Skip to main content

Abstract

The last three decades has seen the development of Computational Logic techniques within Artificial Intelligence. This has led to the development of the subject of Logic Programming (LP), which can be viewed as a key part of Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence. The subtopic of LP concerned with Machine Learning is known as “Inductive Logic Programming” (ILP), which again can be broadened to Logic-Based Machine Learning by dropping Horn clause restrictions. ILP has its roots in the ground-breaking research of Gordon Plotkin and Ehud Shapiro. This paper provides a brief survey of the state of ILP applications, theory and techniques.

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 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

  • Bratko, I. and Muggleton, S. (1995). Applications of inductive logic programming. Communications of the ACM, 38(11):65–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, S., Chothia, C., Hubbard, T., and Murzin, A. (1996). Understanding protein structure: using scop for fold interpretation. Methods in Enzymology, 266:635–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briscoe, T. and Carroll, J. (1993). Generalized probabilistic lr parsing of natural language (corpora) with unification-based grammars. Computational Linguistics, 19(1):25–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, M. (1996). A new statistical parser based on bigram lexical dependencies. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 184–191, Santa Cruz, California, USA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cussens, J., Page, D., Muggleton, S., and Srinivasan, A. (1997). Using Inductive Logic Programming for Natural Logic Processing. In Daelemans, W., Weijters, T., and van der Bosch, A., editors, ECML’97 - Workshop Notes on Empirical Learning of Natural Language Tasks, pages 25–34, Prague. University of Economics. Invited keynote paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Džeroski, S. and Erjavec, T. (1997). Induction of Slovene nominal paradigms. In Lavrač, N. and Džeroski, S., editors, Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 141–148. LNAI 1297, Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finn, P., Muggleton, S., Page, D., and Srinivasan, A. (1998). Pharmacophore discovery using the inductive logic programming system Progol. Machine Learning, 30:241–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, J. R., Stickel, M. E., Appelt, D. E., and Martin, P. (1993). Interpretation as abduction. Artificial Intelligence, 63:69–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, K., Muggleton, S., and Parson, R. (1998). Repeat learning using predicate invention. In Page, C., editor, Proc. of the 8th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming (ILP-98), LNAI 1446, pages 165–174, Berlin. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, R., Muggleton, S., Lewis, R., and Sternberg, M. (1992). Drug design by machine learning: The use of inductive logic programming to model the structure-activity relationships of trimethoprim analogues binding to dihydrofolate reductase. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 89(23):11322–11326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, R., Muggleton, S., Srinivasan, A., and Sternberg, M. (1996). Structure-activity relationships derived by machine learning: the use of atoms and their bond connectives to predict mutagenicity by inductive logic programming. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93:438–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski, R. (1980). Logic for Problem Solving. North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krotov, A., Gaizauskas, R., Hepple, M., and Wilks, Y. (1997). Compacting the Penn Treebank Grammar. Proceedings of the COLING-ACL′98 Joint Conference, pages 699–703, Association for Computational Linguistics. Also: Research Memorandum CS-97-04, Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krotov, A., Gaizauskas, R., and Wilks, Y. (1994). Acquiring a stochastic context-free grammar from the Penn Treebank. In Proc. of the Third Conference on the Cognitive Science of Natural Language Processing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ling, C. (1994). Learning the past tense of english verbs: the symbolic pattern associators vs. connectionist models. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 1:209–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, J. (1987). Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Second edition.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Magerman, D. (1995). Statistical decision-tree models for parsing. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 276–283, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. (1959). Programs with commonsense. In Mechanisation of thought processes, volume 1. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, pages 75–91, London. Reprinted (with an added section on ‘Situations, Actions and Causal Laws’) in Semantic Information Processing, ed. M. Minsky (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (1963)).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, R. (1997). Inductive logic programming for natural language processing. In Muggleton, S., editor, Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 3–21. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. LNAI 1314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, R. and Califf, M. (1995). Induction of first-order decision lists: Results on learning the past tense of english verbs. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 3:1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. (1991). Inductive logic programming. New Generation Computing, 8(4):295–318.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. (1994a). Bayesian inductive logic programming. In Cohen, W. and Hirsh, H., editors, Proceedings of the Eleventh International Machine Learning Conference, pages 371–379, San Mateo, CA. Morgan-Kaufmann. Keynote presentation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. (1994b). Bayesian inductive logic programming. In Warmuth, M., editor, Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM Conference on Computational Learning Theory, pages 3–11, New York. ACM Press. Keynote presentation.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. (1995). Inverse entailment and Progol. New Generation Computing, 13:245–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. (1998). Completing inverse entailment. In Page, C., editor, Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming (ILP-98), LNAI 1446, pages 245–249. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. (2000). Learning from positive data. Machine Learning. Accepted subject to revision.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. and Bain, M. (1999). Analogical prediction. In Proc. of the 9th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming (ILP-99), pages 234–246, Berlin. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. and Feng, C. (1992). Efficient induction of logic programs. In Muggleton, S., editor, Inductive Logic Programming, pages 281–298. Academic Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S., King, R., and Sternberg, M. (1992). Protein secondary structure prediction using logic-based machine learning. Protein Engineering, 5(7):647–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muggleton, S. and De Raedt, L. (1994). Inductive logic programming: Theory and methods. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:629–679. ftp://ftp.cs.york.ac.uk/pub/MLGROUP/Papers/lpj.ps.gz

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nienhuys-Cheng, S.-H. and de Wolf, R. (1997). Foundations of Inductive Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. LNAI 1228.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Plotkin, G. (1971). Automatic Methods of Inductive Inference. PhD thesis, Edinburgh University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart, D. and McClelland, J. (1986). On learning the past tense of english verbs. In Explorations in the Micro-Structure of Cognition Vol. II, pages 216–271. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaprio, E. (1983). Algorithmic Program Debugging. PhD thesis, Yale University, MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, A., Muggleton, R. K. S., and Sternberg, M. (1997). Carcinogenesis predictions using ILP. In Lavrač, N. and Džeroski, S., editors, Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 273–287. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. LNAI 1297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, A., Muggleton, S., King, R., and Sternberg, M. (1996). Theories for mutagenicity: a study of first-order and feature based induction. Artificial Intelligence, 85(l,2):277–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, M., King, R., Lewis, R., and Muggleton, S. (1994). Application of machine learning to structural molecular biology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 344:365–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, C., Mooney, R., and Tang, L. (1997). Learning to parse natural language database queries into logical form. In Workshop on Automata Induction, Grammatical Inference and Language Acquisition. Paper accessible from www-univ-st-etienne.fr/eurise/pdupont.html www-univ-st-etienne.fr/eurise/pdupont.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Turcotte, M., Muggleton, S., and Sternberg, M. (1998). Protein fold recognition. In Page, C., editor, Proc. of the 8th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming (ILP-98), LNAI 1446, pages 53–64, Berlin. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turing, A. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59(236):435–460.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto, A. (1997). Which hypotheses can be found with inverse entailment? In Lavrač, N. and Džeroski, S., editors, Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 296–308. Springer-Ver lag, Berlin. LNAI 1297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelle, J. and Mooney, R. (1993). Learning semantic grammars with constructive inductive logic programming. In Proceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 817–822, San Mateo, CA. Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelle, J. and Mooney, R. (1996a). Comparative results on using inductive logic programming for corpus-based parser construction. In Connectionist, Statistical and Symbolic Approaches to Learning for Natural Language Processing, pages 355–369. Springer, Berlin.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zelle, J. and Mooney, R. (1996b). Learning to parse database queries using Inductive Logic Programming. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1050–1055, Portland, Oregon. AAAI Press/MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Muggleton, S., Marginean, F. (2000). Logic-Based Machine Learning. In: Minker, J. (eds) Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence. The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science, vol 597. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1567-8_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1567-8_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-5618-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-1567-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics