On the complexity of some inductive logic programming problems | New Generation Computing Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

On the complexity of some inductive logic programming problems

  • Special Issue
  • Published:
New Generation Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The bounded ILP-consistency problem for function-free Horn clauses is described as follows. Given at setE + andE − of function-free ground Horn clauses and an integerk polynomial inE +∪E −, does there exist a function-free Horn clauseC with no more thank literals such thatC subsumes each element inE + andC does not subsume any element inE −? It is shown that this problem is Σ P2 complete. We derive some related results on the complexity of ILP and discuss the usefulness of such complexity results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Adleman, L.M., “Molecular Computation of Solutions to Combinatorial Problems,”Science 266, pp. 1021–1024, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Angluin, D., “Queries and Concept Learning,”Machine Learning, 2, pp. 319–342, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baxter, L. D., “The NP-completeness of Subsumption,” unpublished manuscript, 1977.

  4. Ben-David, S., Chor, B., Goldreich, O. and Luby, M., “On the Theory of Average Case Complexity,”Journal of Information and System Sciences, 44, pp. 193–219, 1992.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Cholewinski, P., Marek, V.W. and Truszczynski, M., “Default Reasoning System DeReS,” inProc. Fifth Intl. Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’96), Cambridge, MA, Nov. 5–8, 1996.

  6. Cohen, W., “PAC-Learning Recursive Logic Programs: Efficient Algorithms,”Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 2, pp. 501–539, 1995.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Cohen, W., “PAC-Learning Recursive Logic Programs: Negative Results,”Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 2, pp. 541–573, 1995.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Cohen, W. and Page, C.D., “Polynomial Learnability and Inductive Logic Programming — Methods and Results,”New Generation Computing, 13(3–4), pp. 369–409, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. De Raedt, L. and Džeroski, S., “First orderjk-clausal theories are PAC-learnable,”Artificial Intelligence, 70, pp. 375–392, 1994.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Dix, J. and Müller, M., “Implementing Semantics of Disjunctive Logic programs Using Fringes and Abstract properties,” inProc. Second Intl. workshop on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR-93), Lisbon, Portugal, MIT Press, pp. 43–59, July 1993.

  11. Eiter, T. and Gottlob, G., “On the Computational Cost of Disjunctive Logic Programming: Propositional Case,”Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 15(3/4), pp. 289–323, 1995.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Eiter, T., Leone, N., Mateis, C., Pfeifer, G. and Scarcello, F., “A Deductive System for Nonmonotonic Reasoning,” inProc. 4th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR ’97), Lecture Notes in AI (LNAI) (J. Dix, U. Furbach and A. Nerode Eds.), Springer, Berlin, pp. 364–375, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eiter, T., Gottlob, G. and Mannila, H., “Disjunctive Datalog,”ACM Trans. on Database Syst., 22(3), pp. 364–418, September 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Garey, M. R. and Johnson, D. S.,Computers and Intractability — A guide to the Theory of NP-completeness, Freman, San Francisco, CA, 1979.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V., “The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming,” inLogic Programming: Proc. Fifth Intl Conference and Symposium, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, pp. 1070–1080, 1988.

  16. Gold, E. M., “Language Identification in the Limit,”Information and Control, 10, pp. 447–474, 1967.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Gottlob, G., “Subsumption and Implication,”Information Processing Letters, 24, pp. 109–111, 1987.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Gottlob, G., “Complexity Results for Nonmonotonic Logics,”J. Logic and Computation, 2(3), pp. 397–425, June 1992.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Johnson, D.S., “The NP-completeness Column-an ongoing guide,”Journal of Algorithms, 4, pp. 284–299, 1984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Johnson, D. S., “A Catalog of Complexity Classes,” inHandbook of Theoretical Computer Science (J. van Leeuwen, ed.), volume A, chapter 2, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland), 1990.

  21. Kietz, J.U. and Džeroski, S., “Inductive logic programming and learnability,”SIGART Bulletin 5(1), Special issue on Inductive Logic Programming, pp. 22–32, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kietz, J.U. and Lübbe, M., “An, efficient subsumption algorithm for inductive logic programming,” inProc. of the Eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning, New Brunswick, NJ, pp. 130–138, 1994.

  23. Haussler, D., “Quantifying inductive bias: AI learning algorithms and Valiant’s model,”Artificial Intelligence, 36(2), pp. 177–221, 1988.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Lipton, R.J.,Using DNA to solve NP-complete Problems, Priceton University.

  25. Marek, W. and Truszczyński, M., “Autoepistemic Logic,”JACM, 38(3), pp. 588–619, 1991.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Muggleton, S. H., “Inductive Logic Programming,”New Generation Computing, 8(4), pp. 295–318, 1991.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Muggleton, S. H. ed.,Inductive Logic Programming, Academic Press, London, 1992.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Muggleton, S. H., “Stochastic Logic Programs,” to appear inJournal of Logic Programming, 1997.

  29. Muggleton, S. H. and De Raedt, L., “Inductive Logic Programming: Theory and Methods,”Journal of Logic Programming, 19, 20, pp. 629–679, 1994.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Muggleton, S. and Page, D., “A learnability model for universal representations,” inProc. Fourth International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, GMD, Bonn, pp. 139–160, 1994.

  31. Page, C. D. and Frish, A. M., “Generalization and Learnability: a study of constrained atoms,” inInductive Logic Programming (S. H. Muggleton ed.), Academic Press, London, pp. 29–61, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Plotkin, G. D., “A note on Inductive Generalization,” inMachine Intelligence (B. Meltzer and D. Michie eds.), American Elsevier, pp. 153–163, 1970.

  33. Reiter, R., “A Logic for Default Reasoning,”Artificial Intelligence, 13, pp. 81–132, 1980.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Robinson, J., “A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle,”Journal of the ACM, 12(1), pp. 23–41, 1965.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Schapire, R. E., “The Strength of Weak Learnability,”Machine Learning, 5, pp. 197–227, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Stockmeyer, L. and Meyer, A., “Word Problems Requiring Exponential Time,” inProc. 5th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC ’73), pp. 1–9, 1973.

  37. Rooß, D. and Wagner, K., “On the Power of DNA Computation,”Information and Computation, 131(2), pp. 95–109, 1996.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Valiant, L. G., “A Theory of the Learnable,”Communications of the ACM, 27, pp. 1134–1142.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Informationssysteme, Technische Universität Wien, Paniglgasse 16, A-1040, Wien, Austria

    Georg Gottlob & Nicola Leone

  2. Istituto per la Sistemistica e l’Informatica (ISI-CNR) c/o DEIS, Università della Calabria, I-87036, Rende (CS), Italy

    Francesco Scarcello

Authors
  1. Georg Gottlob
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicola Leone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesco Scarcello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Georg Gottlob.

Additional information

Georg Gottlob, Ph.D.: He is a Professor of Computer Science at the Technical University of Vienna, Austria, where he currently chairs the department of Information Systems and the Database and Artificial Intelligence Lab. His research interests are logic programming, database theory (in particular, query languages), nonmonotonic reasoning, finite model theory, and computational complexity. He has extensively published in all these areas. On the more applied side, he supervises a number of industry projects dealing with expert systems and with multimedia information systems. Dr. Gottlob holds his current position since 1988. Before that, he was affiliated with the Italian National Research Council in Genoa, Italy, and before with the Politecnico di Milano, Italy. He has lectured at Stanford University and in various European universities. He is Editor-in-Chief of AI-Communications and on the editorial board of various other journals and he served as Program Committee co-chair of several conferences, e.g. the 1998 Symposium of Computer Science Logic.

Nicola Leone: He received the italian Laurea degree in Mathematics from the University of Calabria. In June 1986 he joined CRAI (an industrial consortium for computer science research and application at Rende, Italy), where he worked until December 91. From January 1992 to September 1995, he has been with the ISI institute of CNR (the Italian National Research Council). Since October 1995, he is Professor for Database Systems at the Information Systems Department of the Vienna University of Technology. Nicola Leone has partecipated to several national and international projects mainly on the development of advanced Data and Knowledge Bases, including the ESPRIT projects “KIWIS” and “EDS” (where he acted as the leader of the CRAI team). Currently, he is the leader of an FWF project on the implementation of a Disjunctive Deductive Database System. His main research interests are in the areas of Database Theory, Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Complexity Theory, and Deductive Databases. He is author of over eighty papers published in conference proceedings, books, and scientific journals, including alsoInformation and Computation, AI Journal, ACM Transactions, IEEE Transactions, TCS, JLP, andNGC.

Francesco Scarcello, Ph.D.: He received a Ph. D. in “Ingegneria dei Sistemi e Informatica” from University of Calabria (Italy) in 1997. Since 1996 he is recipient of a grant from ISI-CNR (Istituto per la Sistemistica e l’Informatica, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche). Recently, he spent one year at at the Information Systems Department of the Vienna University of Technology as a visiting scientist. His present research interests include knowledge representation, nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, computational complexity, database theory, approximation of logical theories, and inductive logic programming.

About this article

Cite this article

Gottlob, G., Leone, N. & Scarcello, F. On the complexity of some inductive logic programming problems. New Gener Comput 17, 53–75 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03037582

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03037582

Keywords

Search

Navigation