Advertisement

Learning unions of tree patterns using queries

  • Hiroki Arimura
  • Hiroki Ishizaka
  • Takeshi Shinohara
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 997)

Abstract

This paper characterizes the polynomial time learnability of TP k , the class of collections of at most k first-order terms. A collection in TPA k defines the union of the languages defined by each first-order terms in the set. Unfortunately, the class TP k not polynomial time learnable in most of learning frameworks under standard assumptions in computational complexity theory. To overcome this computational hardness, we relax the learning problem by allowing a learning algorithm to make membership queries. We present a polynomial time algorithm that exactly learns every concept in TP k using O(kn) equivalence and O(k2n · max{k, n}) membership queries, where n is the size of longest counterexample given so far. In the proof, we use a technique of replacing each restricted subset query by several membership queries under some condition on a set of function symbols. As corollaries, we obtain the polynomial time PAC-learnability and the polynomial time predictability of TP k when membership queries are available. We also show a lower bound Ω(kn) of the number of queries necessary to learn TP k using both types of queries. Further, we show that neither types of queries can be eliminated to achieve efficient learning of TP k . Finally, we apply our results in learning of a class of restricted logic programs, called unit clause programs.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. Angluin. Finding patterns common to a set of strings. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 21:46–62, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. Angluin. Queries and concept learning. Machine Learning, 2:319–342, 1988.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Arikawa, S. Kuhara, S. Miyano, A. Shinohara, and T. Shinohara. A learning algorithm for elementary formal systems and its experiments on identification of transmembrane domains. In Proc. the 25th HICSS, 675–684, 1992.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. Arimura, T. Shinohara, and S. Otsuki. A polynomial time algorithm for finding finite unions of tree pattern languages. In Proc. the 2nd NIL, LNAI 659, Springer-Verlag, 118–131, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Arimura, T. Shinohara, and S. Otsuki. Finding minimal generalizations for unions of pattern languages and its application to inductive inference from positive data. In Proc. the 11th STACS, LNCS 775, Springer-Verlag, 649–660, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Arimura, H. Ishizaka, T. Shinohara, and S. Otsuki. A generalization of the least general generalization. Machine Intelligence, 13, 59–85, Oxford Univ. Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Frazier and L. Pitt. Classic Learning. In Proc. COLT'94, 23–34, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. Ishizaka, H. Arimura, and T. Shinohara. Finding tree patterns consistent with positive and negative examples using queries In Proc. ALT'94, LNAI872, 317–332, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Jiang, A. Salomaa, K. Salomaa, and S. Yu. Inclusion is undecidable for pattern languages. In Proc. 20th ICALP, pp. 301–312, LNCS 700, Springer, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Kuper, K. McAloon, K. Palem, K. Perry. Efficient Parallel Algorithm for Anti-Unification and Relative Complement. In Proc. the 3rd LICS, 111–120, 1988.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    N. Littlestone. Learning quickly when irrelevant attributes abound: A new linear-threshold algorithm. Machine Learning, 2, 285–318, 1988.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    W. Maass and G. Turán. Lower bound methods and separation results for on-line learning models. Machine Learning, 9, 107–145, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. D. Page Jr. and A. M. Frisch. Generalization and Learnability: A Study of Constrained Atoms. S. Muggleton, editor, Inductive Logic Programming, 29–61, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. Pitt and L. G. Valiant. Computational limitations on learning from examples. JACM, 35:965–984, 1988.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    L. Pitt and M. K. Warmuth. Prediction preserving reduction. JCSS, 41:430–467, 1990.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. D. Plotkin. A note on inductive generalization. In Machine Intelligence 5, 153–163. Edinburgh University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. C. Reynolds. Transformational systems and the algebraic structure of atomic formulas. In Machine Intelligence 5, 135–152. Edinburgh University Press, 1970.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroki Arimura
    • 1
  • Hiroki Ishizaka
    • 1
  • Takeshi Shinohara
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Artificial IntelligenceKyushu Institute of TechnologyIizukaJapan

Personalised recommendations