Skip to main content

Systematic Predicate Invention in Inductive Logic Programming

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Inductive Logic Programming (ILP 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1297))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We propose in this paper a new approach for learning predicate definitions from examples and from an initial theory. The particularity of this approach consists in inventing both a new predicate symbol and a specification for this predicate at most steps of learning. The specifications that are built are incomplete and imprecise, what is modelized by introducing the notion of a-interpretation. At the end of the learning task, some invented predicates are removed by unfolding techniques. The remaining predicates either enable to simplify the program, or are defined by recursive programs. In the second case, the program could not have been learned without inventing these predicates. The method has been implemented in a system, called SPILP, which has been successfully tested for inventing predicates which simplify the learned programs as well as for inventing recursively defined predicates. Let us point out that the introduction of σ-interpretations gives us a general framework for dealing with imprecise specifications and that SPILP can work, even when the target concepts are also incompletely defined by σ-interpretations.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dietterich T.G., Lathrop R.H., Lozano-Perez T., 1996. Solving the MultipleInstance Problem with Axis-Parallel Rectangles. to be published in Artificial Intelligence Journal.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kijsirikul B., Numao M. et al, 1992. Discrimination-based Constructive Induction of Logic Programs, Procs. of AAAI-92, San Jose, pp.44–49, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lavrač N., Džeroski S., 1992. Inductive Learning of Relations from Noisy Examples. Inductive Logic programming. The A.P.I.C. Series N° 38, S. Muggleton (Ed.), Academic Press, pp.495–516.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lapointe S., Ling C., Mawin S., 1993. Constructive Inductive Logic Programming. Procs. of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-93), pp. 1030–1036, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. W. Lloyd. Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer Verlag, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Martin L., Vrain C., 1996. Induction of Constraint Logic Programs. Procs. of the Seventh International Whorkshop on Algorithmic Learning Theory, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence

    Google Scholar 

  7. Muggleton S., 1987. Duce, an oracle based approach to constructive induction, Procs. of the Tenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI87), Milan, pp. 287–292, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Muggleton S., 1988. A strategy for constructing new predicates in first order logic. Procs. of the 3rd European Working Session on Learning, Pitman, pp. 123–130, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Muggleton S., Buntine W. (1988) Machine invention of first order predicates by inverting resolution. Procs. of the Fifth Internationnal Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 339–351, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Muggleton S., Feng C., 1992. Efficient Induction of Logic Programs". Inductive Logic programming. The A.P.I.C. Series N° 38, S. Muggleton (Ed.), Academic Press. pp. 281–298.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Muggleton S., de Raedt L., 1994. Inductive Logic Programming: Theory and Methods. Journal of Logic programming, vol. 19/20, May/July 94, pp. 629–680.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Plotkin G., 1970. A note on inductive generalization. Machine Intelligence, Vol. 5, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Plotkin G.. 1971. A further note on inductive generalization. Machine Intelligence, Vol. 6, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Quinlan JR., 1990. Learning Logical Definitions from Relations. Machine Learning Journal, Vol. 5, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 239–266.

    Google Scholar 

  15. de Raedt L., Lavrac N., Dzeroski S., 1993. Multiple Predicate Learning. Procs. of the Thirteen International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambéry, France, August 28–September 3, 1993, Vol. 2, pp. 1037–1043.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sommer E., 1994. Rulebase Stratification: an Approach to theory restructuring. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, Germany, GMD-Studien Nr. 237.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vrain C., Martin L., 1994. Inductive learning of normal clauses, Machine Learning: ECML-94, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 784, F. Bergadano, L. De Raedt (Eds.), Springer Verlag, pp. 435–438.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wirth R., O'Rorke P., 1991. Constraints on predicate invention. Procs. of the Eighth International Workshop on Machin Learning, Evanston, pp. 457–461, Morgan-Kaufmann, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wrobel S., 1994. Concept Formation and Knowledge Revision. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Nada Lavrač Sašo Džeroski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Martin, L., Vrain, C. (1997). Systematic Predicate Invention in Inductive Logic Programming. In: Lavrač, N., Džeroski, S. (eds) Inductive Logic Programming. ILP 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1297. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3540635149_48

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3540635149_48

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63514-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69587-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics