An inductive logic programming query language for database mining

Extended abstract
  • Luc De Raedt
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1476)


First, a short introduction to inductive logic programming and machine learning is presented and then an inductive database mining query language RDM (Relational Database Mining language). RDM integrates concepts from inductive logic programming, constraint logic programming, deductive databases and meta-programming into a flexible environment for relational knowledge discovery in databases. The approach is motivated by the view of data mining as a querying process (see Imielinkski and Mannila, CACM 96). Because the primitives of the presented query language can easily be combined with the Prolog programming language, complex systems and behaviour can be specified declaratively. Integrating a database mining querying language with principles of inductive logic programming has the added benefit that it becomes feasible to search for regularities involving multiple relations in a database. The proposal for an inductive logic programming query language puts inductive logic programming into a new perspective.


database mining query language inductive logic programming relational learning inductive query language data mining 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. Agrawal, T. Imielinski, and A. Swami. Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases. In Proceedings of the 1993 International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD 93), pages 207–216, May 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Agrawal, H. Mannila, R. Srikant, H. Toivonen, and A.I. Verkamo. Fast discovery of association rules. In U. Fayyad, G. Piatetsky-Shapiro, P. Smyth, and R. Uthurusamy, editors, Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 307–328. The MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    I. Bratko. Prolog Programming for Artificial Intelligence. Addison-Wesley, 1990. 2nd Edition.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Bratko and S. Muggleton. Applications of inductive logic programming. Communications of the ACM, 38(11):65–70, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. Clark and R. Boswell. Rule induction with CN2: Some recent improvements. In Yves Kodratoff, editor, Proceedings of the 5th European Working Session on Learning, volume 482 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 151–163. Springer-Verlag, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Clark and T. Niblett. The CN2 algorithm. Machine Learning, 3(4):261–284, 1989.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. De Raedt, editor. Advances in Inductive Logic Programming, volume 32 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. IOS Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    L. De Raedt and L. Dehaspe. Clausal discovery. Machine Learning, 26:99–146, 1997.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. Dehaspe and L. De Raedt. Mining association rules in multiple relations. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, volume 1297 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 125–132. Springer-Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    L. Dehaspe and H. Toivonen. Frequent query discovery: a unifying ILP approach to association rule mining. Technical Report CW-258, Department of Computer Science, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, March 1998. Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. DŽeroski. Inductive logic programming and knowledge discovery in databases. In U. Fayyad, G. Piatetsky-Shapiro, P. Smyth, and R. Uthurusamy, editors, Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 118–152. The MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. DŽeroski and I. Bratko. Applications of inductive logic programming. In L. De Raedt, editor, Advances in inductive logic programming, volume 32 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 65–81. IOS Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T. Imielinski and H. Mannila. A database perspectivce on knowledge discovery. Communications of the ACM, 39(11):58–64, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Imielinski, A. Virmani, and A. Abdulghani. A discovery board application programming interface and query language for database mining. In Proceedings of KDD 96. AAAI Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    N. Lavrač and S. DŽeroski. Inductive Logic Programming: Techniques and Applications. Ellis Horwood, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Mellish. The description identification problem. Artificial Intelligence, 52:151–167, 1991.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    R.S. Michalski. A theory and methodology of inductive learning. In R.S Michalski, J.G. Carbonell, and T.M. Mitchell, editors, Machine Learning: an artificial intelligence approach, volume 1. Morgan Kaufmann, 1983.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Mitchell. Machine Learning. McGraw-Hill, 1997.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    T.M. Mitchell. Generalization as search. Artificial Intelligence, 18:203–226, 1982.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Muggleton and L. De Raedt. Inductive logic programming: Theory and methods. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:629–679, 1994.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    J. Ross Quinlan. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann series in machine learning. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J.R. Quinlan. Learning logical definitions from relations. Machine Learning, 5:239–266, 1990.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    G. Sablon, L. De Raedt, and M. Bruynooghe. Iterative versionspaces. Artificial Intelligence, 69:393–409, 1994.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    W. Shen, K. Ong, B. Mitbander, and C. Zaniolo. Metaqueries for data mining. In U. Fayyad, G. Piatetsky-Shapiro, P. Smyth, and R. Uthurusamy, editors, Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 375–398. The MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Srinivasan, S.H. Muggleton, M.J.E. Sternberg, and R.D. King. Theories for mutagenicity: A study in first-order and feature-based induction. Artificial Intelligence, 85, 1996.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    H. Toivonen, M. Klemettinen, P. Ronkamen, K. HÄtönen, and H. Mannila. Pruning and grouping discovered association rules. In Y. Kodratoff, G. Nakhaeizadeh, and G. Taylor, editors, Proceedings of the MLnet Familiarization Workshop on Statistics, Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, pages 47–52, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luc De Raedt
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenHeverleeBelgium

Personalised recommendations