Chess Revision: Acquiring the Rules of Chess Variants through FOL Theory Revision from Examples

  • Stephen Muggleton
  • Aline Paes
  • Vítor Santos Costa
  • Gerson Zaverucha
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5989)

Abstract

The game of chess has been a major testbed for research in artificial intelligence, since it requires focus on intelligent reasoning. Particularly, several challenges arise to machine learning systems when inducing a model describing legal moves of the chess, including the collection of the examples, the learning of a model correctly representing the official rules of the game, covering all the branches and restrictions of the correct moves, and the comprehensibility of such a model. Besides, the game of chess has inspired the creation of numerous variants, ranging from faster to more challenging or to regional versions of the game. The question arises if it is possible to take advantage of an initial classifier of chess as a starting point to obtain classifiers for the different variants. We approach this problem as an instance of theory revision from examples. The initial classifier of chess is inspired by a FOL theory approved by a chess expert and the examples are defined as sequences of moves within a game. Starting from a standard revision system, we argue that abduction and negation are also required to best address this problem. Experimental results show the effectiveness of our approach.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Burg, D.B., Just, T.: IUS Chess Federation Official Rules of Chess. McKay, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caruana, R.: Multitask Learning. Machine Learning 28(1), 41–75 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chan, D.: Constructive Negation Based on the Completed Database. In: Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, pp. 111–125. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Drabent, W.: What is Failure? An Approach to Constructive Negation. Acta Inf. 32(1), 27–29 (1995)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duboc, A.L., Paes, A., Zaverucha, G.: Using the Bottom Clause and Mode Declarations in FOL Theory Revision from Examples. Machine Learning 76, 73–107 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Flach, P., Kakas, A.: Abduction and Induction: Essays on their Relation and Integration. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fürnkranz, J.: Recent Advances in Machine Learning and Game Playing. OGAI-Journal 26(2), 147–161 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goodacre, J.: Master thesis, Inductive Learning of Chess Rules Using Progol. Programming Research Group, Oxford University (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Muggleton, S.: Inverse Entailment and Progol. New Generation Computing 13(3&4), 245–286 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Muggleton, S., Bryant, C.H.: Theory completion using inverse entailment. In: Cussens, J., Frisch, A.M. (eds.) ILP 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1866, pp. 130–146. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Muggleton, S., De Raedt, L.: Inductive Logic Programming: Theory and Methods. J. Log. Program. 19/20, 629–679 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paes, A., Zaverucha, G., Costa, V.S.: Revising FOL Theories from Examples through Stochastic Local Search. In: Blockeel, H., Ramon, J., Shavlik, J., Tadepalli, P. (eds.) ILP 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4894, pp. 200–210. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pritchard, D.B.: The Classified Encyclopedia of Chess Variants. John Beasley (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Richards, B.L., Mooney, R.J.: Automated Refinement of First-order Horn-Clause Domain Theories. Machine Learning 19(2), 95–131 (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thrun, S.: Is Learning the nth Thing any Easier than Learning the First? In: Adv. in Neural Inf. Proc. Systems. NIPS, vol. 8, pp. 640–646. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wrobel, S.: First-order theory refinement. In: De Raedt, L. (ed.) Advances in Inductive Logic Programming, pp. 14–33. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen Muggleton
    • 1
  • Aline Paes
    • 1
    • 2
  • Vítor Santos Costa
    • 3
  • Gerson Zaverucha
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ComputingImperial College LondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Systems Eng. and Computer ScienceUFRJBrazil
  3. 3.CRACS and DCC/FCUPUniversidade do PortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations