Skip to main content

On the inference of sequences of functions

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Analogical and Inductive Inference (AII 1986)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 265))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We have shown that, in some sense, computers can be taught how to learn how to learn. The mathematical result constructed sequences of functions that were easy to learn, provided they were learned one at a time in a specific order. Furthermore, the sequences of functions constructed above are impossible to learn, by an algorithmic device, if the functions are not presented in the specified order.

As with any mathematical model, there is some question as to whether or not our result accurately captures the intuitive notion that it was intended to. Independently of how close our proof paradigm is to the intuitive notion of learning how to learn, if it were no were no formal analogue to the concept of machines that learn how to learn, then our result could not possibly be true. Our proof indicates not only that it is not impossible to program computers that learn based, in part, on their previous experiences, but that it is sometimes impossible to succeed without doing so.

Supported in part by NSA OCREAE Grant MDA904-85-H-0002

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. Angluin, D. Inference of reversible languages. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 29 (1982), 741–765.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Angluin, D. and Smith, C. H. Inductive inference: theory and methods. Computing Surveys 15 (1983), 237–269.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Angluin, D. and Smith, C. H. Formal inductive inference. In Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, S. Shapiro, Ed., 1986. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barzdin, J.A. and Podnieks, K. M. The theory of inductive inference. Proceedings of the Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (1973), 9–15. Russian.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Blum, L. and Blum, M. Toward a mathematical theory of inductive inference. Information and Control 28 (1975), 125–155.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Case, J. and Smith, C. Comparison of identification criteria for machine inductive inference. Theoretical Computer Science 25, 2 (1983), 193–220.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cherniavsky, J. C. and Smith, C. H. A recursion theoretic approach to program testing. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (1986). To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cherniavsky, J. C. and Smith, C. H. Using telltales in developing program test sets. Computer Science Dept. TR 4, Georgetown University, Washington D. C., 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Daley, R. P. and Smith, C. H. On the complexity of inductive inference. Information and Control 69 (1986), 12–40.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Freivalds, R. V. and Wiehagen, R. Inductive inference with additional information. Electronische Informationsverabeitung und Kybernetik 15, 4 (1979), 179–184.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gold, E. M. Language identification in the limit. Information and Control 10 (1967), 447–474.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hutchinson, A. A data structure and algorithm for a self-augmenting heuristic program. The Computer Journal 29, 2 (1986), 135–150.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Laird, J., Rosenbloom, P., and Newell, A. Towards chunking as a general learning mechanism. In Proceedings of AAAI 1984, Austin, Texas, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Machtey, M. and Young, P.An Introduction to the General Theory of Algorithms. North-Holland, New York, New York, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Miller, G. The magic number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychology Review 63 (1956), 81–97.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Osherson, D., Stob, M., and Weinstein, S.Systems that Learn. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pitt, L. and Smith, C. Probability and plurality for aggregations of learning machines. Computer Science Department TR 1686, UMIACS TR 86-16, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rogers, H. Jr. Gödel numberings of partial recursive functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 23 (1958), 331–341.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Rogers, H. Jr.Theory of Recursive Functions and Effective Computability. McGraw Hill, New York, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Smith, C. H. The power of pluralism for automatic program synthesis. Journal of the ACM 29, 4 (1982), 1144–1165.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Weyuker, E. J. Assessing test data adequacy through program inference. ACM Transactions on Programming, Languages and Systems 5, 4 (1983), 641–655.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wiehagen, R. Characterization problems in the theory of inductive inference. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 62 (1978), 494–508.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wiehagen, R., Freivalds, R., and Kinber, E. K. On the power of probabilistic strategies in inductive inference. Theoretical Computer Science 28 (1984), 111–133.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Klaus P. Jantke

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1987 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gasarch, W.I., Smith, C.H. (1987). On the inference of sequences of functions. In: Jantke, K.P. (eds) Analogical and Inductive Inference. AII 1986. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 265. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-18081-8_83

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-18081-8_83

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-18081-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47739-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics