Predicate invention in inductive data engineering

  • Peter A. Flach
Research Papers Inductive Logic Programming
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 667)


By inductive data engineering we mean the (interactive) process of restructuring a knowledge base by means of induction. In this paper we describe INDEX, a system that constructs decompositions of database relations by inducing attribute dependencies. The system employs heuristics to locate exceptions to dependencies satisfied by most of the data, and to avoid the generation of dependencies for which the data don't provide enough support. The system is implemented in a deductive database framework, and can be viewed as an Inductive Logic Programming system with predicate invention capabilities.


  1. M. BAIN & S. MUGGLETON (1991), ‘Non-monotonic learning'. In Machine Intelligence 12, J.E. Hayes, D. Michie & E. Tyugu (eds.), pp. 105–119, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. L. DE RAEDT (1992), ‘A clausal discovery engine'. In Proc. ECAI Workshop on Logical approaches to Machine Learning, C. Rouveirol (ed.).Google Scholar
  3. S. DZERODKI & I. BRATKO (1992), ‘Handling noise in inductive logic programming'. In Proc. Second International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, ICOT TM-1182, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  4. P.A. FLACH (1990), ‘Inductive characterisation of database relations'. In Proc. International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, Z.W. Ras, M. Zemankowa & MX. Emrich (eds.), pp. 371–378, North-Holland, Amsterdam. Full version appeared as ITK Research Report no. 23.Google Scholar
  5. J.W. LLOYD (1987), Foundations of Logic Programming, second edition, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  6. D. MAIER (1983), The theory of relational databases, Computer Science Press, Rockville.Google Scholar
  7. J. MINKER (1988), Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos.Google Scholar
  8. S. MUGGLETON & W. BUNTINE (1988), ‘Machine invention of first-order predicates by inverting resolution'. In Proc. Fifth International Conference on Machine Learning, J. Laird (ed.), pp. 339–352, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo.Google Scholar
  9. S. MUGGLETON & C. FENG (1990), ‘Efficient induction of logic programs'. In Proc. First Conference on Algorithmic Learning Theory, Ohmsha, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  10. S. MUGGLETON, ed. (1992), Inductive Logic Programming, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. G. PIATETSKY-SHAPIRO & W.J. FRAWLEY, eds. (1991), Knowledge discovery in databases, MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. J.R. QUINLAN (1990), ‘Learning logical definitions from relations', Machine Learning 5:3, 239–266.Google Scholar
  13. S. RUSSELL (1989), The use of knowledge in analogy and induction, Pitman, London.Google Scholar
  14. E.Y. SHAPIRO (1981), Inductive inference of theories from facts, Techn. rep. 192, Comp. Sc. Dep., Yale University.Google Scholar
  15. R. WIRTH (1989), ‘Completing logic programs by inverse resolution'. In Proc. Fourth European Working Session on Learning, K. Morik (ed.), pp. 239–250, Pitman, London.Google Scholar
  16. S. WROBEL (1989), ‘Demand-driven concept formation'. In Knowledge representation and organization in Machine Learning, K. Morik (ed.), pp. 289–319, LNAI 347, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  17. W. ZIARKO (1991), ‘The discovery, analysis, and representation of data dependencies in databases'. In (Piatetsky-Shapiro & Frawley, 1991).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter A. Flach
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Language Technology and Artificial IntelligenceTilburg UniversityLE Tilburgthe Nelherlands

Personalised recommendations