Skip to main content

Revision of logical theories

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Topics in Artificial Intelligence (AI*IA 1995)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 992))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper presents a system for revising hierarchical first-order logical theories, called INCR/H. It incorporates two refinement operators, one for generalizing clauses which do not cover positive examples, and the other one for specializing the inconsistent hypotheses inductively generated by any system that learns logical theories from positive and negative examples. The generalizing operator is inspired from Hayes-Roth and McDermott's Interference matching, while the specializing operator is completely novel. Both of them perform a search in the space of logical clauses and take advantage of the structure of this set. The main characteristic of the system consists of the capability of autonomously performing a representation change, that allows INCR/H to extend the search to the space of clauses with negated literals in the body (program clauses) when no correct theories exist in the space of definite clauses. Experimental results in the area of electronic document classification show that INCR/H is able to cope effectively and efficiently with this real-world learning task.

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. Becker, J.M., Inductive Learning of Decision Rules with Exceptions:Methodology and Experimentation, B.S. dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, UIUCDCS-F-85-945, August 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bergadano, F., and Giunetti, D., Learning Clauses by Tracing Derivations, Proceed. of the 4 th Int'l Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, ILP-94, S. Wrobel (Ed.), 1–29, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Botta, M., Learning First Order Theories, in Methodologies for Intelligent Systems — Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium, ISMIS '94, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 869, Z.W. Ras and M. Zemankova (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, 356–365, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Clark, K.L., Negation as failure, in Logic and Databases, H. Gallaire and J. Minker (Eds.), Plenum Press, New York, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  5. De Raedt, L., Interactive Theory Revision — An Inductive Logic Programming Approach, AP, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Esposito, F., Malerba, D., and Semeraro, G., Negation as a Specializing Operator, in Advances in Artificial Intelligence-Proceedings of the Third Congress of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence AI *IA 93, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 728, P. Torasso (Ed.), Springer-Verlag, 166–177, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Esposito, F., Malerba, D., and Semeraro, G., Multistrategy Learning for Document Recognition, Applied Artificial Intelligence: An International Journal, Vol. 8, No.1, 33–84, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Esposito, F., Fanizzi, N., Malerba, D., Semeraro, G., Downward Refinement of Hierarchical Datalog Theories, Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Declarative Programming, GULP-PRODE'95, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ginsberg, A., Theory Reduction, Theory Revision, and Retranslation, Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), 777–782, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grant, J., & Subrahmanian, V.S., Reasoning in Inconsistent Knowledge Bases, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 7, N.1, 177–189, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hayes-Roth, F., and McDermott, J., Knowledge acquisition from structural descriptions, Proceed. of the 5th International Joint Conference on AI, Cambridge, MA, 356–362, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Helft, N., Inductive Generalization: A Logical Framework, in Progress in Machine Learning — Proceedings of EWSL 87:2nd European Working Session on Learning, I. Bratko & N. Lavrac (Eds.), Sigma Press, Wilmslow, 149–157, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lloyd, J.W., Foundations of Logic Programming, Second Edition, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Muggleton, S., Duce, an Oracle based approach to constructive induction, Proceedings of the 10th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 287–292, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Muggleton, S., and Buntine, W., Machine Invention of First-order Predicates by Inverting Resolution, Proceed. of the 5th International Conference on Machine Learning, 339–352, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ourston, D., and Mooney, R. J., Changing the Rules: A Comprehensive Approach to Theory Refinement, Proceed. of the 8th National Conference on AI (AAAI-90), 815–820, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Plotkin, G.D., A Note on Inductive Generalization, in Machine Intelligence 5, B. Meltzer and D. Michie (Eds.), 153–163, Edinburgh University Press, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Reinke, R.E., Michalski, R.S., Incremental Learning of Concept Descriptions: A Method and Experimental Results, Machine Intelligence 11, Donald Michie (editor), 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Reiter, R., Equality and domain closure in first order databases. Journal of ACM, 27, 235–249, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Richards, B. L, and Mooney, R. J., First-Order Theory Revision, Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Machine Learning, 447–451, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Saitta, L., Botta, M., and Neri, F., Multistrategy Learning and Theory Revision. Machine Learning 11, 153–172, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Semeraro, G., Esposito, F., Malerba, D., Brunk, C., and Pazzani, M., Avoiding Non-Termination when Learning Logic Programs: A Case Study with FOIL and FOCL, in Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation-Meta-Programming in Logic, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 883, L. Fribourg and F. Turini (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, 183–198, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Shapiro, E. Y., Algorithmic Program Debugging, MIT Press, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Siekmann, J. H., An Introduction to Unification Theory, in Formal Techniques in Artificial Intelligence — A Sourcebook, R. B. Banerji (Ed.), Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North Holland), 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Towell, G. G., Shavlik, J. W., and Noordewier, M. O., Refinement of Approximate Domain Theories by Knowledge-Based Neural Networks, Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), 861–866, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wogulis, J., Revising Relational Domain Theories, Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Machine Learning, 462–466, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  27. S. Wrobel (Ed.), Proceed. of the MLNet Workshop on Theory Revision and Restructuring in Machine Learning, ECML-94, Catania, Italy, Arbeitspapiere der GMD N.842, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Marco Gori Giovanni Soda

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Semeraro, G., Esposito, F., Fanizzi, N., Malerba, D. (1995). Revision of logical theories. In: Gori, M., Soda, G. (eds) Topics in Artificial Intelligence. AI*IA 1995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 992. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60437-5_36

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60437-5_36

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-60437-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47468-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics