Incremental learning and concept drift in INTHELEX

Intelligent Data Analysis

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 213-237

  Esposito, F ^a   Ferilli, S ^a   Fanizzi, N ^a   Basile, T M A ^a   Di Mauro, N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BARI   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTINUOUS FLOWS; DEEP KNOWLEDGE; INCOMPLETE INFORMATION; INCREMENTAL LEARNING; NEW APPROACHES; REAL-WORLD TASK; REFINEMENT OPERATORS; TIME EVOLUTIONS;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 67651248397     PISSN: 1088467X     EISSN: 15714128     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/ida-2004-8302     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. B. Babcock, M. Datar and R. Motwani, Sampling from a moving window over streaming data, in Proceedings of 13th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, 2002.
2. J.M. Becker, Inductive learning of decision rules with exceptions: Methodology and experimentation, Master's thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, B.S. diss, UIUCDCS-F-85-945, 1985.
3. S. Ceri, G. Gottl ̈ob and L. Tanca, Logic Programming and Databases, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany, 1990.
4. P. Domingos and G. Hulten, Mining high-speed data streams, in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2000, pp. 71-80.
5. F. Esposito, A. Laterza, D. Malerba and G. Semeraro, Locally finite, proper and complete operators for refining Datalog programs, in: Proceedings of ISMIS96, (vol. 1079 of LNAI), Z.W. Rás and M. Michalewicz, eds, Springer, 1996, pp. 468-478.
6. F. Esposito, D. Malerba, G. Semeraro, C. Brunk and M. Pazzani, Traps and pitfalls when learning logical definitions from relations, in: Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, (No. 869 in LNAI), Z.W. Rás and M. Zemankova, eds, Springer-Verlag, 1994, pp. 376-385.
7. F. Esposito, G. Semeraro, N. Fanizzi and S. Ferilli, Multistrategy Theory Revision: Induction and abduction in INTHELEX, Machine Learning Journal 38(1/2) (2000), 133-156.
8. M. Ester, H.-P. Kriegel, J. Sander, M. Wimmer and X. Xu, Incremental clustering for mining in a data warehousing environment, in Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, New York, Morgan Kaufmann, 1998, pp. 323-333.
9. M.B. Harries and K. Horn, Detecting context drift in financial time series prediction using symbolic machine learning, in Proceedings of the Eight Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, World Scientific, Singapore, 1995, pp. 91-98.
10. M.B. Harries, C. Sammut and K. Horn, Extracting hidden contexts, Machine Learning 32(2) (1998), 101-126.
11. D.P. Helmbold and P.M. Long, Tracking drifting concepts by minimizing disagreements, Machine Learning 14(2) (1994), 27-45.
12. G. Hulten, L. Spencer and P. Domingos, Mining time-changing data streams, in Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, ACM Press, 2001, pp. 97-106.
13. J. Jaffar and M.J. Maher, Constraint logic programming: a survey, Journal of Logic Programming 19 (1994), 503-581.
14. A.C. Kakas and P. Mancarella, On the relation of truth maintenance and abduction, in Proceedings of the 1st Pacific Rim International Conference on Artificial Intelligence-PRICAI90, Nagoya, Japan, 1990.
15. R. Klinkenberg and T. Joachims, Detecting concept drift with support vector machines, in Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Machine Learning, P. Langley, ed., Morgan Kaufmann, Stanford, CA, 2000, pp. 487-494.
16. N. Littlestone, Learning quickly when irrelevant attributes abound: a new linear-threshold algorithm, Machine Learning 2 (1997), 285-318.
17. J.W. Lloyd, Foundations of Logic Programming, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, second edition, 1987.
18. R.S. Michalski, Inferential theory of learning. Developing foundations for multistrategy learning, in: Machine Learning. A Multistrategy Approach, (Vol. IV), R.S. Michalski and G. Tecuci, eds, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1994, pp. 3-61.
19. T. Mitchell, R. Caruana, D. Freitag, J. McDermott and D. Zabowski, Experience with a learning personal assistant, Communications of the ACM 37 (1994), 81-91.
20. G.D. Plotkin, Building-in equational theories, in: Machine Intelligence, (Vol. 7), B. Meltzer and Donald Michie, eds, Edinburgh University Press, 1972, pp. 73-90.
21. G.D. Plotkin, A note on inductive generalization, Machine Intelligence 5 (1970), 153-163.
22. R. Reiter, Equality and domain closure in first order databases, Journal of the ACM 27 (1980), 235-249.
23. C. Salganicoff, Densitive adaptive learning and forgetting, in Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1993, pp. 276-283.
24. J.C. Schlimmer and R.H. Granger, Incremental learning from noisy data, Machine Learning 1(2) (1986), 317-354.
25. G. Semeraro, F. Esposito and D. Malerba, Ideal refinement of datalog programs, in: Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation, (Vol. 1048 of LNCS), M. Proietti, ed., Springer, 1996, pp. 120-136.
26. G. Semeraro, F. Esposito, D. Malerba, C. Brunk and M. Pazzani, Avoiding non-termination when learning logic programs: A case study with foil and focl, in: Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation-Meta-Programming in Logic, (No. 883 in LNCS), L. Fribourg and F. Turini, eds, Springer-Verlag, 1994, pp. 183-198.
27. G. Semeraro, F. Esposito, D. Malerba, N. Fanizzi and S. Ferilli, A logic framework for the incremental inductive synthesis of datalog theories, in: Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation, (No. 1463 in LNCS), N.E. Fuchs, ed., Springer-Verlag, 1998, pp. 300-321.
28. A. Srinivasan, S. Muggleton, M.J.E. Sternberg and R.D. King, Theories for mutagenicity: A study in first-order and feature-based induction, Artificial Intelligence 85(1-2) (1996), 277-299.
29. C. Taylor and G. Nakhaeizadeh, Learning in dynamically changing domains: Theory revision and context dependency issues, in M. van Someren and G. Widmer, eds, Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Machine Learning, Springer, 1997, pp. 353-360.
30. P.R.J. van der Laag, An Analysis of Refinement Operators in Inductive Logic Programming, PhD thesis, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1995.
31. P.R.J. van der Laag and S.-H. Nienhuys-Cheng, Existence and nonexistence of complete refinement operators, in: Machine Learning, (No. 784 in LNAI), F. Bergadano and L. de Raedt, eds, Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 1994, pp. 307-322.
32. P.R.J. van der Laag and S.-H. Nienhuys-Cheng, A note on ideal refinement operators in inductive logic programming, in: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, S. Wrobel, ed., GMD-Studien Nr. 237, 1994, pp. 247-260.
33. G. Widmer, Combining robustness and flexibility in learning drifting concepts, in Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Wiley, Chicester, UK, 1994, pp. 368-372.
34. G.Widmer, Recognition and exploitation of contextual clues via incremental meta-learning, in L. Saitta, editor, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 1996.
35. G.Widmer and M. Kubat, Learning in the presence of concept drift and hidden contexts, Machine Learning 23(1) (1996), 69-101.
36. G. Widmer and M. Kubat, Special issue on context sensitivity and concept drift: Guest editors' introduction, Machine Learning 32(2) (1998), 83-84.
37. S. Wrobel, Concept Formation and Knowledge Revision, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.
38. S. Wrobel, First order theory refinement, in: Advances in Inductive Logic Programming, L. De Raedt, ed., IOS Press, Amsterdam, 1996, pp. 14-33.
39. J.-D. Zucker, Semantic abstraction for concept representation and learning, Proceedings of the 4th InternationalWorkshop on Multistrategy Learning, Desenzano del Garda, Italy, 1998, pp. 157-164.