Advertisement

New Generation Computing

, Volume 13, Issue 3–4, pp 287–312 | Cite as

Induction of logic programs: FOIL and related systems

  • J. R. Quinlan
  • R. M. Cameron-Jones
Special Issue

Abstract

FOIL is a first-order learning system that uses information in a collection of relations to construct theories expressed in a dialect of Prolog. This paper provides an overview of the principal ideas and methods used in the current version of the system, including two recent additions. We present examples of tasks tackled by FOIL and of systems that adapt and extend its approach.

Keywords

Inductive Logic Programming Relational Learning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1).
    Aha, D.W., Lapointe, S., Ling, C.X., and Matwin, S., “Learning Recursive Relations with Randomly-Selected Small Training Sets,”Proceedings Eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning, New Brunswick, New Jersey, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 12–18, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2).
    Ali, K. and Pazzani, M.J., “HYDRA: A Noise-Tolerant Relational Concept Learning Algorithm,”Proceedings Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambery, France, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 1064–1070, 1993.Google Scholar
  3. 3).
    Bain, M.E., “Learning Logical Exceptions in Chess,”Ph.D. thesis, Department of Statistics and Modelling Science, University of Strathclyde, Scotland, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4).
    Bell, S. and Weber, S., “On the Close Logical Relationship betweenfoil and the Frameworks of Helft and Plotkin,”Proceedings Third International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, Bled, Slovenia, pp. 127–147, 1993.Google Scholar
  5. 5).
    Bratko, I.,Prolog Programming for Artificial Intelligence (2nd edition), Workingham, UK: Addison-Wesley, 1990.Google Scholar
  6. 6).
    Cameron-Jones, R.M. and Quinlan, J.R., “Avoiding Pitfalls When Learning Recursive Theories,”Proceedings Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambery, France, San Francisco, Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 1050–1057, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 7).
    Cameron-Jones, R.M. and Quinlan, J.R., “First Order Learning, Zeroth Order Data,”Proceedings AI’93 Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Melbourne, Singapore: World Scientific, pp. 316–321, 1993.Google Scholar
  8. 8).
    Cameron-Jones, R.M. and Quinlan, J.R., “Efficient Top-down Induction of Logic Programs,”SIGART, 5, pp. 33–42, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9).
    Cohen, W.W., “Pac-Learning a Restricted Class of Recursive Logic Programs,”Proceedings Third International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, Bled, Slovenia, pp. 73–86, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. 10).
    Cohen, W.W., “Recovering Software Specifications with Inductive Logic Programming,”Proceedings AAAI-94 Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Seattle, Washington, Menlo Park: AAAI Press, pp. 142–148, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11).
    Cohen, W.W., “Grammatically Biased Learning: Learning Logic Programs Using an Explicit Antecedent Description Language,”Artificial Intelligence, 68, pp. 303–366, 1994.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12).
    De Raedt, L., Lavrač, N., and Džeroski, S., “Multiple Predicate Learning,”Proceedings Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambery, France, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 1037–1042, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. 13).
    DeJong, G. and Mooney, R., “Explanation-Based Learning: An Alternative View,”Machine Learning, 1, pp. 145–176, 1986.Google Scholar
  14. 14).
    Dietterich, T.G., “The Methodology of Knowledge Layers for Inducing Descriptions of Sequentially Ordered Events,”Technical Report, R-80-1024, Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA, 1980.Google Scholar
  15. 15).
    Fürnkranz, J., “Fossil: A Robust Relational Learner,”Technical Report, TR-93-28, Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Vienna, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. 16).
    Gold, E.M., “Language Identification in the Limit,”Information and Control, 10, pp. 447–474, 1967.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17).
    John, G.S., Kohavi, R., and Pfleger, K., “Irrelevant Features and the Subset Selection Problem,”Proceedings Eleventh International Coference on Machine Learning, New Brunswick, New Jersey, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 121–129, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. 18).
    Kijsirikul, B., Numao, M., and Shimura, M., “Discrimination-Based Constructive Induction of Logic Programs,”Proceedings AAAI-92 Tenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, San Jose, CA, Menlo Park: AAAI Press, pp. 44–49, 1992.Google Scholar
  19. 19).
    Lavrač, N. and Džeroski, S.,Inductive Logic Programming: Techniques and Applications, London: Ellis Horwood, 1994.MATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20).
    Leckie, C. and Zukerman, I., “An Inductive Approach to Learning Search Control Rules for Planning,”Proceedings Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambery, France, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 1100–1105, 1993.Google Scholar
  21. 21).
    Michalski, R.S., “Pattern Recognition as Rule-Guided Inductive Inference,”IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2, pp. 349–361, 1980.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22).
    Mitchell, T.M., Keller, R.M., and Kedar-Cabelli, S.T., “Explanation-Based Generalization: A Unifying View,”Machine Learning, 1, pp. 47–80, 1986.Google Scholar
  23. 23).
    Moore, A.W. and Lee, M.S., “Efficient Algorithms for Minimizing Cross-Validation Error,”Proceedings Eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning, New Brunswick, New Jersey, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 190–198 1994.Google Scholar
  24. 24).
    Muggleton, S. and Buntine, W., “Machine Invention of First-Order Predicates by Inverting Resolution,”Proceedings Fifth International Conference on Machine Learning, Ann Arbor, Michigan, San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 339–352, 1988.Google Scholar
  25. 25).
    Muggleton, S., Bain, M., Hayes-Michie, J., and Michie, D., “An Experimental Comparison of Human and Machine Learning Formalisms,”Proceedings of the Sixth International Machine Learning Workshop, Ithaca, NY, San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 113–118, 1989.Google Scholar
  26. 26).
    Muggleton, S. and Feng, C., “Efficient Induction of Logic Programs,” inInductive Logic Programming (S. Muggleton, ed.), London: Academic Press, pp. 281–298, 1992.Google Scholar
  27. 27).
    Muggleton, S., King, R.D., and Sternberg, M.J., “Protein Secondary Structure Prediction Using Logic-Based Machine Learning,”Protein Engineering, 5, pp. 646–657, 1992.Google Scholar
  28. 28).
    Pazzani, M.J., Brunk, C.A., and Silverstein, G., “A Knowledge-Intensive Approach to Learning Relational Concepts,”Proceedings Eighth International Workshop on Machine Learning, Evanston Illinois, San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 432–436, 1991.Google Scholar
  29. 29).
    Pazzani, M.J. and Kibler, D., “The Utility of Knowledge in Inductive Learning,”Machine Learning, 9, 1, pp. 57–94, 1992.Google Scholar
  30. 30).
    Quinlan, J.R. and Rivest, R.L., “Inferring Decision Trees Using the Minimum Description Length Principle,”Information and Computation, 80, pp. 227–248, 1989.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31).
    Quinlan, J.R., “Learning Logical Definitions from, Relations,”Machine Learning, 5, pp. 239–266, 1990.Google Scholar
  32. 32).
    Quinlan, J.R., “Determinate Literals in Inductive Logic Programming,”Proceedings Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Sydney, Australia, pp. 746–750, 1991.Google Scholar
  33. 33).
    Quinlan, J.R.,C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning, San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.Google Scholar
  34. 34).
    Quinlan, J.R. and Cameron-Jones, R.M., “FOIL: A Midterm Report,”Proceedings European Conference on Machine Learning, Vienna, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 3–20, 1993.Google Scholar
  35. 35).
    Sammut, C.A. and Banerji, R.B., “Learning Concepts by Asking Questions,” inMachine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, Vol. 2 (R.S. Michalski, J.G. Carbonell and T.M. Mitchell, eds.), Los Altos: Morgan Kaufmann, 1986.Google Scholar
  36. 36).
    Sammut, C.A., “The Origins of Inductive Logic Programming: A Prehistoric Tale,”Proceedings Third International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, Bled, Slovenia, pp. 127–147, 1993.Google Scholar
  37. 37).
    Semeraro, G., Brunk, C.A., and Pazzani, M.J., “Traps and Pitfalls When Learning Logical Theories: A Case Study withFoil andFocl,”Technical Report, 93–33, Department of Information and Computer Science, University of California, Irvine, USA, 1993.Google Scholar
  38. 38).
    Shapiro, E.Y.,Algorithmic Program Debugging, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1983.Google Scholar
  39. 39).
    Winston, P.H., “Learning Structural Descriptions from Examples,” inThe Psychology of Computer Vision (P.H. Winston, ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.Google Scholar
  40. 40).
    Wogulis, J. and Pazzani, M.J., “A Methodology for Evaluating Theory Revision Systems: Results withAudrey II,”Proceedings thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambery, France, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 1128–1134, 1993.Google Scholar
  41. 41).
    Zelle, J.M. and Mooney, R.J., “CombiningFoil and EBG to Speed-up Logic Programs,”Proceedings Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambery, France, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 1106–1111, 1993.Google Scholar
  42. 42).
    Zelle, J.M. and Mooney R.J., “Inducing Deterministic Prolog Parsers from Treebanks: A Machine Learning Approach,”Proceedings AAAI-94 Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Seattle, Washington, Menlo Park: AAAI Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  43. 43).
    Zelle, J.M., Mooney, R.J., and Konvisser, J.B., “Combining Top-down and Bottom-up Techniques in Inductive Logic Programming,”Proceedings Eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning, New Brunswick, New Jersey, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 343–351, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ohmsha, Ltd. and Springer 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. R. Quinlan
    • 1
  • R. M. Cameron-Jones
    • 2
  1. 1.University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.University of TasmaniaLauncestonAustralia

Personalised recommendations