Skip to main content

DNF Hypotheses in Explanatory Induction

  • Conference paper

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNAI,volume 7207)

Abstract

This paper investigates the problem of computing hypotheses in disjunctive normal form (DNF) for explanatory induction. This is contrasted to the usual setting of ILP, where hypotheses are obtained in conjunctive normal form (CNF), i.e., a set of clauses. We present two approaches to compute DNF hypotheses as well as several sound and complete algorithms. This problem naturally contains abduction from clausal theories, and can be related to model-based inductive reasoning, in which propositional reasoning methods such as SAT techniques and prime implicant computation can be utilized.

Keywords

  • Conjunctive Normal Form
  • Inductive Logic Programming
  • Disjunctive Normal Form
  • Weak Hypothesis
  • Conjunctive Normal Form Formula

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Eiter, T., Makino, K.: On computing all abductive explanations from a propositional Horn theory. J. ACM 54(5), Article 24 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Inoue, K.: Linear resolution for consequence finding. Artificial Intelligence 56, 301–353 (1992)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Inoue, K.: Induction as consequence finding. Machine Learning 55, 109–135 (2004)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Inoue, K.: Logic programming for Boolean networks. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2011, pp. 924–930 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Disjunctive Explanations. In: Stuckey, P.J. (ed.) ICLP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2401, pp. 317–332. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Inoue, K., Sato, T., Ishihata, M., Kameya, Y., Nabeshima, H.: Evaluating abductive hypotheses using an EM algorithm on BDDs. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2009, pp. 810–815 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jin, H.S., Han, H.J., Somenzi, F.: Efficient Conflict Analysis for Finding All Satisfying Assignments of a Boolean Circuit. In: Halbwachs, N., Zuck, L.D. (eds.) TACAS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3440, pp. 287–300. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Khardon, R., Roth, D.: Reasoning with models. Artificial Intelligence 87, 187–213 (1996)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Kautz, H., Kearns, M., Selman, B.: Reasoning with characteristic models. In: Proceedings of AAAI 1993, pp. 34–39. AAAI Press (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kean, A., Tsiknis, G.: An incremental method for generating prime implicants/implicates. J. Symbolic Computation 9, 185–206 (1990)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Kearns, M.J., Vazirani, U.V.: An Introduction to Computational Learning Theory. MIT Press (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Laird, P.D.: Learning from Good and Bad Data. Kluwer Academic (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Levesque, H.: Making believers out of computers. Artificial Intelligence 30, 81–108 (1986)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Marquis, P.: Consequence finding algorithms. In: Gabbay, D.M., Smets, P. (eds.) Handbook for Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertain Management Systems, vol. 5, pp. 41–145. Kluwer Academic (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  15. McMillan, K.L.: Applying SAT Methods in Unbounded Symbolic Model Checking. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 250–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Midelfart, H.: A Bounded Search Space of Clausal Theories. In: Džeroski, S., Flach, P.A. (eds.) ILP 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1634, pp. 210–221. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Muggleton, S.: Inverse entailment and Progol. New Generation Computing 13, 245–286 (1995)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Muggleton, S., Buntine, W.: Machine invention of first-order predicate by inverting resolution. In: Proc. ML 1988, pp. 339–351. Morgan Kaufmann (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nabeshima, H., Iwanuma, K., Inoue, K., Ray, O.: SOLAR: An automated deduction system for consequence finding. AI Communications 23, 183–203 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Plotkin, G.D.: A note on inductive generalization. In: Meltzer, B., Michie, D. (eds.) Machine Intelligence, vol. 5, pp. 153–163. Edinburgh University Press (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Reiter, R., de Kleer, J.: Foundations of assumption-based truth maintenance systems: preliminary report. In: Proceedings of AAAI 1987, pp. 183–187 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sebag, M.: Delaying the choice of bias: A disjunctive version space approach. In: Proceedings of ICML 1996, pp. 444–452. Morgan Kaufmann (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Simon, L., del Val, A.: Efficient consequence finding. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2001, pp. 359–365 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Tison, P.: Generalized consensus theory and application to the minimization of Boolean functions. IEEE Trans. on Electronic Computers 16(4), 446–456 (1967)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Yamamoto, A., Fronhöfer, B.: Hypotheses Finding via Residue Hypotheses with the Resolution Principle. In: Arimura, H., Sharma, A.K., Jain, S. (eds.) ALT 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1968, pp. 156–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  26. Yamamoto, Y., Inoue, K., Iwanuma, K.: Inverse subsumption for complete explanatory induction. Machine Learning 86(1), 115–139 (2011)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Inoue, K. (2012). DNF Hypotheses in Explanatory Induction. In: Muggleton, S.H., Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A., Lisi, F.A. (eds) Inductive Logic Programming. ILP 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7207. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31951-8_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31951-8_18

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-31950-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-31951-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)