kLog: A Language for Logical and Relational Learning with Kernels

We introduce kLog, a novel approach to statistical relational learning. Unlike standard approaches, kLog does not represent a probability distribution directly. It is rather a language to perform kernel-based learning on expressive logical and relational representations. kLog allows users to specify learning problems declaratively. It builds on simple but powerful concepts: learning from interpretations, entity/relationship data modeling, logic programming, and deductive databases. Access by the kernel to the rich representation is mediated by a technique we call graphicalization: the relational representation is first transformed into a graph --- in particular, a grounded entity/relationship diagram. Subsequently, a choice of graph kernel defines the feature space. kLog supports mixed numerical and symbolic data, as well as background knowledge in the form of Prolog or Datalog programs as in inductive logic programming systems. The kLog framework can be applied to tackle the same range of tasks that has made statistical relational learning so popular, including classification, regression, multitask learning, and collective classification. We also report about empirical comparisons, showing that kLog can be either more accurate, or much faster at the same level of accuracy, than Tilde and Alchemy. kLog is GPLv3 licensed and is available at http://klog.dinfo.unifi.it along with tutorials

Review of analytical instruments for EEG analysis

Since it was first used in 1926, EEG has been one of the most useful instruments of neuroscience. In order to start using EEG data we need not only EEG apparatus, but also some analytical tools and skills to understand what our data mean. This article describes several classical analytical tools and also new one which appeared only several years ago. We hope it will be useful for those researchers who have only started working in the field of cognitive EEG

Inductive queries for a drug designing robot scientist

It is increasingly clear that machine learning algorithms need to be integrated in an iterative scientific discovery loop, in which data is queried repeatedly by means of inductive queries and where the computer provides guidance to the experiments that are being performed. In this chapter, we summarise several key challenges in achieving this integration of machine learning and data mining algorithms in methods for the discovery of Quantitative Structure Activity Relationships (QSARs). We introduce the concept of a robot scientist, in which all steps of the discovery process are automated; we discuss the representation of molecular data such that knowledge discovery tools can analyse it, and we discuss the adaptation of machine learning and data mining algorithms to guide QSAR experiments

A Boxology of Design Patterns for Hybrid Learning and Reasoning Systems

We propose a set of compositional design patterns to describe a large variety of systems that combine statistical techniques from machine learning with symbolic techniques from knowledge representation. As in other areas of computer science (knowledge engineering, software engineering, ontology engineering, process mining and others), such design patterns help to systematize the literature, clarify which combinations of techniques serve which purposes, and encourage re-use of software components. We have validated our set of compositional design patterns against a large body of recent literature.Comment: 12 pages,55 reference

Towards Automated Performance Bug Identification in Python

Context: Software performance is a critical non-functional requirement, appearing in many fields such as mission critical applications, financial, and real time systems. In this work we focused on early detection of performance bugs; our software under study was a real time system used in the advertisement/marketing domain. Goal: Find a simple and easy to implement solution, predicting performance bugs. Method: We built several models using four machine learning methods, commonly used for defect prediction: C4.5 Decision Trees, Na\"{\i}ve Bayes, Bayesian Networks, and Logistic Regression. Results: Our empirical results show that a C4.5 model, using lines of code changed, file's age and size as explanatory variables, can be used to predict performance bugs (recall=0.73, accuracy=0.85, and precision=0.96). We show that reducing the number of changes delivered on a commit, can decrease the chance of performance bug injection. Conclusions: We believe that our approach can help practitioners to eliminate performance bugs early in the development cycle. Our results are also of interest to theoreticians, establishing a link between functional bugs and (non-functional) performance bugs, and explicitly showing that attributes used for prediction of functional bugs can be used for prediction of performance bugs

Learning with con gurable operators and RL-based heuristics

In this paper, we push forward the idea of machine learning systems for which the operators can be modi ed and netuned for each problem. This allows us to propose a learning paradigm where users can write (or adapt) their operators, according to the problem, data representation and the way the information should be navigated. To achieve this goal, data instances, background knowledge, rules, programs and operators are all written in the same functional language, Erlang. Since changing operators a ect how the search space needs to be explored, heuristics are learnt as a result of a decision process based on reinforcement learning where each action is de ned as a choice of operator and rule. As a result, the architecture can be seen as a `system for writing machine learning systems' or to explore new operators.This work was supported by the MEC projects CONSOLIDER-INGENIO 26706 and TIN 2010-21062-C02-02, GVA project PROMETEO/2008/051, and the REFRAME project granted by the European Coordinated Research on Long-term Challenges in Information and Communication Sciences & Technologies ERA-Net (CHIST-ERA), and funded by the Ministerio de Econom´ıa y Competitividad in Spain. Also, F. Mart´ınez-Plumed is supported by FPI-ME grant BES-2011-045099Martínez Plumed, F.; Ferri Ramírez, C.; Hernández Orallo, J.; Ramírez Quintana, MJ. (2013). Learning with con gurable operators and RL-based heuristics. En New Frontiers in Mining Complex Patterns. Springer Verlag (Germany). 7765:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37382-4_1S1167765Armstrong, J.: A history of erlang. In: Proceedings of the Third ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on History of Programming Languages, HOPL III, pp. 1–26. ACM (2007)Brazdil, P., Giraud-Carrier: Metalearning: Concepts and systems. In: Metalearning. Cognitive Technologies, pp. 1–10. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Daumé III, H., Langford, J.: Search-based structured prediction (2009)Dietterich, T., Domingos, P., Getoor, L., Muggleton, S., Tadepalli, P.: Structured machine learning: the next ten years. Machine Learning 73, 3–23 (2008)Dietterich, T.G., Lathrop, R., Lozano-Perez, T.: Solving the multiple-instance problem with axis-parallel rectangles. Artificial Intelligence 89, 31–71 (1997)Džeroski, S.: Towards a general framework for data mining. In: Džeroski, S., Struyf, J. (eds.) KDID 2006. LNCS, vol. 4747, pp. 259–300. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Dzeroski, S., De Raedt, L., Driessens, K.: Relational reinforcement learning. Machine Learning 43, 7–52 (2001), 10.1023/A:1007694015589Dzeroski, S., Lavrac, N. (eds.): Relational Data Mining. Springer (2001)Estruch, V., Ferri, C., Hernández-Orallo, J., Ramírez-Quintana, M.J.: Similarity functions for structured data. an application to decision trees. Inteligencia Artificial, Revista Iberoamericana de Inteligencia Artificial 10(29), 109–121 (2006)Estruch, V., Ferri, C., Hernández-Orallo, J., Ramírez-Quintana, M.J.: Web categorisation using distance-based decision trees. ENTCS 157(2), 35–40 (2006)Estruch, V., Ferri, C., Hernández-Orallo, J., Ramírez-Quintana, M.J.: Bridging the Gap between Distance and Generalisation. Computational Intelligence (2012)Ferri-Ramírez, C., Hernández-Orallo, J., Ramírez-Quintana, M.J.: Incremental learning of functional logic programs. In: Kuchen, H., Ueda, K. (eds.) FLOPS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2024, pp. 233–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Gärtner, T.: Kernels for Structured Data. PhD thesis, Universitat Bonn (2005)Holland, J.H., Booker, L.B., Colombetti, M., Dorigo, M., Goldberg, D.E., Forrest, S., Riolo, R.L., Smith, R.E., Lanzi, P.L., Stolzmann, W., Wilson, S.W.: What is a learning classifier system? In: Lanzi, P.L., Stolzmann, W., Wilson, S.W. (eds.) IWLCS 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1813, pp. 3–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Holmes, J.H., Lanzi, P., Stolzmann, W.: Learning classifier systems: New models, successful applications. Information Processing Letters (2002)Kitzelmann, E.: Inductive programming: A survey of program synthesis techniques. In: Schmid, U., Kitzelmann, E., Plasmeijer, R. (eds.) AAIP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5812, pp. 50–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Koller, D., Sahami, M.: Hierarchically classifying documents using very few words. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 1997, pp. 170–178. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1997)Lafferty, J., McCallum, A.: Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. In: ICML 2001, pp. 282–289 (2001)Lloyd, J.W.: Knowledge representation, computation, and learning in higher-order logic (2001)Maes, F., Denoyer, L., Gallinari, P.: Structured prediction with reinforcement learning. Machine Learning Journal 77(2-3), 271–301 (2009)Martínez-Plumed, F., Estruch, V., Ferri, C., Hernández-Orallo, J., Ramírez-Quintana, M.J.: Newton trees. In: Li, J. (ed.) AI 2010. LNCS, vol. 6464, pp. 174–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Muggleton, S.: Inverse entailment and Progol. New Generation Computing (1995)Muggleton, S.H.: Inductive logic programming: Issues, results, and the challenge of learning language in logic. Artificial Intelligence 114(1-2), 283–296 (1999)Plotkin, G.: A note on inductive generalization. Machine Intelligence 5 (1970)Schmidhuber, J.: Optimal ordered problem solver. Maching Learning 54(3), 211–254 (2004)Srinivasan, A.: The Aleph Manual (2004)Sutton, R.S., Barto, A.G.: Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press (1998)Tadepalli, P., Givan, R., Driessens, K.: Relational reinforcement learning: An overview. In: Proc. of the Workshop on Relational Reinforcement Learning (2004)Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A., Muggleton, S.: A genetic algorithms approach to ILP. In: Matwin, S., Sammut, C. (eds.) ILP 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2583, pp. 285–300. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Tsochantaridis, I., Hofmann, T., Joachims, T., Altun, Y.: Support vector machine learning for interdependent and structured output spaces. In: ICML (2004)Wallace, C.S., Dowe, D.L.: Refinements of MDL and MML coding. Comput. J. 42(4), 330–337 (1999)Watkins, C., Dayan, P.: Q-learning. Machine Learning 8, 279–292 (1992