Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-747cfc64b6-dkhcg Total loading time: 0.262 Render date: 2021-06-17T00:39:40.267Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Exploiting Answer Set Programming with External Sources for Meta-Interpretive Learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2018

TOBIAS KAMINSKI
Affiliation:
Technical University of Vienna (TU Wien), Vienna, Austria (e-mail: kaminski@kr.tuwien.ac.at, eiter@kr.tuwien.ac.at)
THOMAS EITER
Affiliation:
Technical University of Vienna (TU Wien), Vienna, Austria (e-mail: kaminski@kr.tuwien.ac.at, eiter@kr.tuwien.ac.at)
KATSUMI INOUE
Affiliation:
National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo, Japan (e-mail: inoue@nii.ac.jp)
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Meta-Interpretive Learning (MIL) learns logic programs from examples by instantiating meta-rules, which is implemented by the Metagol system based on Prolog. Viewing MIL-problems as combinatorial search problems, they can alternatively be solved by employing Answer Set Programming (ASP), which may result in performance gains as a result of efficient conflict propagation. However, a straightforward ASP-encoding of MIL results in a huge search space due to a lack of procedural bias and the need for grounding. To address these challenging issues, we encode MIL in the HEX-formalism, which is an extension of ASP that allows us to outsource the background knowledge, and we restrict the search space to compensate for a procedural bias in ASP. This way, the import of constants from the background knowledge can for a given type of meta-rules be limited to relevant ones. Moreover, by abstracting from term manipulations in the encoding and by exploiting the HEX interface mechanism, the import of such constants can be entirely avoided in order to mitigate the grounding bottleneck. An experimental evaluation shows promising results.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

References

Cropper, A. and Muggleton, S. H. 2014. Logical minimisation of meta-rules within meta-interpretive learning. In ILP 2014. LNCS, vol. 9046. Springer, 6275.Google Scholar
Cropper, A. and Muggleton, S. H. 2015. Learning efficient logical robot strategies involving composable objects. In IJCAI 2015. AAAI Press, 34233429.Google Scholar
Cropper, A. and Muggleton, S. H. 2016a. Learning higher-order logic programs through abstraction and invention. In IJCAI 2016. IJCAI/AAAI Press, 14181424.Google Scholar
Cropper, A. and Muggleton, S. H. 2016b. Metagol system. https://github.com/metagol/metagol.Google Scholar
Cropper, A., Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A., and Muggleton, S. H. 2015. Meta-interpretive learning of data transformation programs. In ILP 2015. LNCS, vol. 9575. Springer, 4659.Google Scholar
Dai, W., Muggleton, S., Wen, J., Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A., and Zhou, Z. 2017. Logical vision: One-shot meta-interpretive learning from real images. In ILP 2017. LNCS, vol. 10759. Springer, 4662.Google Scholar
Dietterich, T. G., Domingos, P. M., Getoor, L., Muggleton, S., and Tadepalli, P. 2008. Structured machine learning: the next ten years. Machine Learning 73, 1, 323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eiter, T., Fink, M., Ianni, G., Krennwallner, T., Redl, C., and Schüller, P. 2016. A model building framework for answer set programming with external computations. TPLP 16, 4, 418464.Google Scholar
Eiter, T., Fink, M., Krennwallner, T., and Redl, C. 2016. Domain expansion for ASP-programs with external sources. Artif. Intell. 233, 84121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faber, W., Leone, N., and Pfeifer, G. 2011. Semantics and complexity of recursive aggregates in answer set programming. Artif. Intell. 175, 1, 278298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farquhar, C., Grov, G., Cropper, A., Muggleton, S., and Bundy, A. 2015. Typed meta-interpretive learning for proof strategies. In ILP (Late Breaking Papers) 2015. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1636. CEUR-WS.org, 1732.Google Scholar
Gebser, M., Kaminski, R., Kaufmann, B., Ostrowski, M., Schaub, T., and Wanko, P. 2016. Theory solving made easy with clingo 5. In ICLP (Techn. Comm.). OASICS, vol. 52. Schloss Dagstuhl, 2:12:15.Google Scholar
Gebser, M., Kaufmann, B., and Schaub, T. 2012. Conflict-driven answer set solving: From theory to practice. Artif. Intell. 187-188, 52–89.Google Scholar
Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V. 1991. Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Gen. Comput. 9, 3–4, 365386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, J. and Michalski, R. S. 1977. Inductive inference of VL decision rules. SIGART Newsletter 63, 3844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, M., Russo, A., and Broda, K. 2014. Inductive learning of answer set programs. In JELIA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8761. Springer, 311325.Google ScholarPubMed
Lin, D., Dechter, E., Ellis, K., Tenenbaum, J. B., and Muggleton, S. 2014. Bias reformulation for one-shot function induction. In ECAI 2014. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 263. IOS Press, 525530.Google Scholar
Michie, D., Muggleton, S., Page, D., and Srinivasan, A. 1994. To the international computing community: A new east-west challenge. Tech. rep., Oxford University Computing laboratory, UK.Google Scholar
Muggleton, S. H., Lin, D., Pahlavi, N., and Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A. 2014. Meta-interpretive learning: application to grammatical inference. Machine Learning 94, 1, 2549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muggleton, S. H., Lin, D., and Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A. 2015. Meta-interpretive learning of higher-order dyadic datalog: predicate invention revisited. Machine Learning 100, 1, 4973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otero, R. P. 2001. Induction of stable models. In ILP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2157. Springer, 193205.Google Scholar
Ray, O. 2009. Nonmonotonic abductive inductive learning. J. Applied Logic 7, 3, 329340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A., Bohan, D., Raybould, A., and Muggleton, S. 2014. Towards machine learning of predictive models from ecological data. In ILP 2014. LNCS, vol. 9046. Springer, 154167.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Kaminski et al. supplementary material

Kaminski et al. supplementary material 1

Download Kaminski et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 123 KB
You have Access
3
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Exploiting Answer Set Programming with External Sources for Meta-Interpretive Learning
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Exploiting Answer Set Programming with External Sources for Meta-Interpretive Learning
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Exploiting Answer Set Programming with External Sources for Meta-Interpretive Learning
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *