Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #47682. 	[Title] Using Precepts to Augment Training Set Learning an input whose value is don't-care in some [Abstract] are used in turn to approximate A. Empirical studies show that good results can be achieved with TSL [8, 11]. However, TSL has several drawbacks. Training set learners (e.g., backpropagation) are typically slow as they may require many passes over the training set. Also, there is no guarantee that, given an arbitrary training set, the system will find enough good critical features to get a reasonable approximation of A. Moreover, the number of features to be searched is exponential in the number of inputs, and TSL becomes computationally expensive [1]. Finally, the scarcity of interesting positive theoretical results suggests the difficulty of learning without sufficient a priori knowledge. The goal of learning systems is to generalize. Generalization is commonly based on the set of critical features the system has available. Training set learners typically extract critical features from a random set of examples. While this approach is attractive, it suffers from the exponential growth of the number of features to be searched. We propose to extend it by endowing the system with some a priori knowledge, in the form of precepts. Advantages of the augmented system are speedup, improved generalization, and greater parsimony. This paper presents a precept-driven learning algorithm. Its main features include: 1) distributed implementation, 2) bounded learning and execution times, and 3) ability to handle both correct and incorrect precepts. Results of simulations on real-world data demonstrate promise. This paper presents precept-driven learning (PDL). PDL is intended to overcome some of TSL's weaknesses. In PDL, the training set is augmented by a small set of precepts. A pair p = (i, o) in I O is called an example. A precept is an example in which some of the i-entries (inputs) are set to the special value don't-care. An input whose value is not don't-care is said to be asserted. If i has no effect on the value of the output. The use of the special value don't-care is therefore as a shorthand. A pair containing don't-care inputs represents as many examples as the product of the sizes of the input domains of its don't-care inputs. 1. Introduction Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #47683. 	[Title] AN INCREMENTAL LEARNING MODEL FOR COMMONSENSE REASONING [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #47684. 	[Title] AN EFFICIENT METRIC FOR HETEROGENEOUS INDUCTIVE LEARNING APPLICATIONS IN THE ATTRIBUTE-VALUE LANGUAGE 1 [Abstract] Many inductive learning problems can be expressed in the classical attribute-value language. In order to learn and to generalize, learning systems often rely on some measure of similarity between their current knowledge base and new information. The attribute-value language defines a heterogeneous multidimensional input space, where some attributes are nominal and others linear. Defining similarity, or proximity, of two points in such input spaces is non trivial. We discuss two representative homogeneous metrics and show examples of why they are limited to their own domains. We then address the issues raised by the design of a heterogeneous metric for inductive learning systems. In particular, we discuss the need for normalization and the impact of don't-care values. We propose a heterogeneous metric and evaluate it empirically on a simplified version of ILA. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #509379. 	[Title] Model selection using measure functions [Abstract] The concept of measure functions for generalization performance is suggested. This concept provides an alternative way of selecting and evaluating learned models (classifiers). In addition, it makes it possible to state a learning problem as a computational problem. The the known prior (meta-)knowledge about the problem domain is captured in a measure function that, to each possible combination of a training set and a classifier, assigns a value describing how good the classifier is. The computational problem is then to find a classifier maximizing the measure function. We argue that measure functions are of great value for practical applications. Besides of being a tool for model selection, they: (i) force us to make explicit the relevant prior knowledge about the learning problem at hand, (ii) provide a deeper understanding of existing algorithms, and (iii) help us in the construction of problem-specific algorithms. We illustrate the last point by suggesting a novel algorithm based on incremental search for a classifier that optimizes a given measure function. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #63812. 	[Title] FLARE: Induction with Prior Knowledge [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #424. 	[Title] A Hybrid Nearest-Neighbor and Nearest-Hyperrectangle Algorithm [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1125393. 	[Title] Beyond predictive accuracy: what? [Abstract] Today's potential users of machine learning technology are faced with the non-trivial problem of choosing, from the large, ever-increasing number of available tools, the one most appropriate for their particular task. To assist the often non-initiated users, it is desirable that this model selection process be automated. Using experience from base level learning, researchers have proposed meta-learning as a possible solution. Historically, predictive accuracy has been the de facto criterion, with most work in meta-learning focusing on the discovery of rules that match applications to models based on accuracy only. Although predictive accuracy is clearly an important criterion, it is also the case that there are a number of other criteria that could, and often ought to, be considered when learning about model selection. This paper presents a number of such criteria and discusses the impact they have on meta-level approaches to model selection. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #68115. 	[Title] ILA: Combining Inductive Learning with Prior Knowledge and Reasoning [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #47682 has the title `Using Precepts to Augment Training Set Learning an input whose value is don't-care in some
` and the abstract `are used in turn to approximate A. Empirical studies show that good results can be achieved with TSL [8, 11]. However, TSL has several drawbacks. Training set learners (e.g., backpropagation) are typically slow as they may require many passes over the training set. Also, there is no guarantee that, given an arbitrary training set, the system will find enough good critical features to get a reasonable approximation of A. Moreover, the number of features to be searched is exponential in the number of inputs, and TSL becomes computationally expensive [1]. Finally, the scarcity of interesting positive theoretical results suggests the difficulty of learning without sufficient a priori knowledge. The goal of learning systems is to generalize. Generalization is commonly based on the set of critical features the system has available. Training set learners typically extract critical features from a random set of examples. While this approach is attractive, it suffers from the exponential growth of the number of features to be searched. We propose to extend it by endowing the system with some a priori knowledge, in the form of precepts. Advantages of the augmented system are speedup, improved generalization, and greater parsimony. This paper presents a precept-driven learning algorithm. Its main features include: 1) distributed implementation, 2) bounded learning and execution times, and 3) ability to handle both correct and incorrect precepts. Results of simulations on real-world data demonstrate promise. This paper presents precept-driven learning (PDL). PDL is intended to overcome some of TSL's weaknesses. In PDL, the training set is augmented by a small set of precepts. A pair p = (i, o) in I O is called an example. A precept is an example in which some of the i-entries (inputs) are set to the special value don't-care. An input whose value is not don't-care is said to be asserted. If i has no effect on the value of the output. The use of the special value don't-care is therefore as a shorthand. A pair containing don't-care inputs represents as many examples as the product of the sizes of the input domains of its don't-care inputs. 1. Introduction 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #47682 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #47682 has the title `Using Precepts to Augment Training Set Learning an input whose value is don't-care in some
` and the abstract `are used in turn to approximate A. Empirical studies show that good results can be achieved with TSL [8, 11]. However, TSL has several drawbacks. Training set learners (e.g., backpropagation) are typically slow as they may require many passes over the training set. Also, there is no guarantee that, given an arbitrary training set, the system will find enough good critical features to get a reasonable approximation of A. Moreover, the number of features to be searched is exponential in the number of inputs, and TSL becomes computationally expensive [1]. Finally, the scarcity of interesting positive theoretical results suggests the difficulty of learning without sufficient a priori knowledge. The goal of learning systems is to generalize. Generalization is commonly based on the set of critical features the system has available. Training set learners typically extract critical features from a random set of examples. While this approach is attractive, it suffers from the exponential growth of the number of features to be searched. We propose to extend it by endowing the system with some a priori knowledge, in the form of precepts. Advantages of the augmented system are speedup, improved generalization, and greater parsimony. This paper presents a precept-driven learning algorithm. Its main features include: 1) distributed implementation, 2) bounded learning and execution times, and 3) ability to handle both correct and incorrect precepts. Results of simulations on real-world data demonstrate promise. This paper presents precept-driven learning (PDL). PDL is intended to overcome some of TSL's weaknesses. In PDL, the training set is augmented by a small set of precepts. A pair p = (i, o) in I O is called an example. A precept is an example in which some of the i-entries (inputs) are set to the special value don't-care. An input whose value is not don't-care is said to be asserted. If i has no effect on the value of the output. The use of the special value don't-care is therefore as a shorthand. A pair containing don't-care inputs represents as many examples as the product of the sizes of the input domains of its don't-care inputs. 1. Introduction 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #47682 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].

This paper should be classified into: Neural_Networks