Explanation-based reuse of prolog programs

  • Yasuyuki Koga
  • Eiju Hirowatari
  • Setsuo Arikawa
Selected Papers Analogical and Inductive Inference
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 872)


This paper presents a method of extracting subprograms from background knowledge. Most studies on learning logic programs so far developed are mainly concerned with pure Prolog, so that we can not deal with programs with system predicates such as the cut symbol, true, false, and so on. Explanation-based generalization system builds an explanation and learns a concept definition as its generalization, provided an input program. However, it assumes the input program be pure Prolog program. This paper proposes explanation-based reuse (EBR, for short), which is an extension of the explanation-based generalization and a method of program reuse. In EBR, we can deal with some system predicates. In extracting subprograms, we need to extract correct subprograms based on not only an explanation but also the whole back-ground knowledge for a goal concept. This paper also shows that such extracted subprograms by EBR are correct.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ali, K. M.: Augmenting domain theory for explanation-based generalization. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Machine Learning (1989) 40–42Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bostrōm, H.: Improving example-guided unfolding. In Proceedings of European Conference on Machine Learning (1993) 124–135Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ellman, T.: Explanation-based learning: A survey of programs and perspectives. ACM Computing Surveys 21 (1989) 163–221Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Etzioni, O.: Acquiring search-control knowledge via static analysis. Artificial Intelligence 62 (1993) 255–301Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hirowatari, E., Arikawa, S.: Incorporating explanation-based generalization with analogical reasoning. Bulletin of Informatics and Cybernetics 26 (1994) 13–33Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kedar-Cabelli, S.T., McCarty, L.T.: Explanation-based generalization as resolution theorem proving. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Machine Learning (1987) 383–389Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lloyd, J. W.: Foundation of logic programming (second edition). Springer-Verlag (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mahadevan, S., Mitchell, T.M., Mostow, J., Steinberg, L., Tadepalli, P.V.: An apprentice-based approach to knowledge acquisition. Artificial Intelligence 64 (1993) 1–52Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mitchell, T.M., Keller, R. M., Kedar-Cabelli, S. T.: Explanation-based generalization: a unifying view. Machine Learning 1 (1986) 47–80Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Numao, M., Maruoka, T., Shimura, M.: Speed-up learning by extracting partial structures of explanations. Journal of Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence (in Japanese) 7 (1992) 1018–1026Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Puget, J.-F.: Explicit representation of concept negation. Machine Learning 14 (1994) 233–247Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sterling, L., Shapiro, E.: The art of Prolog. The MIT Press (1986).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Harmelen, F., Bundy, A.: Explanation-based generalization=partial evaluation. Artificial Intelligence 36 (1988) 401–412Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yamada, S.: Computing the utility of EBL in a logic programming environment. Journal of Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence (in Japanese) 7 (1992) 309–319Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yasuyuki Koga
    • 1
  • Eiju Hirowatari
    • 1
  • Setsuo Arikawa
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Institute of Fundamental Information ScienceKyushu University 33FukuokaJapan

Personalised recommendations