Learning with ordinal-bounded memory from positive data

A bounded example memory learner operates incrementally and maintains a memory of finitely many data items. The paradigm is well-studied and known to coincide with set-driven learning. A hierarchy of stronger and stronger learning criteria had earlier been obtained when one considers, for each [email protected]?N, iterative learners that can maintain a memory of at most k previously processed data items. We investigate an extension of the paradigm into the constructive transfinite. For this purpose we use [email protected]?s universal ordinal notation system O. To each ordinal notation in O one can associate a learning criterion in which the number of times a learner can extend its example memory is bounded by an algorithmic count-down from the notation. We prove a general hierarchy result: if b is larger than a in [email protected]?s system, then learners that extend their example memory ''at most b times'' can learn strictly more than learners that can extend their example memory ''at most a times''. For notations for ordinals below @w^2 the result only depends on the ordinals and is notation-independent. For higher ordinals it is notation-dependent. In the setting of learners with ordinal-bounded memory, we also study the impact of requiring that a learner cannot discard an element from memory without replacing it with a new one. A learner satisfying this condition is called cumulative.

[1]  E. Mark Gold,et al.  Language Identification in the Limit , 1967, Inf. Control..

[2]  Thomas Zeugmann,et al.  Incremental Learning from Positive Data , 1996, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[3]  Stephen Cole Kleene,et al.  On notation for ordinal numbers , 1938, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[4]  Thomas Zeugmann,et al.  Types of monotonic language learning and their characterization , 1992, COLT '92.

[5]  Carl H. Smith,et al.  On the Role of Procrastination in Machine Learning , 1993, Inf. Comput..

[6]  Andris Ambainis,et al.  Ordinal Mind Change Complexity of Language Identification , 1997, EuroCOLT.

[7]  John Case,et al.  Incremental Concept Learning for Bounded Data Mining , 1997, Inf. Comput..

[8]  Lorenzo Carlucci Incremental Learning with Ordinal Bounded Example Memory , 2009, ALT.

[9]  Andris Ambainis The power of procrastination in inductive inference: How it depends on used ordinal notations , 1995, EuroCOLT.

[10]  Rolf Wiehagen Limes-Erkennung rekursiver Funktionen durch spezielle Strategien , 1975, J. Inf. Process. Cybern..

[11]  Manuel Blum,et al.  Toward a Mathematical Theory of Inductive Inference , 1975, Inf. Control..

[12]  S. Kleene On the Forms of the Predicates in the Theory of Constructive Ordinals (Second Paper) , 1955 .

[13]  Daniel N. Osherson,et al.  Systems That Learn: An Introduction to Learning Theory for Cognitive and Computer Scientists , 1990 .

[14]  Ming Li,et al.  An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and Its Applications , 1997, Texts in Computer Science.

[15]  John Case,et al.  Feasible Iteration of Feasible Learning Functionals , 2007, ALT.

[16]  Kenneth Wexler,et al.  Formal Principles of Language Acquisition , 1980 .

[17]  Carl H. Smith,et al.  On the role of procrastination for machine learning , 1992, COLT '92.

[18]  Rózsa Péter Review: S. C. Kleene, On Notation for Ordinal Numbers , 1939 .

[19]  S. Kleene On the Forms of the Predicates in the Theory of Constructive Ordinals , 1944 .

[20]  Jr. Hartley Rogers Theory of Recursive Functions and Effective Computability , 1969 .

[21]  Frank Stephan,et al.  Language Learning from Texts: Mindchanges, Limited Memory, and Monotonicity , 1995, Inf. Comput..

[22]  Sandra Zilles,et al.  Learning with Temporary Memory , 2008, ALT.