Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ideal refinement of Datalog programs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR 1995)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1048))

Abstract

In model inference, refinement operators are exploited to change in an automated way incorrect clauses of a logic program. In this paper, we present two refinement operators for Datalog programs and state that both of them meet the properties of local finiteness, properness, and completeness (ideality). Such operators are based on the quasi-ordering induced upon a set of clauses by the generalization model of θ-subsumption under object identity. These operators have been implemented in a system for theory revision that proved effective in the area of electronic document classification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bergadano, F., and Gunetti, D., Learning Clauses by Tracing Derivations, Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming ILP-94, S.Wrobel(Ed.),GMD-Studien Nr.237, 11–19, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chang, C.-L. and Lee, R. C.-T., Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving, Academic Press, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cohen, W. W., Rapid Prototyping of ILP Systems Using Explicil Bias, Proceedings of the IJCAI-93 Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, F. Bergadano, L. De Raedt, S. Matwin, S. Muggleton (Eds.), 24–35, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Eisinger,N., and Ohlbach, H. J., Deduction Systems Based on Resolution, in Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Volume 1, Logical Foundations, D. M. Gabbay, C. J. Hogger and J. A. Robinson (Eds.), Oxford Science Publications, 183–271, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Esposito, F., Malerba, D., and Semeraro, G., INCR/H: A System for Revising Logical Theories, Proceedings of the MLnet Workshop on Theory Revision and Restructuring in Machine Learning, ECML-94, Arbeitspapiere der GMD N.842, S. Wrobel (Ed.), 13–15, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  6. -, Multistrategy Learning for Document Recognition, Applied Artificial Intelligence: An International Journal, 8:33–84, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Esposito, F., Malerba, D., Semeraro, G., Brunk, C., and Pazzani, M., Traps and Pitfalls when Learning Logical Definitions from Relations, in Methodologies for Intelligent Systems — Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium, ISMIS '94, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 869, Z. W. Ras and M. Zemankova (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, 376–385, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Esposito, F., Fanizzi, N., Malerba, D., and Semeraro, G., Downward Refinement of Hierarchical Datalog Theories, Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Declarative Programming, GULP-PRODE'95, M. Alpuente and M. I. Sessa (Eds.), 148–159, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. -, Locally Finite, Proper and Complete Operators for Refining Datalog Programs, LACAM Technical Report No. 95–014, Dipartimento di Informatica, Università di Bari, June 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Garey, M. R., and Johnson, D.S., Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness, Freeman, New York, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gold, E. M., Language identification in the limit, Information and Control, 10:447–474, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gottlob, G., Subsumption and Implication, Information Processing Letters, 24:109–111, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gottlob, G., and Fermüller, C.G., Removing redundancy from a clause, Artificial Intellgence, 61:263–289, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Grigoletto, F., Notes in statistics. Part II (in italian), CLEUP, Padova, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Helft, N., Inductive Generalization: A Logical Framework, in Progress in Machine Learning — Proceedings of EWSL 87: 2nd European Working Session on Learning, I. Bratko & N. Lavrac (Eds.), Sigma Press, Wilmslow, 149–157, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kanellakis, P.C., Elements of Relational Database Theory,in Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B,Formal Models and Semantics, J. Van Leeuwen (Ed.), Elsevier Science Publ., 1073–1156, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kietz, J. U., and Wrobel, S., Controlling the Complexity of Learning in Logic through Syntactic and Task-Oriented Models, in Inductive Logic Programming, S. Muggleton (Ed.), Academic Press, 335–359, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ling, X., Inductive Learning from Good Examples, Proceedings of the 12th Internalional Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, J. Mylopoulos and R. Reiter (Eds.), Sydney, Australia, 751–756, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lloyd, J. W., Foundations of Logic Programming, Second Edition, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Loveland, D. W., Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Muggleton, S., and Feng, C., Efficient Induction of Logic Programs, in Inductive Logic Programming, S. Muggleton (Ed.), 281–298, Academic Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Niblett,T., A note on refinement operators, in Machine Learning:ECML-93 — Proceedings of the European Conference on Machine Learning, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 667, P. B. Brazdil (Ed.), Springer-Verlag, 329–335, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Pazzani, M., and Kibler, D., The utility of knowledge in inductive learning, Machine Learning, 9:57–94, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Plotkin, G. D., A Note on Inductive Generalization, in Machine Intelligence 5, B. Meltzer and D. Michie (Eds.), Edinburgh University Press, 153–163, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  25. -, Building-in Equational Theories, in Machine Intelligence 5, B. Meltzer and D. Michie (Eds.), Edinburgh University Press, 73–90, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Popper, K. R., Conjectures and refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, Harper Torch Books, New York, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Quinlan, J. R., Learning Logical Implications from Relations, Machine Learning, 5:239–266, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Reiter, R., Equality and domain closure in first order databases, Journal of ACM, 27:235–249, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Semeraro, G., Esposito, F., Malerba, D., Brunk, C., and Pazzani, M., Avoiding Non-Termination when Learning Logic Programs: A Case Study with FOIL and FOCL, in Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation — Meta-Programming in Logic, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 883, L. Fribourg and F. Turini (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, 183–198, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Semeraro, G., Esposito, F., and Malerba, D., Learning Contextual Rules for Document Understanding, Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Applications (CAIA '94), IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 108–115, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Shapiro, E. Y., An Algorithm that Infers Theories from Facts, Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, Canada, 446–451, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  32. -, Inductive Inference of Theories from Facts, Technical Report 192, Department of Computer Science, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Tausend, B., Representing Biases for Inductive Logic Programming, in Machine Learning: ECML-94 — Proceedings of the European Conference on Machine Learning, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 784, F. Bergadano and L. De Raedt (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, 427–430, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  34. van der Laag, P. R. J., and Nienhuys-Cheng, S.-H., A Note on Ideal Refinement Operators in Inductive Logic Programming,Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, ILP-94, S. Wrobel (Ed.), GMD-Studien Nr.237, 247–260, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  35. -, Existence and Nonexistence of Complete Refinement Operators, in Machine Learning: ECML-94-Proceedings of the European Conference on Machine Learning, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 784, F. Bergadano and L. De Raedt (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, 307–322, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Informatica, Università degli Studi di Bari, Via E. Orabona 4, 70126, Bari, Italy

    Giovanni Semeraro, Floriana Esposito & Donato Malerba

Authors
  1. Giovanni Semeraro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Floriana Esposito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Donato Malerba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Maurizio Proietti

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Semeraro, G., Esposito, F., Malerba, D. (1996). Ideal refinement of Datalog programs. In: Proietti, M. (eds) Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation. LOPSTR 1995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1048. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60939-3_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60939-3_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-60939-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49745-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation