Learning from Informants: Relations between Learning Success Criteria
  Learning from positive and negative information, so-called \emph{informants},
being one of the models for human and machine learning introduced by
E.~M.~Gold, is investigated. Particularly, naturally arising questions about
this learning setting, originating in results on learning from solely positive
information, are answered. By a carefully arranged argument learners can be
assumed to only change their hypothesis in case it is inconsistent with the
data (such a learning behavior is called \emph{conservative}). The deduced main
theorem states the relations between the most important delayable learning
success criteria, being the ones not ruined by a delayed in time hypothesis
output. Additionally, our investigations concerning the non-delayable
requirement of consistent learning underpin the claim for \emph{delayability}
being the right structural property to gain a deeper understanding concerning
the nature of learning success criteria. Moreover, we obtain an anomalous
\emph{hierarchy} when allowing for an increasing finite number of
\emph{anomalies} of the hypothesized language by the learner compared with the
language to be learned. In contrast to the vacillatory hierarchy for learning
from solely positive information, we observe a \emph{duality} depending on
whether infinitely many \emph{vacillations} between different (almost) correct
hypotheses are still considered a successful learning behavior.
