Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Grammar Induction as Substructural Inductive Logic Programming

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Learning Language in Logic (LLL 1999)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1925))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this chapter we describe an approach to grammar induction based on categorial grammars: the EMILE algorithm. Categorial grammars are equivalent to context-free grammars. They were introduced by Ajduciewicz and formalised by Lambek. Technically they can be seen as a variant of the propositional calculus without structural rules. Various learnability results for categorial grammars are known. There exists a whole landscape of these so called substructural logics. This suggests an extension of the ILP research program in the direction of what one might call substructural ILP. We discuss the application of substructural logic to database design and present some complexity results from the literature that suggest the feasibility of this approach.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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. Aarts, E. (1995). Investigations in Logic, Language and Computation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Adriaans, P. (1990). Categoriale modellen voor kennissystemen. Informatie, 118–126.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Adriaans, P. (1992). Language learning from a categorial perspective. Academisch proefschrift, Universiteit van Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Adriaans, P. (1999). Learning Shallow Context-Free languages under simple distributions. CSLI-publications, University of Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Adriaans, P., & de Haas, E. (2000). Substructural PAC learning. Research report, Syllogic.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ajdukiewicz, K. (1935). Die syntactische konnexität. Studia Philosophica, 1, 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Andreka, H., van Benthem, J., & Nemeti, I. (1996). Modal languages and bounded fragments of predicate logic. Pre-print ML-96-03, ILLC, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Apt, K., & Pellegrini, A. (1994). On the occur-check free Prolog programs. ACM Toplas, 16 (3), 687–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chagrov, A., & Zakharyaschev, M. (1996). Modal Logic. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. de Haas, E. (1995). Categorial graphs. In Reichel, H. (Ed.), Fundamentals of Computation Theory, FCT’95, Vol. 965 of LNCS, pp. 263–272. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  11. de Haas, E. (2000). Categories for Profit. Ph.D. thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam. In preparation.

    Google Scholar 

  12. E.Y., S. (1984). Alternation and the computational complexity of logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming, 1, 19–33.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Fowler, M. (1997). UML Distilled: Applying the Standard Object Modeling Language. Addison Wesley Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fujinami, T. (1997). A decidable linear logic for transforming DRSs in context. In Dekker, P., S. M. V. Y. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th Amsterdam Colloquium, pp. 127–132.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gurevich, Y. (1988). Logic and the challenge of computer science. In Boerger, E. (Ed.), Trends in Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 1–57. Computer Science Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kanazawa, M. (1994). Learnable Classes of Categorial Grammars. Ph.D. thesis, University of Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kanovich, M. (1992). Horn programming in linear logic is NP-complete. In Proc. 7th annual IEEE symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pp. 200–210 Santa Cruz, CA. Full paper appears in Annals of Pure and Applied Logic.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lambek, J. (1958). The mathemetics of sentence structure. American Mathematical Monthly, 65, 154–169.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Lambek, J. (1990). Logic without structural rules. Another look at cut elimination. Ms. McGill University, Montreal.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lincoln, P., Mitchell, J., Scedrov, A., & Shankar, N. (1992). Decision problems for propositional linear logic. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 56, 239–311.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Lincoln, P., S. N. (1994). Proof search in first order linear logic and other cut-free sequent calculi. In Proc. of the ninth (IEEE) symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pp. 282–291.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Oehrle, R.T., B. E. W. D. (Ed.). (1988). Categorial Grammars and Natural Language Structures. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  23. OMG, http://www.omg.org (1997). UML 1.1 Specification. documents ad970802-ad0809.

  24. Pentus, M. (1993). Lambek grammars are context free. In IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Scedrov, A. (1995). Linear logic and computation: A survey. In Schwichtenberg, S. (Ed.), Proc. of the 1993 Summer School at Marktoberdorf, Germany, No. 139 in Ser. F. Commut. System Sci., pp. 379–395. Springer Verlag. also as Report Dept. of Mathematics, University of Pensylvania, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Schroeder-Heister, P., D. K. (1993). Substructural Logics. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Troelstra, A. (1992). Lectures on Linear Logic. No. 29 in Lecture Notes. CSLI, Stanford.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Valiant, L. (1984). A theory of the learnable. Communications of the ACM, 27 (11), 1134–1142.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Syllogic, P.O. Box 2729, 3800GG, Amersfoort, The Netherlands

    Pieter Adriaans & Erik de Haas

  2. Faculty of Mathematics, Computer Science, Physics and Astronomy, University of Amsterdam, Plantage Muidergracht 24, 1018TV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Pieter Adriaans

Authors
  1. Pieter Adriaans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erik de Haas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of York, YO10 5DD, Heslington, York, UK

    James Cussens

  2. Jožef Stefan Institute, Jamova 39, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Sašo Džeroski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Adriaans, P., de Haas, E. (2000). Grammar Induction as Substructural Inductive Logic Programming. In: Cussens, J., Džeroski, S. (eds) Learning Language in Logic. LLL 1999. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1925. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40030-3_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40030-3_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41145-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-40030-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation