Learning Rule Representations From Data

IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans

Volumn 36, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 1010-1028

  Apolloni, Bruno ^a   Brega, Andrea ^a   Palmas, Giorgio ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

^b STMICROELECTRONICS   (Italy)

Author keywords

Algorithmic inference; Boolean formula simplification; computational learning; fuzzy sets; granular computing; mutual information; probably approximately correct (PAC) meditation; rough sets; rule learning; sentry points

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008025556     PISSN: 10834427     EISSN: 15582426     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TSMCA.2006.878987     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. L. Valiant, “A theory of the learnable,” Commun. ACM, vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 1134–1142, Nov. 1984.
2. V. Vapnik, Estimation of Dependences Based on Empirical Data. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1982.
3. D. Haussler, “Quantifying inductive bias: AI learning algorithms and Valiant's learning framework,” Artif. Intell., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 177–221, Sep. 1988.
4. M. J. Kearns, R. E. Schapire, and L. M. Sellie, “Toward efficient agnostic learning,” in Proc. 5th ACM Workshop Comput. Learning Theory, 1992, pp. 341–352.
5. W. S. Lee, R. Bartlett, and P. L. Williamson, “Efficient agnostic learning of neural networks with bounded fan-in,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 2118–2132, Nov. 1996.
6. L. C. Jain, B. Lazzerini, and U. Halici, Eds. Innovations in ART Neural Networks, ser. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol. 43, New York: Springer-Verlag, 2000.
7. R. E. Schapire, “The strength of weak learnability,” Mach. Learn., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 197–227, Jun. 1990.
8. J. R. Qunilan, C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.
9. J. R. Qunilan, “Learning logical definitions from relations,” Mach. Learn., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 239–266, Aug. 1990.
10. W. Pedrycz, “Granular computing in data mining,” in Data Mining and Computational Intelligence, ser. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol. 68, M. Last and A. Kandel, Eds. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2001.
11. D. Dubois and H. Prade, Possibility Theory: An Approach to Computerized Processing of Uncertainty. New York: Plenum, 1988.
12. E. Cox, The Fuzzy Systems Handbook. San Diego, CA: AP Professional, 1998.
13. R. S. Michalski, “A theory and methodology of inductive learning,” in Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, J. G. Carbonell and T. M. Mitchell, Eds. Palo Alto, CA: Tioga, 1983, pp. 83–134.
14. Z. Pawlak, “Rough sets and decision algorithms,” in Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing, W. Ziarko and Y. Yao, Eds. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 2001, pp. 30–45.
15. H. Hirsh, “Generalizing version spaces,” Mach. Learn., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 5–46, Oct. 1994.
16. M. Sebag, “Delaying the choice of bias: A disjunctive version space approach,” in Proc. 13th Int. Conf. Mach. Learning, San Francisco, CA, 1996, pp. 444–452.
17. L. Breiman, “Bagging predictors,” Mach. Learn., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 123—140, Aug. 1986.
18. N. Linial, Y. Mansour, and R. L. Rivest, “Results on learnability and the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension,” Inf. Comput., vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 33–49, Jan. 1991.
19. J. Piaget, Biologie et Connaissance. Paris, France: Gallimard, 1969.
20. T. Cover and J. Thomas, Elements of Information Theory. New York: Wiley, 1991.
21. A. Hyvarinen, J. Kahunen, and E. Oja, Independent Component Analysis. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2001.
22. R. Andrews and S. Geva, “Inserting and extracting knowledge from constrained backpropagation network,” in Proc. 6th Australian Conf. Neural Netw., Sydney, Australia, 1995, pp. 29–32.
23. M. Muselli and D. Liberati, “Binary rule generation via Hamming clustering,” IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., vol. 14, pp. 1258–1268, Nov./Dec. 2002.
24. V. Vapnik, The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1995.
25. B. Apolloni and S. Chiaravalli, “PAC learning of concept classes through the boundaries of their items,” Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 172, no. 1/2, pp. 91–120, Feb. 1997.
26. B. Apolloni, D. Malchiodi, and S. Gaito, Algorithmic Inference in Machine Learning, ser. International Series on Advanced Intelligence. Adelaide, Australia: Advanced Knowledge International, 2003.
27. B. Apolloni, F. Baraghini, and G. Palmas, “PAC meditation on Boolean formulas,” in Abstraction, Reformulation and Approximation, S. Koenig and R. C. Holte, Eds. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 2002, pp. 274–281.
28. B. Apolloni and D. Malchiodi, “Gaining degrees of freedom in sub-symbolic learning,” Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 255, no. 1/2, pp. 295–321, Mar. 2001.
29. A. Blumer, A. Ehrenfreucht, D. Haussler, and M. Warmuth, “Learnability and the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension,” J. ACM, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 929–965, Oct. 1989.
30. B. Apolloni, A. Esposito, D. Malchiodi, C. Orovas, G. Palmas, and J. Taylor, “A general framework for learning rules from data,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw., vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1333–1349, Nov. 2004.
31. T. M. Mitchell, Machine Learning, ser. McGraw-Hill Series in Computer Science. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997.
32. A. Bundy, A. Silver, and D. Plummer, “An analytical comparison of some rule-learning programs,” Artif. Intell., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 137–181, Nov. 1985.
33. B. Scholkopf and A. J. Smola, Learning with Kernels : Support Vector Machines, Regularization, Optimization, and Beyond. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002.
34. M. Aigner, Combinatorial Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1979.
35. M. Goldstern and S. Shelah, “Order-polynomially complete lattices must be large,” Algebra Universalis, vol. 39, no. 3/4, pp. 197–209, Aug. 1998.
36. M. Muselli, personal communication.
37. S. K. Pal andA. Skowron, Eds. Rough Fuzzy Hybridization: A New Trend in Decision-Making, Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1999.
38. Y. Freund and R. E. Schapire, “A decision-theoretic generalization of online learning and application to boosting,” in Proc. 2nd Eur. Conf. Comput. Learning Theory, Barcelona, Spain, 1995, pp. 92–99.
39. M. J. Kearns and U. V. Vazirani, An Introduction to Computational Learning Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994.
40. A. J. Bell and T. J. Sejnowski, “An information-maximization approach to blind separation and blind deconvolution,” Neural Comput., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 1129–1159, Nov. 1995.
41. B. Apolloni, D. Malchiodi, C. Orovas, and G. Palmas, “From synapses to rules,” Cognitive Syst. Res., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 167–201, Jun. 2002.
42. C. Orovas and J. Austin, “A cellular neural associative array for symbolic vision,” in Hybrid Neural Systems, S. Wermter and R. Sun, Eds. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2000, pp. 372–386.
43. G. Shafer, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 1976.
44. D. Dubois and H. Prade, “On several representations of uncertain body of evidence,” in Fuzzy Information and Decision Processes. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North Holland, 1982, pp. 167–181.
45. P. D. Laird, “Inductive Inference by Refinement,” Yale Univ., New Haven, CT, Tech. Rep. YALEU/DCS/TR376, 1986.
46. L. Pitt and L. Valiant, “Computational limitations on learning from examples,” J. ACM, vol. 4, no. 35, pp. 965–984, Oct. 1988.
47. M. Kearns, M. Li, L. Pitt, and L. Valiant, “On the learnability of Boolean formulae,” in Proc. 19th ACM Symp. Theory Comput. New York, 1987, pp. 285–295.
48. Ross Quinlan home page. [Online]. Available: http://www.cse.unsw. edu.au/~quinlan/
49. S. Giove, F. Piccione, F. Giorgi, F. Beverina, and S. Silvoni, “P300 offline detection: A fuzzy-based support system,” in Proc. WILF, Milano, Italy, Oct. 4–5, 2001, pp. 155–164.
50. E. Aarts and J. Korst, Simulated Annealing and Boltzmann Machines: A Stochastic Approach to Combinatorial Optimization and Neural Computing. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 1989.
51. B. Apolloni, D. Malchiodi, C. Orovas, and A. M. Zanaboni, “Fuzzy methods for simplifying a Boolean formula inferred from examples,” in Proc. 1st Int. Conf. FSKD, Singapore, Nov. 18–22, 2002, pp. 554–558.
52. The Scheme Programming Language. [Online]. Available: http://www. swiss.ai.mit.edu/projects/scheme
53. Q. P. Gu and A. Maruoka, “Learning monotone Boolean functions by uniformly distributed examples,” SIAM J. Comput., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 587-599, Jun. 1992.
54. T. W. Picton, “The use of human eventrelated potentials in psychology,” in Techniques in Psychophysiology, I. Martin and P. H. Venables, Eds. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 1980.
55. W. Feller, An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, 2nd ed, vol. 1. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 1960.