Multivalued dependency constraint: which action is a standard solution to eliminate the problem?

Introduction / Context:
Multivalued dependencies indicate that a table tries to represent multiple independent sets of facts about the same key, leading to redundancy and anomalies.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• A single relation contains attributes that vary independently with respect to a key.
• Our goal is to remove redundancy and update anomalies.

Concept / Approach:
Fourth normal form requires that for every nontrivial multivalued dependency, we decompose the table into separate relations so that each captures a single theme of attributes dependent on the key.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
After decomposition, insertions or deletions in one attribute set no longer force spurious changes in the other set, confirming that the multivalued dependency problem is resolved.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Changing or creating a new theme without decomposition does not address the structural redundancy.
• Adding a composite key does not eliminate the independent variability of attributes.

Common Pitfalls:
Trying to patch symptoms with extra keys or triggers rather than performing the correct decomposition.

Final Answer:
split the relation into two relations, each with a single theme.