<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Learning programs by learning from failures · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.02259/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.02259/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Learning programs by learning from failures — mentioned by YeGoblynQueenne</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26877471</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2005.02259:26877471</guid><pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:13:04 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Statistics, no. Machine learning, yes. The most successful inductive programming approaches (learning programs from data) are Inductive Logic Programming approaches that basically learn Prolog programs from data. Prolog as a language with an automated deductive theorem prover as an interpreter is uniquely suited to learning new prorgams, because, it turns out, induction (learning new theories from observations and existing theories) is the inverse of deduction (explaining observations with existing theories). For some modern examples of learning Prolog programs with Prolog see: 1. Metagol…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.02259/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item></channel></rss>
