Skip to main content

Experimental Comparison of Graph-Based Relational Concept Learning with Inductive Logic Programming Systems

  • 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

We compare our graph-based relational concept learning approach “SubdueCL” with the ILP systems FOIL and Progol. In order to be fair in the comparison, we use the conceptual graphs representation. Conceptual graphs have a standard translation from graphs into logic. In this way, we introduce less bias during the translation process. We experiment with different types of domains. First, we show our experiments with an artificial domain to describe how SubdueCL performs with the conceptual graphs representation. Second, we experiment with several flat and relational domains. The results of the comparison show that the SubdueCL system is competitive with ILP systems in both flat and relational domains.

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. Cameron-Jones, R. M., and J. R. Quinlan. (1994). Efficient Top-down Induction of Logic Programs. SIGART Bulletin, 5, 1:33–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cook, D. J., and L. B. Holder. (1994). Substructure Discovery Using Minimum Description Length and Background Knowledge. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 1:231–55.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cook, D. J., and L. B. Holder. (2000). Graph-Based Data Mining. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 15(2):32–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gonzalez, Jesus A. (2001). Empirical and Theoretical Análisis of Relational Concept Learning Using a Graph-Based Representation. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Texas at Arlington.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gonzalez, Jesus A., L. B. Holder, and Diane J. Cook. (2001). Application of Graph-Based Concept Learning to the Predictive Toxicology Domain. Proceedings of the Predictive Toxicology Challenge Workshop.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Keogh, E., C. Blake, and C. J. Merz. (1998). In UCI Repository of Machine Learning Databases.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lehmann, F. (1992). Semantics Networks in Artificial Intelligence. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Muggleton S. (1995). Inverse Entailment and Progol. New Generation Computing, 13:245–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Muggleton, S. and C. Feng. (1992). Efficient Induction of Logic Programs. Inductive Logic Programming, Academic Press 281–97.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rissanen, J. (1989). Stochastic Complexity in Statistical Inquiry. World Scientific Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sowa, J. F. (1984). Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Addison-Wesley.

    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

Gonzalez, J.A., Holder, L.B., Cook, D.J. (2003). Experimental Comparison of Graph-Based Relational Concept Learning with Inductive Logic Programming Systems. 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_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36468-4_6

  • 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