Skip to main content
Log in

Learning-theoretic perspectives of acceptable numberings

  • Published:
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A class of recursive functionsC islimiting standardizable, in a programming system φ, iff there is an effective procedure which, given any φ-program (in the φ-system), synthesizes in the limit acanonical φ-program which is equivalent to the former. It can arguably be expected that notions similar to the above one would be relevant toGold-style function learning, which features, among other things, the effective limiting synthesis of programs for input recursive functions. Many learning classes have been characterized in terms of variants of the above notion. In this paper, we focus on the limiting standardizability of the entire class of recursive functions inEffective programming systems. To start with, we prove the independence of this notionvis-à-vis finitary recursion theorems. Secondly, we show that this motion does not entail acceptability, in the spirit of the results of Case, Riccardi and Royer on characterizations of the samevis-à-vis programming language control structures.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M. Blum, A machine independent theory of the complexity of recursive functions,Journal of the ACM 14 (1967) 322–336.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. Case, Periodicity in generations of automata,Mathematical Systems Theory 8 (1974) 15–32.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. Case, Infinitary self-reference in learning theory,Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 4 (1993) 281–293. To appear in the special issue from AII 92.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Freivalds, E.B. Kinber and R. Wichagen, Connections between identifying functionals, standardizing operations, and computable numberings,Zeitschr. Math. Logik und Grundlagen d. Math. 30 (1984) 145–164.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R. Freivalds, Minimal Gödel numbers and their identification in the limit,Lecture Notes in Computer Science 32 (1975) 219–225.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R.M. Friedberg, Three theorems on recursive enumeration,Journal of Symbolic Logic 23(3) (September, 1958) 309–316.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Jain and A. Sharma, Connections between machine learning and standardizing operations, in:Proceedings of the First Annual Workshop on Computational Learning Theory, MIT, Cambridge, eds. D. Haussler and L. Pitt (Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, August, 1988) pp. 427–428.

  10. S. Jain and A. Sharma, Characterizing language learning by standardizing operations, in:Advances in Computing and Information, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing and Information, Niagara Falls, Canada, eds. S. Akl, F. Fiala and W.W. Koczkodaj (Canadian Scholars' Press, May, 1990) pp. 144–148.

  11. E.B. Kinber, Private communication.

  12. E.B. Kinber, On comparison of limit identification and limit standardization of general recursive functions,Uch. Zap. Latv. Univ. 233 (1975) 45–56.

    Google Scholar 

  13. M. Kummer, Private communication.

  14. M. Kummer, An easy priority-free proof of a theorem of Friedberg,Theoretical Computer Science 74(2) (1990) 249–251.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. Pour-El, Gödel numberings versus Friedberg numberings,Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 14(2) (April, 1964) 252–256.

    Google Scholar 

  17. K. Popper,Conjectures and Refutations: the Growth of Scientific Knowledge (Basic Books, New York, 1962).

    Google Scholar 

  18. K. Popper,The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Harper Torch Books, New York, 2nd ed., 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Royer and J. Case,Intensional Subrecursion and Complexity Theory (Research Notes in Theoretical Science, Pitman Press, 1992). Under preparation.

  20. G. Riccardi,The Independence of Control Structures in Abstract Programming Systems, Ph.D. Thesis, SUNY/Buffalo (1980).

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

    Google Scholar 

  22. H. Rogers,Theory of Recursive Functions and Effective Computability (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967). [Reprinted, MIT Press, 1987.]

    Google Scholar 

  23. J. Royer,A Connotational Theory of Program Structure, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 273 (Springer-Verlag, 1987).

  24. R. Soare,Recursively Enumerable Sets and Degrees (Springer-Verlag, 1987).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baliga, G.R., Shende, A.M. Learning-theoretic perspectives of acceptable numberings. Ann Math Artif Intell 17, 177–187 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02127967

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02127967

Keywords

Navigation