A Hybrid Abductive Inductive Proof Procedure

This paper introduces a proof procedure that integrates Abductive Logic Programming (ALP) and Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) to automate the learning of first order Horn clause theories from examples and background knowledge. The work builds upon a recent approach called Hybrid Abductive Inductive Learning (HAIL) by showing how language bias can be practically and usefully incorporated into the learning process. A proof procedure for HAIL is proposed that utilises a set of user specified mode declarations to learn hypotheses that satisfy a given language bias. A semantics is presented that accurately characterises the intended hypothesis space and includes the hypotheses derivable by the proof procedure. An implementation is described that combines an extension of the Kakas-Mancarella ALP procedure within an ILP procedure that generalises the Progol system of Muggleton. The explicit integration of abduction and induction is shown to allow the derivation of multiple clause hypotheses in response to a single seed example and to enable the inference of missing type information in a way not previously possible.

[1]  Stephen Muggleton,et al.  Theory Completion Using Inverse Entailment , 2000, ILP.

[2]  Krysia Broda,et al.  Hybrid Abductive Inductive Learning: A Generalisation of Progol , 2003, ILP.

[3]  Liviu Badea,et al.  Functional Discrimination of Gene Expression Patterns in Terms of the Gene Ontology , 2002, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing.

[4]  Teodor C. Przymusinski.  On the declarative and procedural semantics of logic programs , 1989, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[5]  Akihiro Yamamoto,et al.  Which Hypotheses Can Be Found with Inverse Entailment? , 1997, ILP.

[6]  Akihiro Yamamoto,et al.  A Theory of Hypothesis Finding in Clausal Logic , 2002, Progress in Discovery Science.

[7]  Akihiro Yamamoto.  Using Abduction for Induction Based on Bottom Generalization , 2000 .

[8]  Peter A. Flach,et al.  Abduction and induction: essays on their relation and integration , 2000 .

[9]  Ryszard S. Michalski,et al.  A theory and methodology of inductive learning , 1993 .

[10]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  Database Updates through Abduction , 1990, VLDB.

[11]  Christopher H. Bryant,et al.  Functional genomic hypothesis generation and experimentation by a robot scientist , 2004, Nature.

[12]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  Abductive Logic Programming , 1992, LPNMR.

[13]  O AkihiroYAMAMOT.  An Inference Method for the Complete Inverse of Relative Subsumption , .

[14]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

[15]  Herbert B. Enderton,et al.  A mathematical introduction to logic , 1972 .

[16]  Kenneth A. Ross,et al.  The well-founded semantics for general logic programs , 1991, JACM.

[17]  G. Plotkin.  Automatic Methods of Inductive Inference , 1972 .

[18]  Claire Nédellec,et al.  Declarative Bias in ILP , 1996 .

[19]  Thomas G. Dietterich.  What is machine learning? , 2020, Archives of Disease in Childhood.

[20]  K. Iwanuma,et al.  Completeness of Pruning Methods for Consequence Finding Procedure SOL , 2000 .

[21]  John Wylie Lloyd,et al.  Foundations of Logic Programming , 1987, Symbolic Computation.

[22]  Katsumi Inoue,et al.  Induction as Consequence Finding , 2004, Machine Learning.

[23]  Katsumi Inoue,et al.  Linear Resolution for Consequence Finding , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[24]  M J Sternberg,et al.  Automated discovery of structural signatures of protein fold and function. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[25]  Luc De Raedt,et al.  Inductive Logic Programming: Theory and Methods , 1994, J. Log. Program..

[26]  Céline Rouveirol,et al.  Extensions of Inversion of Resolution Applied to Theory Completion , 1992 .

[27]  Mark E. Stickel,et al.  A Prolog Technology Theorem Prover: A New Exposition and Implementation in Prolog , 1990, Theor. Comput. Sci..