Abstract
Noisy (uncertain, missing, or inconsistent) information, typical of many real-world domains, may dramatically affect the performance of logic-based Machine Learning. Multistrategy Learning approaches have been tried to solve this problem by coupling Inductive Logic Programming with other kinds of inference. While uncertainty has been tackled using probabilistic approaches, and abduction has been used to deal with missing data, inconsistency is still an open problem. In the Multistrategy Learning perspective, this paper proposes to attack this latter kind of noise using (abstract) Argumentation, an inferential strategy aimed at handling conflicting information. More specifically, it defines a pre-processing operator based on abstract argumentation that can detect and remove noisy atoms from the observations before running the learning system on the polished data. Quantitative and qualitative experiments point out some strengths and weaknesses of the proposed approach, and suggest lines for future research on this topic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
An atom is an n-ary predicate applied to n terms as arguments, where a term is a constant, a variable, or an n-ary function applied to n terms as arguments.
References
Ali, K.M., Pazzani, M.J.: HYDRA: a noise-tolerant relational concept learning algorithm. In: IJCAI, pp. 1064–1071 (1993)
Baroni, P., Gabbay, D., Giacomin, M., van der Torre, L.: Handbook of Formal Argumentation, vol. 1. College Publications, Joplin (2018)
Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 378–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_33
Ceri, S., Gottlöb, G., Tanca, L.: Logic Programming and Databases. Springer, Heidelberg (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-83952-8
De Raedt, L., Lavrač, N.: Multiple predicate learning in two inductive logic programming settings. Log. J. IGPL 4(2), 227–254 (1996)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. intell. 77(2), 321–357 (1995)
Džeroski, S.: Handling imperfect data in inductive logic programming. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Scandinavian Conference on Artificial Intelligence–93, SCAI93, pp. 111–125 (1993)
Egly, U., Gaggl, S.A., Woltran, S.: ASPARTIX: implementing argumentation frameworks using answer-set programming. In: Garcia de la Banda, M., Pontelli, E. (eds.) ICLP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5366, pp. 734–738. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89982-2_67
Evans, R., Grefenstette, E.: Learning explanatory rules from noisy data. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 61, 1–64 (2018)
Ferilli, S.: Extending expressivity and flexibility of abductive logic programming. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10844-018-0531-6, ISSN: 1573-7675
Gamberger, D., Lavrač, N., Džeroski, S.: Noise elimination in inductive concept learning: a case study in medical diagnosis. In: Arikawa, S., Sharma, A.K. (eds.) ALT 1996. LNCS, vol. 1160, pp. 199–212. Springer, Heidelberg (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61863-5_47
Lavrač, N., Džeroski, S., Grobelnik, M.: Learning nonrecursive definitions of relations with linus. In: Kodratoff, Y. (ed.) EWSL 1991. LNCS, vol. 482, pp. 265–281. Springer, Heidelberg (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0017020
Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-83189-8
McCreath, E., Sharma, A.: ILP with noise and fixed example size: a Bayesian approach. In: IJCAI, vol. 97, pp. 1310–1315 (1997)
Muggleton, S., Feng, C.: Efficient induction of logic programs. In: New Generation Computing. Academic Press (1990)
Quinlan, J.R.: Learning logical definitions from relations. Mach.learn. 5(3), 239–266 (1990)
Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R., van Benthem, J.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 47. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0
Richards, B.L., Mooney, R.J.: Automated refinement of first-order horn-clause domain theories. Mach. Learn. 19(2), 95–131 (1995)
Rotella, F., Ferilli, S.: Probabilistic abductive logic programming using possible worlds. In: Proceedings of the 28th Italian Convention on Computational Logic (CILC-2013), Central Europe (CEUR) Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1068, pp. 131–145 (2013)
Rouveirol, C.: Extensions of inversion of resolution applied to theory completion. In: Inductive Logic Programming, pp. 64–90. Academic Press (1992)
Semeraro, G., Esposito, F., Malerba, D., Fanizzi, N., Ferilli, S.: A logic framework for the incremental inductive synthesis of datalog theories. In: Fuchs, N.E. (ed.) LOPSTR 1997. LNCS, vol. 1463, pp. 300–321. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49674-2_16
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Pazienza, A., Ferilli, S. (2018). Exploring Abstract Argumentation-Based Approaches to Tackle Inconsistent Observations in Inductive Logic Programming. In: Ghidini, C., Magnini, B., Passerini, A., Traverso, P. (eds) AI*IA 2018 – Advances in Artificial Intelligence. AI*IA 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11298. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03840-3_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03840-3_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03839-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03840-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)