An inductive logic programming framework to learn a concept from ambiguous examples

  • Dominique Bouthinon
  • Henry Soldano
Inductive Logic Programming
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1398)


We address a learning problem with the following peculiarity : we search for characteristic features common to a learning set of objects related to a target concept. In particular we approach the cases where descriptions of objects are ambiguous : they represent several incompatible realities. Ambiguity arises because each description only contains indirect information from which assumptions can be derived about the object. We suppose here that a set of constraints allows the identification of “coherent” sub-descriptions inside each object.

We formally study this problem, using an Inductive Logic Programming framework close to characteristic induction from interpretations. In particular, we exhibit conditions which allow a pruned search of the space of concepts. Additionally we propose a method in which a set of hypothetical examples is explicitly calculated for each object prior to learning. The method is used with promising results to search for secondary substructures common to a set of RNA sequences.


Integrity Constraint Inductive Logic Target Concept Inductive Logic Programming Domain Theory 
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.


  1. 1.
    B. Billoud, M. Kontic and A. Viari, Palingol: a declarative programming language to describe nucleic acids' secondary structures and to scan sequence databases, Nucleic Acids Research, vol 24, n° 8, pp. 1395–1403, 1996.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. Bouthinon, Apprentissage à Partir d'Exemples Ambigus: Etude Théorique and Application à la Découverte de Structures Communes à un Ensemble de Séquences d'ARN, doctorat de l'université Paris XIII-Institut Galilée, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. Bouthinon, H. Soldano and B. Billoud, Apprentissage d'un concept commun á un ensemble d'objets dont la description est hypothétique: application á la découverte de structures secondaires d'ARN, Journées Francophones d'Apprentissage, Sétes (France), pp. 206–220, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Buntime, Generalized subsumption and its applications to induction and redundancy, Artificial Intelligence, pp. 149–176, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. MacDermott and J. Doyle, Non-monotonie logic I, Artificial Intelligence, vol. 13, n° 1–2, pp.41–72, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    T.G. Dietterich, R.H. Lathrop and T. Lozano-Perez, Solving the Multiple-Instance Problem with Axis-Parallel Rectangles, Artificial Intelligence, vol 89(1–2), pp. 31–71, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    P.A. Flach, A Framework for Inductive Logic Programming, Inductive Logic Programming, 1992.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R.M. Karp, R.E. Miller and A.L. Rosenberg, Rapid identification of repeated patterns in strings, trees and arrays, Proc. 4th Annu. ACM Symp. Theory of Computing, pp. 125–136, 1972.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.U. Kietz and M. Lübbe, An efficient subsumption algorithm for inductive logic programming, Machine Learning, pp. 130–138, 1994.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Lindsay, B. Buchanan, E. Feigenbaum and J. Lederberg, Applications of artificial intelligence to organic chemistry: The Dendra projects, New-York McGraw-Hill., 1980.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Muggleton, Inductive Logic Programming, Inductive Logic Programming, 1992.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Muggleton and C. Feng, Efficient induction of logic programs, Inductive Logic Programming, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S.H. Nienhuys-Cheng and R.D. Wolf, The subsumption theorem in inductive logic programming: facts and fallacies, International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, Leuven, 1995.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. De Raedt and M. Bruynooghe, Belief updating from integrity constraints and queries, Artificial Intelligence, vol 53, pp. 291–307, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    L. De Raedt, Logical settings for concept-learning, Artificial Intelligence, 95 187–201 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    L. De Raedt and L. Dehaspe, Clausal Discovery, Machine Learning, 26, 99–146 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    R. Reiter, A logic for default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence, vol. 13, n° 1–2, pp. 81–131, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Sebag, A constraint-based induction algorithm in FOL, Machine Learning, pp. 275–283, 1994.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Sebag and C. Rouveirol, Induction of maximally general clauses consistent with integrity constraints, Inductive logic programming, 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Sebag and C. Rouveirol, Constraint inductive logic programming, Advances in inductive logic programming, 1995.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Sebag, C. Rouveirol and J.F. Puget, Inductive Logic Programming + Stochastic Bias = Polynomial Approximate Learning, Multi Strategy Learning, J. Wrete & R.S. Michalski, MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    H. Soldano, A. Viari and M. Champesme, Searching for flexible repeated patterns using a non transitive similarity relation, Pattern Recognition Letters, vol 16, pp. 233–245, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    F. Torre and C. 23. F. Opérateurs naturels en programmation logique inductive, JICAA' 97, Roscoff 20–22 Mai 1997, pp. 53–64, 1997.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    F. Torre and C. Rouveirol, Natural ideal operators in inductive logic programming, Proceeding of the ninth European Conference on Machine Learning pp. 274–289, Springer-Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    P.H. Winston, Learning structural descriptions from examples, The psychology of computer vision, P.H. Winston, MacGraw-Hill, 1975.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    S. Wrobel, First order theory refinement, Advances in inductive logic programming, L. De Raedt, IOS press, 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dominique Bouthinon
    • 1
    • 2
  • Henry Soldano
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Atelier de BioInformatique (ABI)Paris
  2. 2.Laboratoire d'Informatique Paris Nord (LIPN)Atelier de BioInformatique 12ParisFrance

Personalised recommendations