Encyclopedia of Machine Learning and Data Mining

Living Edition
| Editors: Claude Sammut, Geoffrey I. Webb

Explanation-Based Learning

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7502-7_96-1



Explanation-based learning (EBL) is a principled method for exploiting available domain knowledge to improve supervised learning. Improvement can be in speed of learning, confidence of learning, accuracy of the learned concept, or a combination of these. In modern EBL the domain theory represents an expert’s approximate knowledge of complex systematic world behavior. It may be imperfect and incomplete. Inference over the domain knowledge provides analyticevidence that compliments the empirical evidence of the training data. By contrast, in original EBL, the domain theory is required to be much stronger; inferred properties are guaranteed. Another important aspect of modern EBL is the interaction between domain knowledge and labeled training examples afforded by explanations. Interaction allows the nonlinear combination of evidence so that the resulting information about the target concept can be much...


Classification Label Target Concept Inductive Logic Programming Domain Theory Generalize Explanation 
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, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. Anderson J (1986) Knowledge compilation: the general learning mechanism. In: Michalski R, Carbonell J, Mitchell T (eds) Machine learning II. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, pp 289–310Google Scholar
  2. Bruynooghe M, De Raedt L, De Schreye D (1989) Explanation based program transformation. In: IJCAI’89: proceedings of the eleventh international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Detroit, pp 407–412Google Scholar
  3. Cohen WW (1992) Abductive explanation-based learning: a solution to the multiple inconsistent explanation problem. Mach Learn 8:167–219MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. DeJong G (1981) Generalizations based on explanations. In: IJCAI’81: proceedings of the seventh international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Vancouver, pp 67–69Google Scholar
  5. DeJong G (2006) Toward robust real-world inference: a new perspective on explanation-based learning. In: ECML06: proceedings of the seventeenth European conference on machine learning, Berlin. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 102–113Google Scholar
  6. DeJong G, Mooney R (1986) Explanation-based learning: an alternative view. Mach Learn 1(2):145–176Google Scholar
  7. Etzioni O (1993) A structural theory of explanation-based learning. Artif Intell 60(1):93–139MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fikes R, Hart PE, Nilsson NJ (1972) Learning and executing generalized robot plans. Artif Intell 3(1–3):251–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Flann NS, Dietterich TG (1989) A study of explanation-based methods for inductive learning. Mach Learn 4:187–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Freund Y, Schapire RE, Singer Y, Warmuth MK (1997) Using and combining predictors that specialize. In: Twenty-ninth annual ACM symposium on the theory of computing, El Paso, pp 334–343Google Scholar
  11. Genest J, Matwin S, Plante B (1990) Explanation-based learning with incomplete theories: a three-step approach. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on machine learning, Austin, pp 286–294Google Scholar
  12. Gratch J, DeJong G (1992) Composer: a probabilistic solution to the utility problem in speed-up learning. In: AAAI, San Jose, pp 235–240Google Scholar
  13. Greiner R, Jurisica I (1992) A statistical approach to solving the EBL utility problem. In: National conference on artificial intelligence, San Jose, pp 241–248Google Scholar
  14. Hirsh H (1987) Explanation-based generalization in a logic-programming environment. In: IJCAI’87: proceedings of the tenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Milan, pp 221–227Google Scholar
  15. Kimmig A, De Raedt L, Toivonen H (2007) Probabilistic explanation based learning. In: ECML’07: proceedings of the eighteenth European conference on machine learning, Warsaw, pp 176–187Google Scholar
  16. Laird JE, Rosenbloom PS, Newell A (1986) Chunking in soar: the anatomy of a general learning mechanism. Mach Learn 1(1):11–46Google Scholar
  17. Lim SH, Wang L-L, DeJong G (2007) Explanation-based feature construction. In: IJCAI’07: proceedings of the twentieth international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Hyderabad, pp 931–936Google Scholar
  18. McCarthy J (1980) Circumscription – a form of non-monotonic reasoning. Artif Intell 13:27–39CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Minton S (1990) Quantitative results concerning the utility of explanation-based learning. Artif Intell 42(2–3):363–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mitchell T (1997) Machine learning. McGraw-Hill, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Mitchell T, Keller R, Kedar-Cabelli S (1986) Explanation-based generalization: a unifying view. Mach Learn 1(1):47–80Google Scholar
  22. Ourston D, Mooney RJ (1994) Theory refinement combining analytical and empirical methods. Artif Intell 66(2):273–309MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Pazzani MJ, Kibler DF (1992) The utility of knowledge in inductive learning. Mach Learn 9:57–94Google Scholar
  24. Russell SJ, Grosof BN (1987) A declarative approach to bias in concept learning. In: AAAI, Seattle, pp 505–510Google Scholar
  25. Russell S, Norvig P (2003) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  26. Sun Q, DeJong G (2005) Feature kernel functions: improving SVMs using high-level knowledge. In: CVPR (2), San Diego, pp 177–183Google Scholar
  27. Thrun S, Mitchell TM (1993) Integrating inductive neural network learning and explanation-based learning. In: IJCAI’93: proceedings of the thirteenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Chambery, pp 930–936Google Scholar
  28. Towell GG, Craven M, Shavlik JW (1991) Constructive induction in knowledge-based neural networks. In: proceedings of the eighth international conference on machine learning, Evanston, pp 213–217Google Scholar
  29. Zelle JM, Mooney RJ (1993) Combining Foil and EBG to speed-up logic programs. In: IJCAI’93: proceedings of the thirteenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Chambery, pp 1106–1113Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Illinois at UrbanaILUSA
  2. 2.University of IllinoisILUSA