Induction of Fuzzy and Annotated Logic Programs

  • Tomáš Horváth
  • Peter Vojtáš
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4455)


The new direction of the research in the field of data mining is the development of methods to handle imperfection (uncertainty, vagueness, imprecision,...). The main interest in this research is focused on probability models. Besides these there is an extensive study of the phenomena of imperfection in fuzzy logic. In this paper we concentrate especially on fuzzy logic programs (FLP) and Generalized Annotated Programs (GAP). The lack of the present research in the field of fuzzy inductive logic programming (FILP) is that every approach has its own formulation of the proof-theoretic part (often dealing with linguistic hedges) and lack sound and compete formulation of semantics. Our aim in this paper is to propose a formal model of FILP and induction of GAP programs (IGAP) based on sound and complete model of FLP (without linguistic hedges) and its equivalence with GAP. We focus on learning from entailment setting in this paper. We describe our approach to IGAP and show its consistency and equivalence to FILP. Our inductive method is used for detection of user preferences in a web search application. Finally, we compare our approach to several fuzzy ILP approaches.


Logic Program Logic Programming Inductive Logic Programming Deductive Part Inductive Logic Programming System 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Bodenhofer, U., Drobics, M., Klement, E-P.: FS-FOIL: An Inductive learning method for extracting interpretable fuzzy descriptions. Int.J. Approximate Reasoning 32, 131–152 (2003)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Blockeel, H., Raedt, L.D., Jacobs, N.: Scaling up inductive logic programming by learning from interpretations. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 3(1), 59–93 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Blockeel, H: Two Novel Methods for Learning Logic Prorams with Annotated Disjunctions. In: Proceedings of short papers on ILP 2006, Santiago De Compostela, Spain, UDC Press Service, pp. 31–33 (2006) ISBN:84-9749-206-4Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Bratko, I., Šuc, D.: Learning qualitative models. AI Magazine 24, 107–119 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    De Raedt, L., Kersting, K.: Probabilistic Inductive Logic Programming. In: Ben-David, S., Case, J., Maruoka, A. (eds.) ALT 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3244, pp. 19–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Džeroski, S., Lavrač, N.: An introduction to inductive logic programming. In: Džeroski, S., Lavrač, N. (eds.) Relational data mining, pp. 48–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Getoor, L., et al.: Learning probabilistic relational models. In: Džeroski, S., Lavrač, N. (eds.) Relational data mining, pp. 307–335. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Heckerman, D.: A Tutorial on Learning with Bayesian Networks. Technical Report MSR-TR-95-06, Microsoft Research (March 1995)Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Horváth, T.: Unsupervised Learning of User Preferences by Ordinal Classification. In: Workshop NAZOU, Bystra Dolina, Slovakia, 2006: Vydavatelstvo STU. Bratislava, Slovakia, pp. 125–134 (2006) ISBN 80-227-2468-8Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Horváth, T., Sudzina, F.: Measuring impact of information systems on business competitiveness using regression and ILP. In: Ekonomika firiem, Michalovce, Slovakia, 2004: PHF EU Bratislava, Košice, Slovakia, 2004, pp. 296–300 (2004) ISBN 80-225-1879-4Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Horváth, T., Vojtáš, P.: GAP - Rule Discovery for Graded Classifciation. In: Fuernkranz, J. (eds.) Workshop of Advances in Inductive Rule Learning (W8) of ECML/PKDD 2004, Pisa, Italy, 2004: TU Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany, 2004, pp. 46–63 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Horváth, T., Vojtáš, P.: Fuzzy induction via generalized annotated programs. In: FDD 2004, Dortmund, Germany, 2004, pp. 419–433. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Kersting, K., De Raedt, L.: Bayesian Logic Programs, Technical Report 151, University of Freiburg, p. 52Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Kifer, M., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Theory of generalized annotated logic programming and its applications. J. Logic Programming 12, 335–367 (1992)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Krajči, S., Lencses, R., Vojtáš, P.: A comparison of fuzzy and annotated logic programming. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 144, 173–192 (2004)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Prade, H., Richard, G., Serrurier, M.: Enriching relational Learning with fuzzy predicates. In: Lavrač, N., Gamberger, D., Todorovski, L., Blockeel, H. (eds.) PKDD 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2838, pp. 399–410. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Prade, H., Richard, G., Dubois, D., Sudkamp, T., Serrurier, M.: Learning first order fuzzy rules with their implication operator. In. Proc. of IPMU (2004)Google Scholar
  19. [19]
  20. [20]
    Shibata, D., et al.: An induction algorithm based on fuzzy logic programming. In: Zhong, N., Zhou, L. (eds.) Methodologies for Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1574, pp. 268–273. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Vojtáš, P.: Fuzzy logic programming. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 124(3), 361–370 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Vojtáš, P., Vomlelová, M.: Transformation of deductive and inductive tasks between models of logic programming with imperfect information. In: Proceedings of IPMU, Editrice Universita La Sapienza, Roma, pp. 839–846 (2004)Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Vojtáš, P., Vomlelová, M.: On models of comparison of multiple monotone classifications. In: Proc. IPMU 2006, Paris, France, Éditions EDK, Paris, pp. 1236–1243Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tomáš Horváth
    • 1
  • Peter Vojtáš
    • 2
  1. 1.ICS, Faculty of Science, Pavol Jozef Šafárik University, KošiceSlovakia
  2. 2.ICS, Czech Academy of Sciences, PragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations