Abstract:Abstract We describe an inductive logic programming (ILP) approach called learning from failures . In this approach, an ILP system (the learner) decomposes the learning problem into three separate stages: generate , test , and constrain . In the generate stage, the learner generates a hypothesis (a logic program) that satisfies a set of hypothesis constraints (constraints on the syntactic form of hypotheses). In the test stage, the learner tests the hypothesis against training examples. A hypothesis fails when it does not entail all the positive examples or entails a negative example. If a hypothesis fails, then, in the constrain stage, the learner learns constraints from the failed hypothesis to prune the hypothesis space, i.e. to constrain subsequent hypothesis generation. For instance, if a hypothesis is too general (entails a negative example), the constraints prune generalisations of the hypothesis. If a hypothesis is too specific (does not entail all the positive examples), the constraints prune specialisations of the hypothesis. This loop repeats until either (i) the learner finds a hypothesis that entails all the positive and none of the negative examples, or (ii) there are no more hypotheses to test. We introduce Popper, an ILP system that implements this approach by combining answer set programming and Prolog. Popper supports infinite problem domains, reasoning about lists and numbers, learning textually minimal programs, and learning recursive programs. Our experimental results on three domains (toy game problems, robot strategies, and list transformations) show that (i) constraints drastically improve learning performance, and (ii) Popper can outperform existing ILP systems, both in terms of predictive accuracies and learning times.

A History of Probabilistic Inductive Logic Programming

A Survey on Inductive Logic Programming

Learning higher-order logic programs

Towards Probabilistic Inductive Logic Programming with Neurosymbolic Inference and Relaxation

Declarative Probabilistic Logic Programming in Discrete-Continuous Domains

Inductive Logic Boosting

Conflict-Driven Inductive Logic Programming

SMT + ILP

Learning Probabilistic Logic Programs in Continuous Domains

Learning logic programs by combining programs

Differentiable Logic Programming for Probabilistic Reasoning

The ILASP system for Inductive Learning of Answer Set Programs

Learning programs by learning from failures

Differentiable Inductive Logic Programming in High-Dimensional Space

Learning logic programs by discovering where not to search

Learning Logic Specifications for Policy Guidance in POMDPs: an Inductive Logic Programming Approach

Inductive logic programming for natural language processing

Learning Onto-Relational Rules with Inductive Logic Programming

Semirings for Probabilistic and Neuro-Symbolic Logic Programming

Explaining Explanations in Probabilistic Logic Programming

Improving the efficiency of inductive logic programming systems