schema is in 3NF but not in BCNF
| |
The schema is in 2NF but not in 3NF | |
The schema is not in 2NF |
(Sid, Street) → Sname
As Sid is a primary key, then
(Sid, Street) will be super key.
Hence, it is in BCNF.
Question 10 |
Both Book and Collection are in BCNF
| |
Both Book and Collection are in 3NF only
| |
Book is in 2NF and Collection is in 3NF
| |
Both Book and Collection are in 2NF only
|
Book(Title, Author, Catalog_no, Publisher, Year, Price)
Collection(Title, Author, Catalog_no)
I) Title Author ⟶ Catalog_no ⟶ BCNR
II) Catalog_no ⟶ Title, Author, Publisher, Year ⟶ 3NF
III) Publisher Title Year ⟶Price ⟶ 2NF Book’s in 2NF
Collection is in 3NF.
Question 11 |
in BCNF | |
in 3NF, but not in BCNF | |
in 2NF, but not in 3NF | |
not in 2NF |
Since there is a partial dependency B→G.
So the relational schema R is Not in 2NF.
Question 12 |
Any relation with two attributes is in BCNF | |
A relation in which every key has only one attribute is in 2NF
| |
A prime attribute can be transitively dependent on a key in a 3NF relation | |
A prime attribute can be transitively dependent on a key in a BCNF relation |
i) It is in 3NF.
ii) For any dependency X→ Y
where X is a super key.
iii) Functional dependency has been removed.
Option D is false.
→ Because a prime attribute can’t be transitive dependent on a key in a BCNF relation.
Question 13 |
BCNF is stricter than 3NF
| |
Lossless, dependency-preserving decomposition into 3NF is always possible
| |
Lossless, dependency-preserving decomposition into BCNF is always possible | |
Any relation with two attributes is in BCNF
|
Option B: Lossless, dependency preserving decomposition into 3NF is always possible.
Option C: It is false.
It is not possible to have dependency preserving in BCNF decomposition.
→ Let take an example, 3NF can't be decomposed into BCNF.
Option D: It is true.
Let consider t wo attributes (X, Y).
If (X→Y), X is a candidate key. It is in BCNF and vice-versa.
Question 14 |
1 NF | |
2 NF | |
3 NF | |
None |
F2 → F4 ......(ii)
(F1⋅F2) → F5 .....(iii)
F1F2 is the candidate key.
F1 and F2 are the prime key.
In (i) and (ii) we can observe that the relation from P → NP which is partial dependency. So this is in 1NF.
Question 15 |
2 NF
| |
3 NF
| |
BCNF
| |
4NF
|
name, courseNo → grade →(I)
rollNo, courseNo → grade →(II)
name → rollNo →(III)
rollNo → name →(IV)
Candidate keys: name, courseNo (or) rollNo
Its is not BCNF, because the relation III, there is no relationship from super key.
name → rollNo
It is not BCNF, name is not super key.
It belongs to 3NF, because if X→Y, Y is prime then it is in 3NF.
Question 16 |
Data_of_Birth → Age Age → Eligibility Name → Roll_number Roll_number → Name Course_number → Course_name Course_number → Instructor (Roll_number, Course_number) → GradeThe relation (Roll_number, Name, Date_of_birth, Age) is:
in second normal form but not in third normal form | |
in third normal form but not in BCNF | |
in BCNF
| |
in none of the above
|
Date_of_Birth → Age
Name → Roll_number
Roll_number → Name
Candidate keys for the above are:
(Date_of_Birth, Name) and (Date_of_Birth, Roll_number)
Clearly, there is a partial dependency,
Date_of_Birth → Age
So, it is only in 1NF.
Question 17 |
Zero | |
More than zero but less than that of an equivalent 3NF decomposition | |
Proportional to the size of F+ | |
Indetermine |
Question 18 |
Relation R is decomposed using a set of functional dependencies, F, and relation S is decomposed using another set of functional dependencies, G. One decomposition is definitely BCNF, the other is definitely 3NF, but it is not known which is which. To make a quaranteed identification, which one of the following tests should be used on the decompositions? (Assume that the closures of F and G are available).
Dependency-preservation | |
Lossless-join | |
BCNF definition | |
3NF definition |
Question 20 |
not in 2NF | |
in 2NF but not 3NF | |
in 3NF but not in 2NF | |
in both 2NF and 3NF |
And since every attribute is key so the decomposed relation will be in BCNF and hence in 3NF.
Question 21 |
2 NF | |
5 NF | |
4 NF | |
3 NF |
Question 22 |
in first normal form but not in second normal form | |
in second normal form but not in third normal form | |
in third normal form | |
None of the above |
Since all a, b, c, d are atomic. So the relation is in 1NF.
Checking the FD's
a → c
b → d
We can see that there is partial dependencies. So it is not 2NF.
So answer is option (A).
Question 23 |
A → B, B → CD | |
A → B, B → C, C → D | |
AB → C, C → AD | |
A → BCD |
Question 24 |
Transitive functional dependencies. | |
Non-trivial functional dependencies involving prime attributes on the right-side.
| |
Non-trivial functional dependencies involving prime attributes only on the left-side.
| |
Non-trivial functional dependencies involving only prime attributes. | |
Both (B) and (D). |
B) 3NF because right side is prime attribute.
C) Not in 3NF, because lets suppose ABC is a candidate key. Now consider
AB → Non-prime attribute
which show it is not in 3NF
D) Involves only prime attribute, so right side should definitely contain only prime attribute. So in 3NF.