Abstract
This paper is concerned with how to classify examples that are not covered by any rule in an unordered hypothesis. Instead of assigning the majority class to the uncovered examples, which is the standard method, a novel method is presented that minimally generalises the rules to include the uncovered examples. The new method, called Rule Stretching, has been evaluated on several domains (using the inductive logic programming system Virtual Predict for induction of the base hypothesis). The results show a significant improvement over the standard method.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
F. Bergadano, S. Matwin, R.S. Michalski, and J. Zhang. Learning Two-Tiered Descriptions of Flexible Concepts: The POSEIDON System. Machine Learning, 8(1):5–43, 1992.
H. Boström. Virtual Predict User Manual. Virtual Genetics Laboratory, 2001.
H. Boström and L. Asker. Combining divide-and-conquer and separate-and-conquer for efficient and effective rule induction. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, volume 1634, pages 33–43. Springer-Verlag, 1999.
H. Boström and P. Idestam-Almquist. Induction of logic programs by example-guided unfolding. Journal of Logic Programming, 40(2–3):159–183, 1999.
P. Clark and R. Boswell. Rule induction with CN2: Some recent improvements. In Proceedings of the Fifth European Working Session on Learning, pages 151–163, Berlin, 1991. Springer Verlag.
W. W. Cohen. Fast effective rule induction. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.
R.D. King, A. Srinivasan, and M.J.E. Sternberg. Relating chemical activity to structure: an examination of ilp successes. New Generation Computing, 13(3–4): 411–433, 1995.
W. Van Laer, L. De Raedt, and S. Dzeroski. On multi-class problems and discretization in inductive logic programming. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems. Springer-Verlag, 1997.
J.W. Lloyd. Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag, 1987.
S. Muggleton. Inverse entailment and Progol. New Generation Computing Journal, 13:245–286, 1995.
S. Muggleton and M. Bain. Analogical prediction. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, volume 1634, pages 234–244. Springer-Verlag, 1999.
S. Muggleton, R. King, and M. Sternberg. Protein secondary structure prediction using logic-based machine learning. Protein Engineering, 5:647–657, 1992.
G. D. Plotkin. A note on inductive generalisation. Machine Intelligence 5, pages 153–163, 1970.
G.D. Plotkin. A further note on inductive generalization. In Machine Intelligence, volume 6, pages 101–124. Edinburgh University Press, 1971.
R.L. Rivest. Learning decision lists. Machine Learning, 2(3):229–246, 1987.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Eineborg, M., Boström, H. (2001). Classifying Uncovered Examples by Rule Stretching. In: Rouveirol, C., Sebag, M. (eds) Inductive Logic Programming. ILP 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2157. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44797-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44797-0_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42538-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44797-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive