Abstract
The main real-world applications of Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) to date involve the “Observation Predicate Learning” (OPL) assumption, in which both the examples and hypotheses define the same predicate. However, in both scientific discovery and language learning potential applications exist in which OPL does not hold. OPL is ingrained within the theory and performance testing of Machine Learning. A general ILP technique called “Theory Completion using Inverse Entailment” (TCIE) is introduced which is applicable to non-OPL applications. TCIE is based on inverse entailment and is closely allied to abductive inference. The implementation of TCIE within Progol5.0 is described. The implementation uses contra-positives in a similar way to Stickel’s Prolog Technology Theorem Prover. Progol5.0 is tested on two different data-sets. The first dataset involves a grammar which translates numbers to their representation in English. The second dataset involves hypothesising the function of unknown genes within a network of metabolic pathways. On both datasets near complete recovery of performance is achieved after relearning when randomly chosen portions of background knowledge are removed. Progol5.0’s running times for experiments in this paper were typically under 6 seconds on a standard laptop PC.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
H. Ade, L. De Raedt, and M. Bruynooghe. Theory revision. In S. Muggleton, editor, Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 179–192, 1993.
Y. Dimopoulos and A. Kakas. Abduction and inductive learning. In L. De Raedt, editor, Proceedings of the Fifth Inductive Logic Programming Workshop (ILP9), pages 25–28, Leuven, Belgium, 1995. KU Leuven.
B. Dujon. The yeast genome project-what did we learn? Trends in Genetics, 12:263–270, 1996.
K. Furukawa. On the completion of the most specific hypothesis computation in inverse entailment for mutual recursion. In Proceedings of Discovery Science’ 98, LNAI1532, pages 315–325, Berlin, 1998. Springer-Verlag.
Goffeau, A. et multi al. Life with 6000 genes. Science, 274:546–567, 1996.
K. Ito and A. Yamamoto. Finding hypotheses from examples by computing the least generlisation of bottom clauses. In S. Arikawa and H. Motoda, editors, Proceedings of Discovery Science’ 98, pages 303–314. Springer, Berlin, 1998. LNAI 1532.
A.C. Kakas, R.A. Kowalski, and F. Toni. Abductive logic programming. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2, 1992.
S. Muggleton. Inverse entailment and Progol. New Generation Computing, 13:245–286, 1995.
S. Muggleton. Completing inverse entailment. In C.D. Page, editor, Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming (ILP-98), LNAI 1446, pages 245–249. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1998.
S.G. Oliver. From DNA sequence to biological function. Nature, 379:597–600, 1996.
G. Plotkin. A further note on inductive generalization. In Machine Intelligence, volume 6. Edinburgh University Press, 1971.
L. De Raedt. Interactive Theory Revision: an Inductive Logic Programming Approach. Academic Press, 1992.
L. De Raedt and M. Bruynooghe. Interactive concept-learning and constructive induction by analogy. Machine Learning, 8:107–150, 1992.
L. De Raedt and N. Lavrac. Multiple predicate learning in two inductive logic programming settings. Journal on Pure and Applied Logic, 4(2):227–254, 1996.
B. L. Richards and R. J. Mooney. Automated refinement of first-order Horn-clause domain theories. Machine Learning, 19(2):95–131, 1995.
E.Y. Shapiro. Algorithmic program debugging. MIT Press, 1983.
M. Stickel. A Prolog technology theorem prover: implementation by an extended Prolog compiler. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 4(4):353–380, 1988.
J. Wogulis. Revising relational theories. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Machine Learning, pages 462–466. Morgan Kaufmann, 1991.
S. Wrobel. First-order theory refinement. In L. De Raedt, editor, Advances in Inductive Logic Programming, pages 14–33. IOS Press, Ohmsha, Amsterdam, 1995.
A. Yamamoto. Which hypotheses can be found with inverse entailment? In N. Lavrač and S. Džeroski, editors, Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 296–308. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997. LNAI 1297.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Muggleton, S.H., Bryant, C.H. (2000). Theory Completion Using Inverse Entailment. In: Cussens, J., Frisch, A. (eds) Inductive Logic Programming. ILP 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1866. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44960-4_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44960-4_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67795-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44960-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive