Inductive logic programming using bounded hypothesis space

Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) systems apply inductive learning to an inductive learning task by deriving a hypothesis which explains the given examples. Applying ILP systems to real applications poses many challenges as they require large search space, noise is present in the learning task, and in domains such as software engineering hypotheses are required to satisfy domain specific syntactic constraints. ILP systems use language biases to define the hypothesis space, and learning can be seen as a search within the defined hypothesis space. Past systems apply search heuristics to traverse across a large hypothesis space. This is unsuitable for systems implemented using Answer Set Programming (ASP), for which scalability is a constraint as the hypothesis space will need to be grounded by the ASP solver prior to solving the learning task, making them unable to solve large learning tasks. This work explores how to learn using bounded hypothesis spaces and iterative refinement. Hypotheses that explain all examples are learnt by refining smaller partial hypotheses. This improves the scalability of ASP based systems as the learning task is split into multiple smaller manageable refinement tasks. The thesis presents how syntactic integrity constraints on the hypothesis space can be used to strengthen hypothesis selection criteria, removing hypotheses with undesirable structure. The notion of constraint-driven bias is introduced, where hypotheses are required to be acceptable with respect to the given meta-level integrity constraints. Building upon the ILP system ASPAL, the system RASPAL which learns through iterative hypothesis refinement is implemented. RASPAL's algorithm is proven, under certain assumptions, to be complete and consistent. Both systems have been applied to a case study in learning user's behaviours from data collected from their mobile usage. This demonstrates their capability for learning with noise, and the difference in their efficiency. Constraint-driven bias has been implemented for both systems, and applied to a task in specification revision, and in learning stratified programs.Open Acces

The complexity and generality of learning answer set programs

Traditionally most of the work in the field of Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) has addressed the problem of learning Prolog programs. On the other hand, Answer Set Programming is increasingly being used as a powerful language for knowledge representation and reasoning, and is also gaining increasing attention in industry. Consequently, the research activity in ILP has widened to the area of Answer Set Programming, witnessing the proposal of several new learning frameworks that have extended ILP to learning answer set programs. In this paper, we investigate the theoretical properties of these existing frameworks for learning programs under the answer set semantics. Specifically, we present a detailed analysis of the computational complexity of each of these frameworks with respect to the two decision problems of deciding whether a hypothesis is a solution of a learning task and deciding whether a learning task has any solutions. We introduce a new notion of generality of a learning framework, which enables us to define a framework to be more general than another in terms of being able to distinguish one ASP hypothesis solution from a set of incorrect ASP programs. Based on this notion, we formally prove a generality relation over the set of existing frameworks for learning programs under answer set semantics. In particular, we show that our recently proposed framework, Context-dependent Learning from Ordered Answer Sets, is more general than brave induction, induction of stable models, and cautious induction, and maintains the same complexity as cautious induction, which has the highest complexity of these frameworks