Advertisement

Top-down induction of logic programs from incomplete samples

  • Nobuhiro Inuzuka
  • Masakage Kamo
  • Naohiro Ishii
  • Hirohisa Seki
  • Hidenori Itoh
Implementations
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1314)

Abstract

We propose an ILP system FOIL-I, which induces logic programs by a top-down method from incomplete samples. An incomplete sample is constituted by some of positive examples and negative examples on a finite domain. FOIL-I has an evaluation function to estimate candidate definitions, the function which is composition of an information-based function and an encoding complexity measure. FOILI uses a best-first search using the evaluation function to make use of suspicious but necessary candidates. Other particular points include a treatment for recursive definitions and removal of redundant clauses. Randomly selected incomplete samples are tested with FOIL-I, QuinIan's FOIL and Muggleton's Progol. Compared with others FOIL-I can induce target relations in many cases from small incomplete samples.

Keywords

Logic Program Inductive Logic Inductive Logic Programming Correct Definition Recursive Definition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [ALLM94a]
    D.W. Aha, S. Lapointe, C.X. Ling, and S. Matwin. Inverting implication with small training sets. In F. Bergadano and L. De Raedt, editors, Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Machine Learning, volume 784 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 31–48. Springer-Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. [ALLM94b]
    D.W. Aha, S. Lapointe, C.X., and S. Matwin. Learning recursive relations with randomly selected small training sets. In W.W. Cohen and H. Hirsh, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 12–18. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.Google Scholar
  3. [AP93]
    K.M. Ali and M.J. Pazzani. Hydra: A noise-tolerant relational concept learning algorithm. In R. Bajcsy, editor, Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1064–1071. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.Google Scholar
  4. [BP91]
    C.A. Brunk and M.J. Pazzani. An investigation of noise-tolerant relational concept learning algorithms. In L. Birnbaum and G. Collins, editors, Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Machine Learning, pages 389–393. Morgan Kaufmann, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. [Coh95]
    W. Cohen.Learning to classify english text with ILP method.In L. De Raedt, editor, Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, Scientific report, pages 3–24. Department of Computer Science, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 1995.Google Scholar
  6. [DB92]
    S. Dzeroski and I. Bratko. Handling noise in inductive logic programming. In S. Muggleton, editor, Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, Report ICOT TM-1182, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. [DBJ94]
    B. Dolšak, I. Bratko, and A. Jezernik. Finite element mesh design: An engineering domain for ILP application. In S. Wrobel, editor, Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, volume 237 of GMD-Studien, pages 305–320. Gesellschaft für Mathematik und Datenverarbeitung MBH, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. [DM91]
    B. Dolšak and S. Muggleton.The application of ILP to finite element mesh design. In S. Muggleton, editor, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 225–242, 1991.Google Scholar
  9. [Dže95]
    S. Džeroski. Learning first-order clausal theories in the presence of noise. In A. Aamodt and J. Komorowski, editors, Proceedings of the 5th Scandinavian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 51–60. IOS, Amsterdam, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. [Für93]
    J. Fürnkranz. Avoiding noise fitting in a FOIL-like learning algorithm. In F. Bergadano, L. De Raedt, S. Matwin, and S. Muggleton, editors, Proceedings of the IJCAI-93 Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 14–23. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. [HS92]
    D. Hume and C. Sammut. Applying inductive logic programming in reactive environments. In S. Muggleton, editor, Inductive Logic Programming, pages 539–549. Academic Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  12. [MF92]
    S. Muggleton and C. Feng.Efficient induction in logic programs.In S. Muggleton, editor, Inductive Logic Programming, pages 281–298. Academic Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. [MN95]
    C. R. Mofizur and M. Numao. Top-down induction of recursive programs from small number of sparse examples. In L. De Raedt, editor, Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, Scientific report, pages 161–180. Department of Computer Science, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 1995.Google Scholar
  14. [Mug95]
    Stephen Muggleton. Inverse entailment and progol. New Generation Computing, 3+4:245–286, 1995.Google Scholar
  15. [QCJ93]
    J.R. Quinlan and R.M. Cameron-Jones. FOIL: A midterm report. In P. Brazdil, editor, Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Machine Learning, volume 667 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 3–20. Springer-Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. [Qui90]
    J.R. Quinlan. Learning logical definitions from relations. Machine Learning, 5:239–266, 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nobuhiro Inuzuka
    • 1
  • Masakage Kamo
    • 2
  • Naohiro Ishii
    • 1
  • Hirohisa Seki
    • 1
  • Hidenori Itoh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Intelligence and Computer ScienceNagoya Institute of TechnologyShowa-ku, NagoyaJapan
  2. 2.Aishin Seiki Co.,Ltd.Kariya-shi, AichiJapan

Personalised recommendations