Abstract
Machine discovery systems help humans to find natural laws from collections of experimentally collected data. Most of the laws found by existing machine discovery systems describe static situations, where a physical system has reached equilibrium. In this paper, we consider the problem of discovering laws that govern the behavior of dynamical systems, i.e., systems that change their state over time. Based on ideas from inductive logic programming and machine discovery, we present two systems, QMN and LAGRANGE, for discovery of qualitative and quantitative laws from quantitative (numerical) descriptions of dynamical system behavior. We illustrate their use by generating a variety of dynamical system models from example behaviors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Babloyantz, A. (1986).Molecules, Dynamics, and Life. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Bielecki, M. W. (1992). Machine discovery approach to dynamic systems in the real laboratory.ML92 Workshop on Machine Discovery. Aberdeen, Scotland.
Bohte, Z. (1991).Numerical Methods. The Society of Mathematicians, Physicists and Astronomers of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Bratko, I., Muggleton, S., and Varsek, A. (1992). Learning qualitative models of dynamic systems. In Muggleton, S., editor,Inductive Logic Programming, pages 437–452. Academic Press, London.
Coiera, E. (1989). Learning qualitative models from example behaviors.Third International Workshop on Qualitative Physics. Stanford, CA.
De Raedt, L. and Bruynooghe, M. (1993). A theory of clausal discovery. InProc. Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1058–1063. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA.
Dzeroski, S. and Bratko, I. (1992). Handling noise in inductive logic programming.Second International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming. Tokyo, Japan.
Dzeroski, S. and Petrovski, I. (1994). Discovering dynamics with genetic programming. InProc. Seventh European Conference on Machine Learning. Springer, Berlin. To appear.
Dzeroski, S. and Todorovski, L. (1993). Discovering dynamics. InProc. Tenth International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 97–103. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1993.
Dzeroski, S., Muggleton, S., and Russell, S. (1992). PAC-learnability of determinate logic programs. InProc. Fifth ACM Workshop on Computational Learning Theory, pages 128–135. ACM Press, New York.
Falkenheiner, B. and Michalski, R. (1990). Integrating quantitative and qualitative discovery in the ABACUS system. In Kodratoff, Y. and Michalski, R., editors,Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, pages 153–190. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA.
Geva, S. and Sitte, J. (1993). A cartpole experimental benchmark for trainable controllers.IEEE Control Systems, 13(5):40–51.
Kraan, I., Richards, B., and Kuipers, B. (1991). Automatic abduction of qualitative models.Fifth International Workshop on Qualitative Physics. Austin, TX.
Krizman, V. (1994) Handling noisy data in automated modeling of dynamical systems. MSc Thesis, Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Kuipers, B. (1986). Qualitative simulation.Artificial Intelligence, 29(3):289–338.
Langley, P., Simon, H., Bradshaw, G., and Zytkow, J. (1987).Scientific discovery. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Lavrac, N. and Dzeroski, S. (1994)Inductive Logic Programming: Techniques and Applications. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.
Lavrac, N., Dzeroski, S., and Grobelnik, M. (1991). Learning nonrecursive definitions of relations with LINUS. InProc. Fifth European Working Session on Learning, pages 265–281. Springer, Berlin.
Ljung, L. (1993). Modelling of industrial systems. InProc. Seventh International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, pages 338–349. Springer, Berlin.
Muggleton, S., editor (1992).Inductive Logic Programming. Academic Press, London.
Nordhausen, B. and Langley, P. (1990). A robust approach to numeric discovery. InProc. Seventh International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 411–418. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA.
Press, W. H., Flannery, B. P., Teukolsky, S. A., and Vetterling, W. T. (1986).Numerical Recipes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Urbancic, T. and Bratko, I. (1994) Learning to control dynamic systems. In Michie, D., Spiegelhalter, D., and Taylor, C., editors,Machine Learning, Neural and Statistical Classification. Ellis Horwood, Chichester. In press.
Van Laer, W. and De Raedt, L. (1993). Discovering quantitative laws in inductive logic programming.MLnet Workshop on Machine Discovery. Blanes, Spain.
Volk, W. (1958).Applied Statistics for Engineers. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Zembowicz, R. and Zytkow, J. (1992). Discovery of equations: experimental evaluation of convergence. InProc. Tenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 70–75. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Zytkow, J. and Zhu, J. (1991). Application of empirical discovery in knowledge acquisition. InProc. Fifth European Working Session on Learning, pages 101–117. Springer, Berlin.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dzeroski, S., Todorovski, L. Discovering dynamics: From inductive logic programming to machine discovery. J Intell Inf Syst 4, 89–108 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00962824
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00962824