Skip to main content

Lattice-Search Runtime Distributions May Be Heavy-Tailed

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Inductive Logic Programming (ILP 2002)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2583))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Recent empirical studies show that runtime distributions of backtrack procedures for solving hard combinatorial problems often have intriguing properties. Unlike standard distributions (such as the normal), such distributions decay slower than exponentially and have “heavy tails”. Procedures characterized by heavy-tailed runtime distributions exhibit large variability in efficiency, but a very straightforward method called rapid randomized restarts has been designed to essentially improve their average performance. We show on two experimental domains that heavy-tailed phenomena can be observed in ILP, namely in the search for a clause in the subsumption lattice. We also reformulate the technique of randomized rapid restarts to make it applicable in ILP and show that it can reduce the average search-time.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • 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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. L. Breiman, J. Friedman, R. Olshen, and C. Stone. Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth, Belmont, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Daniel Frost, Irina Rish, and Lluis Vila. Summarizing CSP hardness with continuous probability distributions. In AAAI/IAAI, pages 327–333, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. Giordana and L. Saitta. Phase transitions in relational learning. Machine Learning, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  4. C. P. Gomes, B. Selman, N. Crato, and H. A. Kautz. Heavy-tailed phenomena in satisfiability and constraint satisfaction problems. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 24(1/2):67–100, 2000.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. C. P. Gomes, B. Selman, and H. A. Kautz. Boosting combinatorial search through randomization. In AAAI/IAAI, pages 431–437, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Maloberti and M. Sebag. Theta-subsumption in a constraint satisfaction perspective. volume 2157 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 164–178. Springer-Verlag, September 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Botta, A. Giordana, L. Saitta, and M. Sebag. Relational learning: hard problems and phase transitions. In 6th Congress of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence. Springer-Verlag, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  8. S. Muggleton. Inverse entailment and Progol. New Generation Computing, Special issue on Inductive Logic Programming, 13(3–4):245–286, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Muggleton and L. De Raedt. Inductive logic programming: Theory and methods. Journal of Logic Programming, 19/20:629–679, 1994.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Michele Sebag and Celine Rouveirol. Resource-bounded relational reasoning: Induction and deduction through stochastic matching. Machine Learning, 38(1/2):41–62, January 2000.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. A. Serra, A. Giordana, and L. Saitta. Learning on the phase transition edge. In Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 921–926. Morgan Kaufmann, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Barbara M. Smith and Martin E. Dyer. Locating the phase transition in binary constraint satisfaction problems. Artificial Intelligence, 81(1–2):155–181, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. A. Srinivasan. A study of two probabilistic methods for searching large spaces with ILP. Technical Report PRG-TR-16-00, Oxford University Computing Laboratory, Oxford, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  14. A. Srinivasan and R. King. Carcinogenesis predictions using ilp. In S. Džeroski and N. Lavrač, editors, Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, volume 1297 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 3–16. Springer-Verlag, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A. Srinivasan and R.D. King. Feature construction with Inductive Logic Programming: a study of quantitative predictions of biological activity aided by structural attributes. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 3(1):37–57, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. A. Srinivasan, S. Muggleton, M.J.E. Sternberg, and R.D. King. Theories for mutagenicity: A study in first-order and feature-based induction. Artificial Intelligence, 85(1,2), 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  17. R. Walpole and R. Myers. Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists. Collier Macmillan, New York, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Železný, F., Srinivasan, A., Page, D. (2003). Lattice-Search Runtime Distributions May Be Heavy-Tailed. In: Matwin, S., Sammut, C. (eds) Inductive Logic Programming. ILP 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2583. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36468-4_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36468-4_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-00567-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-36468-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics