Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data.

Peter Idestam-Almquist

dblp:98/2267 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
4as first author
0since 2021 · last 1997
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Automated reasoning and model checking · 50% Logic in computer science · 50%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Automated reasoning and model checking › automated reasoning
anti-unification
0.011993
Generalization under Implication by Recursive Anti-unification · ICML 1993
Automated reasoning and model checking
automated reasoning
0.011993
Generalization under Implication by Recursive Anti-unification · ICML 1993
Logic in computer science › propositional logic
implication
0.011993
Generalization under Implication by Recursive Anti-unification · ICML 1993
Logic in computer science
proof theory
0.011993
Generalization under Implication by Recursive Anti-unification · ICML 1993

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

anti-unification · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1997 Theta-Subsumption for Structural Matching
Luc De Raedt, Peter Idestam-Almquist, Gunther Sablon
ECML2
1997 Generalization of Clauses Relative to a Theory
Peter Idestam-Almquist
Mach. Learn.1
1995 Generalization of Clauses under Implication
abstract
In the area of inductive learning, generalization is a main operation, and the usual definition of induction is based on logical implication. Recently there has been a rising interest in clausal representation of knowledge in machine learning. Almost all inductive learning systems that perform generalization of clauses use the relation theta-subsumption instead of implication. The main reason is that there is a well-known and simple technique to compute least general generalizations under theta-subsumption, but not under implication. However generalization under theta-subsumption is inappropriate for learning recursive clauses, which is a crucial problem since recursion is the basic program structure of logic programs. We note that implication between clauses is undecidable, and we therefore introduce a stronger form of implication, called T-implication, which is decidable between clauses. We show that for every finite set of clauses there exists a least general generalization under T-implication. We describe a technique to reduce generalizations under implication of a clause to generalizations under theta-subsumption of what we call an expansion of the original clause. Moreover we show that for every non-tautological clause there exists a T-complete expansion, which means that every generalization under T-implication of the clause is reduced to a generalization under theta-subsumption of the expansion.
Peter Idestam-Almquist
J. Artif. Intell. Res.1
1993 Generalization under Implication by using Or-Introduction
Peter Idestam-Almquist
ECML1
1993 Generalization under Implication by Recursive Anti-unification
Peter Idestam-Almquist
ICML1