Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Induction of constraint logic programs

  • Inducing Complex Representations
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Learning and Reasoning with Complex Representations (PRICAI 1996)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1359))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) is concerned with learning hypotheses from examples, where both examples and hypotheses are represented in the Logic Programming (LP) language. The application of ILP to problems involving numerical information has shown the need for basic numerical background knowledge (e.g. relation “less than”). Our thesis is that one should rather choose Constraint Logic Programming (CLP) as the representation language of hypotheses, since CLP contains the extensions of LP developed in the past decade for handling numerical variables.

This paper deals with learning constrained clauses from positive and negative examples expressed as constrained clauses. A first step, termed small induction, gives a computational characterization of the solution clauses, which is sufficient to classify further instances of the problem domain. A second step, termed exhaustive induction, explicitly constructs all solution clauses. The algorithms we use are presented in detail, their complexity is given, and they are compared with other prominent ILP approaches.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. F. Bergadano and A. Giordana. Guiding induction with domain theories. In Y. Kodratoff and R.S. Michalski, editors, Machine Learning: an artificial intelligence approach, volume 3, pages 474–492. Morgan Kaufmann, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  2. S. Dzeroski, L. Todorovski, and T. Urbancic. Handling real numbers in ILP: a step towards better behavioral clones. In N. Lavrac and S. Wrobel, editors, Proceedings of ECML-95, European Conference on Machine Learning, pages 283–286. Springer Verlag, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. Giordana, L. Saitta, and F. Zini. Learning disjunctive concepts by means of genetic algorithms. In Cohen W. and Hirsh H., editors, Proceedings of ICML-94, International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 96–104. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  4. ILOG. Manuel SOLVER. ILOG, Gentilly, France, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. Jaffar and J. L. Lassez. Constraint logic programming. In Proc. of the fourteenth ACM Symposium on the Principles of Programming Languages, pages 111–119, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Jaffar and M.J. Maher. Constraint logic programming: a survey. Journal of Logic Programming, pages 503–581, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R.D. King, A. Srinivasan, and M.J.E. Sternberg. Relating chemical activity to structure: an examination of ILP successes. New Gen. Comput., 13, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  8. N. Lavrač and S. Džeroski. Inductive Logic Programming: Techniques and Applications. Ellis Horwood, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J.W. Lloyd. Foundations of Logic Programming, second extended edition. Springer Verlag, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  10. R.S. Michalski. A theory and methodology of inductive learning. In R.S Michalski, J.G. Carbonell, and T.M. Mitchell, editors, Machine Learning: an artificial intelligence approach, volume 1, pages 83–134. Morgan Kaufmann, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  11. T.M. Mitchell. Generalization as search. Artificial Intelligence, 18:203–226, 1982.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. F. Mizoguchi and H. Ohwada. Constraint-directed generalizations for learning spatial relations. In Proceedings of ILP-91, International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  13. S. Muggleton. Inverse entailment and PROGOL. New Gen. Comput., 13:245–286, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. S. Muggleton and L. De Raedt. Inductive logic programming: Theory and methods. Journal of Logic Programming, 19:629–679, 1994.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. S. Muggleton and C. Feng. Efficient induction of logic programs. In Proceedings of the 1st conference on algorithmic learning theory. Ohmsha, Tokyo, Japan, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  16. C. D. Page and A. M. Frisch. Generalization and learnability: A study of constrained atoms. In S. Muggleton, editor, Proceedings of the first International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 29–61, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  17. J.R. Quinlan. Learning logical definition from relations. Machine Learning, 5:239–266, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Sebag. A constraint-based induction algorithm in FOL. In W. Cohen and H. Hirsh, editors, Proceedings of ICML44, International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 275–283. Morgan Kaufmann, July 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  19. M. Sebag. Delaying the choice of bias: A disjunctive version space approach. In L. Saitta, editor, Proceedings of the 13 th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 444–452. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  20. M. Sebag and C. Rouveirol. Induction of maximally general clauses compatible with integrity constraints. In S. Wrobel, editor, Proceedings of ILP-94, International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  21. M. Sebag and C. Rouveirol. Constraint inductive logic programming. In L. de Raedt, editor, Advances in ILP, pages 277–294. IOS Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  22. M. Sebag and C. Rouveirol. Tractable induction and classification in FOL. In Proceedings of IJCAI-97. Morgan Kaufmann, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  23. A. Srinivasan and S. Muggleton. Comparing the use of background knowledge by two ILP systems. In L. de Raedt, editor, Proceedings of ILP-95. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  24. P. Van Hentenryck and Deville Y. Constraint Logic Programming. In Proceedings of POPL'97, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  25. P. Van Hentenryck and Deville Y. Operational semantics of constraint logic programming over finite domains. In Proceedings of POPL'97, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J.-D. Zucker and J. G. Ganascia. Selective reformulation of examples in concept learning. In W. Cohen and H. Hirsh, editors, Proc. of 11th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 352–360. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  27. J.-D. Zucker and J.-G. Ganascia. Representation changes for efficient learning in structural domains. In L. Saitta, editor, Proceedings of the 13 th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 543–551, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LMS - URA CNRS 317 Ecole Polytechnique, 91128, Palaiseau Cedex, France

    Michèle Sebag

  2. LRI - URA CNRS 410 Université Paris-XI, 91405, Orsay Cedex, France

    Céline Rouveirol

  3. ILOG, 9 avenue de Verdun, 94253, Gentilly Cedex

    Jean-François Puget

Authors
  1. Michèle Sebag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Céline Rouveirol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jean-François Puget
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Grigoris Antoniou Aditya K. Ghose Mirosław Truszczyński

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sebag, M., Rouveirol, C., Puget, JF. (1998). Induction of constraint logic programs. In: Antoniou, G., Ghose, A.K., Truszczyński, M. (eds) Learning and Reasoning with Complex Representations. PRICAI 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1359. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg . https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-64413-X_34

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-64413-X_34

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-64413-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69780-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation